What does their microscopic size mean?

Could it be that the citizenry, including African-Americans, supposedly so greatly injured, have seen through the media hype (what I earlier called media pornography) and themselves realize this case is simply an accidental, anomalous one-off and not that big of a deal?

I certainly hope so, because what we have been going through is a form of national nervous breakdown, taking us rapidly backwards on race relations, something that has improved consistently in our country over the last fifty years.

What we do not need now is a “national conversation on race.” That’s like taking a scab that’s slowly healing and, just when it’s about to whither away, scratching it as hard as possible until the wound comes back.

The only reason to have a “national conversation on race” is to once again stir up the slaves on the “liberal” plantation leading up to next year’s election (which was the same reason that the Democrat race mongers in the media had to spin the false Zimmerman narrative last year as well). Fortunately, unlike the IRS scandal, this actually does seem to be fizzling.

[Update a few minutes later]

“Why I left the NAACP”:

Progressives in the NAACP called me a “bad soldier” for the organization. I refuse to fight for agendas that hold my community down in poverty. Black Americans are only 13.5 percent of the total population, but we represent 34 percent of all welfare recipients. The culture of dependency has our abolitionist forefathers rolling in their graves.

The organization’s attempted manipulation of Martin’s tragic death for its own gain – the NAACP even held its 2013 annual convention as close to the media covering Zimmerman’s trial as it could – is just the latest example of a once-great organization gone completely off the rails. The case had nothing to do with “racial profiling,” but the cynics at the NAACP saw an opportunity to score political points on a buzzword issue and relentlessly pounced.

It’s time for black Americans to reject the NAACP’s message of entitlement and victimhood. It’s time for members of the black community to educate themselves on the values they won’t hear from the NAACP pulpit.

It’s been a long time since that organization was for the actual interests of colored people.

[Update a while later]

More thoughts from Shelby Steele:

The Revs. Jackson and Sharpton have been consigned to a hard fate: They can never be more than redundancies, echoes of the great men they emulate because America has changed. Hard to be a King or Mandela today when your monstrous enemy is no more than the cherubic George Zimmerman.

Why did the civil-rights leadership use its greatly depleted moral authority to support Trayvon Martin? This young man was, after all, no Rosa Parks—a figure of indisputable human dignity set upon by the rank evil of white supremacy. Trayvon threw the first punch and then continued pummeling the much smaller Zimmerman. Yes, Trayvon was a kid, but he was also something of a menace. The larger tragedy is that his death will come to very little. There was no important principle or coherent protest implied in that first nose-breaking punch. It was just dumb bravado, a tough-guy punch.

…here, precisely at the point of this verdict, is where all of America begins to see this hollowed-out civil-rights establishment slip into pathos. Almost everyone saw this verdict coming. It is impossible to see how this jury could have applied the actual law to this body of evidence and come up with a different conclusion. The civil-rights establishment’s mistake was to get ahead of itself, to be seduced by its own poetic truth even when there was no evidence to support it. And even now its leaders call for a Justice Department investigation, and they long for civil lawsuits to be filed—hoping against hope that some leaf of actual racial victimization will be turned over for all to see. This is how a once-great social movement looks when it becomes infested with obsolescence.

One wants to scream at all those outraged at the Zimmerman verdict: Where is your outrage over the collapse of the black family? Today’s civil-rights leaders swat at mosquitoes like Zimmerman when they have gorillas on their back. Seventy-three percent of all black children are born without fathers married to their mothers. And you want to bring the nation to a standstill over George Zimmerman?

At this point, their moral authority should not be just depleted, but completely dissipated. And it would be if we had an honest press.

A message for them that they need, but don’t want, to hear.

[Update a couple minutes later]

What George Zimmerman’s police calls tell us about his attitude toward blacks.

The amount of lies and nonsense that have been spewed about this case over the last year and a half have been staggering, even for the leftist media.

Heather McDonald has a palliative to the continuing race baiting:

Criminal-law professors across the political spectrum agree that the Zimmerman verdict resulted from prosecutorial overkill, not juror bias. . . . Close on the heels of the “biased justice system” conceit, however, is the preposterous implication that the primary homicide threat faced by young black males comes from honorary whites such as George Zimmerman. “Our children are targeted. Our community is targeted,” Martin Luther King III told the NAACP national convention on Wednesday. Protesters at the Orlando, Fla., courthouse this week held signs proclaiming “Endangered species: young black men and boys.” The New York Times ran an article today about the “painful talks” black parents are having with their children about how not to get gunned down by whites. A nurse’s assistant in Missouri told the Times: The whole situation ‘“would just make me skeptical about what crowd of white people I put [my son] around.’”

In fact, if a black parent wants to radically reduce his son’s chance of getting shot, he should live in a white neighborhood.

Yup.

More from the notorious right-wing racist, Jeralyn Merritt:

Obama said if Martin had been white the result would probably have been different. Not once did he acknowledge that if Trayvon Martin had not attacked George Zimmerman, the outcome might have been different.

As a former Constitutional law professor, I would expect our President to acknowledge that the purpose of a criminal trial is not to send messages to the American public. It is merely to test the Government’s evidence: Did the state prove guilt and disprove self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt.

By the President comparing himself to Martin 35 years ago, is he saying he would have responded as Martin did, and physically attacked someone for following him? I hope not because our laws do not allow such conduct. It is not illegal for a private citizen to follow someone. It is illegal to physically assault another person who has not threatened him with the imminent use of force.

I am very disappointed that the President has chosen to endorse those who have turned a case of assault and self-defense into a referendum on race and civil rights. And that he is using it to support those with an agenda of restricting gun rights.

The President, like so many others, refuses to acknowledge that George Zimmerman had no avenue of retreat from the beating Martin was inflicting on him. Zimmerman would have prevailed on self-defense without a stand-your-ground law. The only additional element a stand-your-ground law adds to traditional self-defense is the elimination of a duty to retreat if one is available.

Florida Gov. Rick Scott says there will be no change to Florida’s Stand Your Ground law. I hope he’s right. The law does not need to be changed. People have a right to defend themselves from attacks like the one Martin initiated against Zimmerman. They should not have to wait until the next blow, which could be a fatal one.

Shameful. But the president has no shame (which is apparently true of some of my commenters as well).

Well, you know what, Mr. President? If you were bashing some guy’s head into the pavement thirty-five years ago to be a tough guy, you may well have been. As Treacher notes: “Apparently, @BarackObama thinks that if a white kid was beating a Hispanic guy’s head into the sidewalk, he couldn’t possibly get shot.”

The notion that this case is about “white supremacy” is sheer lunacy.

I’ll refrain from comment about how much better off the nation might be today had the President been Trayvon, with the same results.

Every time morons (or liars — OK, could be both) like Eric Holder talk about them in the context of Martin/Zimmerman, they are a complete non-sequitur. This should be pointed out at every opportunity.

Was he attempting to gay bash Zimmerman?

There’s a lot more evidence for that than that Zimmerman killed him because he was black. But it doesn’t fit the politically correct narrative. Nor does the fact that he was an uncharged criminal.

Sadly for the media, almost everything they reported was wrong, and against the narrative. And of course, they continue to tell the lies. And when Will Saletan is calling you out, you know that you’ve jumped the shark.

[Update a while later]

Shorter Eric Holder: The show trial must go on. Plus a bonus — the gratuitous racism of Nancy Grace. CNN has been more disgraceful (so to speak) than usual on this case.