‘The Bible,’ The Devil And Obama

I’ve been laughing ever since I heard about the uproar that was created over “the devil” in the History Channel The Bible miniseries looking like Barack Obama.

For the record, I’ve been watching – and enjoying – the programs. I saw “the devil” and – as much as I despise Barack Obama – it never occurred to me to see Obama in Satan.

I suppose the liberals who managed to do so are experiencing a guilty conscience.

The thing is that liberals are saying things like, “There are NO other black people in the whole show other than the devil!  It’s racist!”  And of course they claim that The Bible creators deliberately made “the devil” up to look like Obama.

Well, as usual, liberals are slanderers and liars.  Yes, there ARE black characters in the movie.  Samson, for example, was not only black, but he was TWICE as black as Obama.  I was actually stunned when the liberal Bill O’Reilly had on his program to debate this topic at least TWICE falsely stated that there were no other “black” characters in the movie other than “the devil.”  Just as I was stunned that O’Reilly was ignorant of the fact that the liberal woman was factually wrong in her slander of the movie series.

As for any resemblance between Obama and the devil, let me just say this: I was pointing out something to that effect back in December of 2011 -

And, of course, this will be an election between a Mormon who believes that he will one day be God (Mitt Romney) versus a man who already believes he is God (Barack Obama).

It will be an election between a Mormon who believes that Jesus Christ is the spirit brother of Lucifer and a man who actually IS the spirit brother of Lucifer.

It’s just beyond sad.

- and I hadn’t even HEARD that there was going to be a History Channel miniseries on “The Bible.”

I suppose I was just born ahead of my time, wasn’t I?

That having been said, I very seriously doubt that any “resemblance” between “the devil” and Obama was anything other than unintentional.  For example, people are saying that “the devil” is black.  He is NOT black; he’s a Moroccan actor named Mehdi Ouazzani.  Nor did they actually make Ouazzani “black.”  On my television screen, he is decidedly pale gray and ashen in tone rather than “black.”  And that and all the facial features – such as “the devil’s” sunken cheeks – are much more in line with the devil being the source of plague and disease than they are with being Obama.

It’s kind of funny that liberals – again, apparently possessing the guilty consciences they ought to have – saw Satan in Obama.  I wouldn’t have if they hadn’t thrown it into my face.

I submit that the producers of The Bible tried to make “the devil” look like the personification of diseased evil.  How could they help it if that description ALSO matched Barack Obama???

Other than the fact that both Obama and the actual devil are a) evil and b) individuals who think they should sit above God, it’s the standard movie disclaimer: “Any resemblance to real persons, living or dead is purely coincidental.”

Whether Obama is a “real person” is much more debatable.

Liberals slandered The Bible miniseries trying to gin up a controversy to undermine God and undermine the actual Bible in addition to trying to undermine the miniseries.  Judging by the enormous ratings the miniseries has received, the effort – rather like Obama’s sequestration demagoguing – apparently backfired big time.

Oh, oh, I just saw a whole new controversy.  As I was watching the final episode of The Bible, I saw what I imagine will be a whole new reason for liberals to bitch.  Saul “waterboarded” a man – who wouldn’t talk until after his “waterboarding” – into giving up the city of Damascus  as being the city where the Christians were hiding.  You know, just like the CIA waterboarded terrorists into giving up Abbatobad to find out where Osama bin Laden was hiding.  Such a superficial “resemblance” is all the left needs to draw demagogic conclusions.  I’m guessing liberals will be whining that these evil conservatives will stop at nothing.

Obama Dives Into ‘Racist’ Trayvon Martin Shooting Case (Please Try To Remember That ‘Racist’ Shooter George Zimmerman Is Hispanic)

[Update 3/26/12] One of my good friends on this blog, HL, provides information in her comment that I did not know – such as the facts that the mainstream media have been streaming pictures of Trayvon Martin from when he was a twelve-year-old boy rather than recent pictures to create a false impression of “innocence,” and concealing facts about Trayvon Martin that indicate a propensity for violence.  In the same way, the media have deliberately demagogued Zimmerman’s 911 call to allege that he uttered a racial slur when there is no reason beyond their own biases to conclusively prove that he did.  Maybe he did use a racial slur, maybe he didn’t.  But even if he did use the slur, as offensive as such racism ought to be it still doesn’t in any way mean that Trayvon Martin did not attack Zimmerman as he claims (see below for more).

There are about 300 homicides a week in these United States of America.  The media only cares about an incredibly tiny cross-section of those tiny homicides, such as when a pretty little white girl is killed or when a black person is killed and it can at least be made to appear linked to racism.

More than nine out of every ten black people who are murdered in America are murdered by other black people -

The department’s Bureau of Justice Statistics report offers a snapshot of racial disparities among violent crime victims. Black people represented an estimated 13 percent of the U.S. population in 2005, the latest data available, but were the victims of 49 percent of all murders and 15 percent of rapes, assaults and other nonfatal violent crimes nationwide.

Most of the black murder victims — 93 percent — were killed by other black people, the study found.

- but covering all of those awful stories undermines the leftwing narrative, so let’s not trouble ourselves with all of those murder victims.  Let’s try to be like the liberal mainstream media and not give a damn about them.  Let’s try to think of murdered black people the way the left thinks of murdered black babies:

“Frankly I had thought that at that time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of” — 7/2/09 Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg

And if black people are murdering black people in the womb and out of it in droves, try to think, you know, good liberal thoughts instead.

Just remember what the left said in the form of überliberal heroine Margaret Sanger:

“We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the negro population.”

And try to remember that dead black people only count in liberalism if you can link the deaths to white racism. 

Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson swooped into this tragedy like the vultures they are so they could get in front of the cameras and racially demagogue and demonize they way only they can do.  This case was all about racism and it’s frankly racist to think it could even possibly be about anything other than racism (well, except how guns are evil and how any law that allows an ordinary American to be allowed to touch a gun is evil), we’re told.

For the record, a former NAACP leader denounced Sharpton and Jackson as the exploitative vultures that they are.   Good for him.  That’s what courage looks like.

And of course nobody mentions that George Zimmerman, the shooter, is Hispanic (i.e., is a member of an ethnic group that overwhelmingly votes Democrat) because that kind of information doesn’t suit the leftist mainstream media narrative.  He is every scintilla as Hispanic as our first black president is black.  Oh, and some of his relatives are even black -

“His father is white, neighbors say. His mother is Latina. And his family is eager to point out that some of his relatives are black.”

- But how often have you been told that little bit of trivia on MSNBC???

The shooter, George Zimmerman – and I remind you again for the record that said shooter is Hispanic and therefore a recognized member of the Democrat voting block - has been about as convicted as the mainstream media can convict somebody.  Well, him and “stand your ground” gun laws.  Because how dare an ordinary citizen believe he or she ought to have a right to stand his or her ground in America!!!

Nothing has been allowed to stand in the way of justice.  If the media has to bury certain facts and hype certain others, well, demagoguery is a small price to pay for lynch-mob justice.  Which is why this item hasn’t made the story lines on MSNBC, either:

Witness: Martin attacked Zimmerman
Updated: Friday, 23 Mar 2012, 6:19 PM EDT
Published : Friday, 23 Mar 2012, 5:47 PM EDT

ORLANDO - A witness we haven’t heard from before paints a much different picture than we’ve seen so far of what happened the night 17-year-old Trayvon Martin was shot and killed.
 
The night of that shooting, police say there was a witness who saw it all.
 
Our sister station, FOX 35 in Orlando, has spoken to that witness.
 
What Sanford Police investigators have in the folder, they put together on the killing of Trayvon Martin few know about.
 
The file now sits in the hands of the state attorney. Now that file is just weeks away from being opened to a grand jury.
 
It shows more now about why police believed that night that George Zimmerman shouldn’t have gone to jail.
 
Zimmerman called 911 and told dispatchers he was following a teen. The dispatcher told Zimmerman not to.
 
And from that moment to the shooting, details are few.
 
But one man’s testimony could be key for the police.
 
“The guy on the bottom who had a red sweater on was yelling to me: ‘help, help…and I told him to stop and I was calling 911,” he said.
 
Trayvon Martin was in a hoodie; Zimmerman was in red.
 
The witness only wanted to be identified as “John,” and didn’t not want to be shown on camera.
 
His statements to police were instrumental, because police backed up Zimmerman’s claims, saying those screams on the 911 call are those of Zimmerman.
 
“When I got upstairs and looked down, the guy who was on top beating up the other guy, was the one laying in the grass, and I believe he was dead at that point,” John said.
 
Zimmerman says the shooting was self defense. According to information released on the Sanford city website, Zimmerman said he was going back to his SUV when he was attacked by the teen.
 
Sanford police say Zimmerman was bloody in his face and head, and the back of his shirt was wet and had grass stains, indicating a struggle took place before the shooting.

Not that Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson give a damn about such information.  Any more than the racebaiting duo cared about the evidence that exonerated the Duke Lacrosse team.  You know, before the black woman who wrongfully accused them – with Al Sharpton’s and Jesse Jackson’s assistance – ended up murdering - you should have guessed it - a black man named Milton Walker.  Not that the 93% of black people who get murdered by other black people matter one tiny bit to the left, mind you.  Let’s not lose our focus on racism, by which I mean focusing on cases involving killers who can at least be made to appear more or less white.

So why did Barack Obama jump into this case?  Because he’s the exact same sort of racebaiting media whore that Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson are, that’s why.

We’ve got a couple little pieces of info on Obama’s taking that question from the press.  The New York Times writes:

The president often appears perturbed when he is asked off-topic questions at ceremonial events, but on Friday, he seemed eager to address the case, which has quickly developed into a cause célèbre around the country. He cautioned that his comments would be limited because the Justice Department was investigating. But he talked at length about his personal feelings about the case.

And we’re also told how the whole question was a fascist media set-up for a fascist media-hungry president:

pm317

March 23rd, 2012 at 5:01 pm

@Admin A few minutes before the press conference began Josh Earnest of the press office approached the NBC JournoLister present and whispered something into his ear. The NBC JournoLister later asked Obama about Trayvon. Yes, we are implying this was a set up question designed to exploit the death of Trayvon Martin.

Aside from the fact that America used to have a quaint and bizarre notion that accused people were supposed to be presumed innocent until proven guilty – and Zimmerman may actually be innocent of everything but not having an adequately Hispanic-sounding surname – Obama’s assistance as “Demagogue-in-Chief” may very well be the thing that gets George Zimmerman off on this shooting.

Because how is George Zimmerman going to get a fair trial for shooting a young black man who “looks like Obama’s son” would have looked???

“But my main message is to the parents of Trayvon Martin. You know, if I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon.”

Have you ever heard of the legal term “mistrial”???  Apparently our Constitutional-Scholar-in-Chief hasn’t.

Not that it matters – because the New Black Panthers have Barack Obama’s back:

If you’ve been living in a cave: George Zimmerman is the guy who killed the young black kid Trayvon Martin. So forget the system — let’s kill him if necessary!

On Thursday, members of the New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense circulated a “wanted dead or alive” poster for George Zimmerman over the shooting death of Trayvon Martin.

The posters were circulated during a press conference led by Minister Mikhail Muhummud, who said he is the southern regional director for the New Black Panther Party in Jacksonville, Florida.

You remember the New Black Panthers, right?  They’re the ones that got to intimidate white voters because that clearly isn’t a crime???  Barack Obama sure remembers them.

For what it’s worth, I have absolutely no idea what took place between George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin. All I know is that it was a tragedy, and Trayvon Martin looked like a real nice kid with a big smile in the pictures I’ve seen of him. It sounds like Zimmerman was following Martin – quite possibly after he was told to stop – and that therefore this wasn’t a “stand your ground” case. It’s possible that this whole thing was a terrible misunderstanding, in which George Zimmerman was pursuing a suspicious black guy in a hoodie and Trayvon Martin was becoming increasingly paranoid about the Hispanic guy who clearly seemed to be stalking him. It’s quite possible that both young men actually thought they were legitimately defending themselves from the other man. All I know is that Obama didn’t help anybody but Obama by injecting himself into this case.  And all I know is that by attempting to transform this case into one about guns rather than about homicide, the left has turned it into a political football and undermined the justice process.

[Update, 3/26/12] I said immediately above that “Trayvon Martin looked like a real nice kid with a big smile in the pictures I’ve seen of him.”  What I didn’t know was that the mainstream media propaganda was playing a collage of pictures from when Trayvon Martin – who looked very different when George Zimmerman encountered him – was 12 years old.  I also didn’t know that the facts that we haven’t been given by the media paint a very different picture of this “kid” that begins with the fact that he had just been suspended from school for ten days for drug possession and was temporarily staying with his father:

Of course, this is why Trayvon was staying as his Father’s house, so far away from school. And it also explains why George Zimmerman, who by all accounts seemed to stay on top of everything that happened in his neighborhood, didn’t recognize him that evening, Trayvon didn’t really live there, and was only in town because of the suspension.

It seems we may not find out more anytime soon, as a lawyer representing Trayvon’s family has sealed his school records.

[...]

Even though Trayvon was only 17, he already was sporting gold teeth, and several large tattoos. This one was on his wrist, apparently of his girlfriend’s mother’s name.

[...]

It seems that Tray was also on Twitter, but his account seems to have been recently deleted by his family or friends.

His screen name was “@NO_LIMIT_NIGGA, as you can see from the twitpic account screenshot above. He was also a member of a twitter hash group #team4dat.

At first, I was skeptical that anyone would maintain an account with that sort of derogatory slur in the title, but after doing some research, it’s apparent that it was Trayvon’s account.

[...]

There seem to be several allusions to violence on Tray’s Twitter account.

Oh, and Trayvon Martin’s suspension from school also possession of stolen jewelry as well as possession of a burglary tool.

THAT’S the 6’3″ “kid” the 5’9″ Zimmerman encountered the night of the shooting.

And Barack Obama and the mainstream media propaganda are doing absolutely everything they each can to poison the justice process so they can convict a “racist” “white” guy who is really Hispanic out of their larger goal to convict guns in the hands of American citizens.

It very much sounds like Trayvon Martin was growing into a brutal thug.  And I think about that thug when I contemplate Chicago-style thug Obama saying, “If I had a son, he would have looked like Trayvon.”  It sounds a lot more true now than it did before, knowing what I’ve learned about Trayvon Martin and knowing what I’ve sadly experienced in Barack Obama.

[End update].

This country is such a mess it is absolutely unreal.  And when you’ve got a president interfering in a state case that’s already being interfered with more than quite enough as it is instead of doing his job keeping Iran from getting nukes and causing Armageddon, or maybe keeping gas from getting to $5 a gallon, you can understand why.

Liberal Black People Are Racist Bigots. And The Democrat Party And The Mainstrem Media Condones Leftwing Racist Bigotry

What if a white man refused to shake a black woman’s hand, saying, “I’m scared because some of that blackness might rub off on me”????

Decent people would be rightly appalled.  If that white man were a media figure, he would almost certainly lose his job, whether he “apologized” or not.  If he were a conservative, all the more so.  His true racist bigot heart has been revealed, people would say.  And there’s no place for that kind of vile crap on America’s airwaves.

Thank despicability - you sure can’t thank goodness - for Thaddeus Matthews that liberals and particularly liberals in the Democrat Party and the mainstream media are anything but “decent” people.

Outrage subdued after DJ goes on racially charged rant on GOP congressional candidate
By Judson Berger
Published February 03, 2012 | FoxNews.com

In a profanity-laced tirade, a Memphis DJ last week used an on-air interview to berate a local Republican congressional candidate — calling her a “token negro” who is doing the bidding of “white folk.”

DJ Thaddeus Matthews called Charlotte Bergmann, who is black, “stupid.” He referred to her as a “curly-haired nigga.” When she walked out of the interview, he refused to shake her hand, saying he didn’t want to get her “whiteness” on him.

The outrage? The fury? In Memphis, you can hear the crickets.

Bergmann told FoxNews.com that, while the web video of the interview has gotten a lot of attention on blogs, local media are largely ignoring it. She said she hasn’t gotten any calls from politicians about it. “No organization has spoken out,” Bergmann said.

“The anger has been expressed throughout the nation, but not in my local … area,” she said.

As for her treatment on air, which she described as “racist” and abusive, she said it stems from the notion that black politicians should uniformly be Democrats.

Bergmann is running in Tennessee’s 9th District, which is mostly black. The seat is currently held by Democratic Rep. Steve Cohen, whose office so far has not returned a request for comment on the radio interview.

Matthews has stood by the bulk of his comments. He told MyFoxMemphis.com on Thursday that he’s apologized on air for the “whiteness” comment, but he defended the rest.

“I do not regret the content of what I said. In the anger of having another politician in my studio that knows absolutely nothing about nothing and gives me stupid answers, I don’t regret that,” he said. “Now the context of the whiteness rubbing off … that part I do regret, that particular portion of the show. But the rest of everything I said, I meant exactly what I said.”

It’s unclear how the radio station management, at WPLX-AM 1180, is handling the incident, but the owner of the broadcasting company apparently has issued an apology. Bergmann said the owner, William Pollack, called her Wednesday to apologize. She also provided a written apology under Pollack’s name, which expressed regret for the “ill treatment” on air.

“I was unaware of the horrific treatment of you until today. I have personally met with Matthews and will assure you this situation is receiving our complete attention,” the statement said, adding that he “personally supported” Bergmann in 2010 and will do so again.

Bergmann eventually walked out of the interview, which was conducted last Tuesday.

But for the first 12 minutes, Matthews repeatedly challenged her loyalty to black people.

Matthews started by asking about her affiliation with the Tea Party.

He accused her of evading the question, later asking, “Are you a token of white folk? And white folk using you to come against black folk?”

After she started to respond, Matthews interrupted, saying: “Damn, Ms. Bergmann, shut up for a moment. OK, shut up for a moment, because you shucking and jiving.”

The confrontational interview continued as he challenged her on plans to help the black community. “All I see in you is another token negro,” he said, likening her to former Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain.

After several minutes, the DJ threatened to cut off her microphone and throw her out of the studio. “I’m so sick of your sh-, yourself, and I’m about to put your ass up outta here,” he said. “You are a token negro that white folk have control over.”

Eventually, Bergmann said “we have a failure to communicate” and left the studio.

Matthews continued to berate the congressional candidate.

“Get up and get your ass up outta here. Get your stupid, ignorant ass up outta my studio,” he said.

As she left, Bergmann held out her hand to the DJ.

“I don’t need to shake your hand,” he told her. “I’m scared because some of that whiteness might rub off on me.”

Bergmann told FoxNews.com that she’s trying to get the video of the confrontation shown at the upcoming Conservative Political Action Conference — an annual meet-up in Washington of prominent conservatives.

She said her campaign has reached out to two Republican lawmakers about that possibility.

She also said donations to her campaign have spiked since the incident.

Matthews has a reputation in Memphis as a controversial blogger and radio host. According to MyFoxMemphis.com, he was booted from another AM station in 2010 — he claimed white Republicans pressured the bosses to remove him, according to the report.

Matthews went on to launch his show on WPLX, which was billed as a mostly blues music program.

This is what Democrats being “civil” looks like.  It’s also what “Republican obstructionism” looks like.

The Democrat Party has ALWAYS been the official party of racism in America.  It was the party of racism when it literally fought our nation’s most brutal war to continue black slavery.  It was racist when its members created the Ku Klux Klan as the terrorist wing of the Democrat Party to intimidate or even kill black people and Republicans:

Klan groups spread throughout the South as an insurgent movement during the Reconstruction era in the United States. As a secret vigilante group, the Klan targeted freedmen and their allies; it sought to restore white supremacy by threats and violence, including murder, against black and white Republicans. In 1870 and 1871 the federal government passed the Force Acts, which were used to prosecute Klan crimes.[18] Prosecution of Klan crimes and enforcement of the Force Acts suppressed Klan activity. In 1874 and later, however, newly organized and openly active paramilitary organizations, such as the White League and the Red Shirts, started a fresh round of violence aimed at suppressing blacks’ voting and running Republicans out of office. These contributed to segregationist white Democrats regaining political power in all the Southern states by 1877.

And:

Dressed in robes and sheets, intended to prevent identification by the occupying federal troops (and supposedly designed to frighten blacks), the Klan quickly became a terrorist organization in service of the Democratic Party and white supremacy. Between 1869 and 1871 its goal was to destroy Congressional Reconstruction by murdering blacks — and some whites — who were either active in Republican politics or educating black children.

And:

History shows that the Ku Klux Klan was the terrorist arm of the Democrat Party.

The Democrat Party was bitterly racist throughout the entire period during and after the Civil War.

The Democrat Party was racist when Woodrow Wilson resegregated the military and the federal government.

The Democrat Party was still racist to the core sixty years after it waged the Civil War to fight for black slavery when its 1924 National Convention was so filled with Ku Klux Klan members it was called “Klanbake.”

The Democrat Party was racist when Franklin Delano Roosevelt put Japanese-Americans in camps.  Oh, and for the record, FDR’s New Deal policies also attacked black people by keeping them from being able to work (and see also here).

When Martin Luther King, Jr. marched for Civil Rights, he marched in Democrat-controlled areas and encountered his most vicious opposition from Democrats.  As an example, look at Montgomery Alabama when Martin Luther King organized his bus boycott in 1955 or his Bloody Sunday March from Selma To Montgomery in 1965.  And then check which party was totally in control over Alabama.

Martin Luther King, Jr. marched on Washington D.C. in 1963.  It was the most liberal city then and it is still the most liberal city now.

Oh, and it was after that march that the FBI began to attempt to discredit and undermine Martin Luther King, Jr., under the authority of a Democrat administration.

This of course brings us into to the Civil Rights era. 

Here is something interesting about the Civil Rights act and which party supported it:

What is the breakdown by party of who voted for and against the Civil
Rights act of 1964?

House of Representatives:
Democrats for: 152
Democrats against: 96
Republicans for: 138
Republicans against: 34

Senate:
Democrats for: 46
Democrats against: 21
Republicans for: 27
Republicans against: 6

39% of House Democrats were opposed to Civil Rights versus 20% of Republicans. Which is to say that twice as many Democrats in the House opposed Civil Rights as Republicans.

31% of Senate Democrats were opposed to Civil Rights versus 19 percent of Republicans.

Liberals are treacherous and pathologically dishonest; they want to keep people ignorant that Republicans were at the epicenter of the Civil Rights movement from DAY ONE in the 1850s and CONTINUED to be at the epicenter of the Civil Rights movement.  Until that movement was hijacked by a movement that pissed on everything Martin Luther King, Jr. stood for as epitomized by his famous words, “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.”

And we find that Martin Luther King, Jr. was a registered Republican.  Just as his father who was first to bear the name “Martin Luther King” before him was a lifelong Republican.

Liberals continued to document their gross racism when they openly acknowledged that their white SEIU members were “f-ing rabidly racist” and also in their vicious racist attacks against Clarence Thomas when they said, “Send him back to the fields!” and “String him up!”

The same Democrat Party that had been racist for 150 years didn’t just suddenly turn on a dime; they discovered a new way to “own” black people.  Just as the drug dealer wants to get kids addicted to crack cocaine in a neighborhood he wants to control, so also the Democrat Party found that it could get desperate blacks addicted to the welfare agenda and OWN their vote for life.

And the Democrat Party continues to be the party that oppresses and undermines black people.  I document as a FACT that the minimum wage law that you so praise as helping blacks actually has created a tragic and awful situation in which more than HALF of young blacks are not able to get a job. We conservatives predicted that exactly what has happened would happen.

But who is to blame for a Democrat policy that we rightly predicted would fail and which then failed just as we predicted?  Bush.

Thaddeus Matthews is a racist bigot.  But that’s okay: he’s got an entire political party and nearly the entire media propaganda behind him because they’re just like him.

There’s a fitting sentence in the article above that the black victim of the racist attack provides: “As for her treatment on air, which she described as “racist” and abusive, she said it stems from the notion that black politicians should uniformly be Democrats.”

It’s fitting because Democrats feel that THEY SHOULD OWN BLACKS now.  And if they can’t own a black person, if a black person is off the Democrat plantation, then Democrats should be able to hunt that fugitive slave down and punish him/her.

There’s an incredibly racist theory that black liberal ”intellectuals” hold; namely, that black people cannot be racist, because racism is not an attitude that any and all people of any and all colors can have, but rather it is a power relationship.  And even though black people currently have a black person sitting in the White House and even though black people have a black attorney general running America’s law enforcement, they have no power and so can’t be “racist.”  Whereas white people are institutionally racist by the same definition.

But isn’t Charlotte Bergmann black???

So this is the twisted, perverted and frankly morally evil metric that black liberals have to define “black people”: being “black” has nothing whatsoever to do with ancestry or skin color or genetics and everything to do with whether or not one is sufficiently owned by the Democrat Party machine.

You go ahead and call me a “racist” for writing this article.  I will consider your attack to be a badge of honor knowing that it is coming from a genuine racist bigot who is a true enemy of the dream that Martin Luther King, Jr. shared with America.  And I know that the Democrat Party must be defeated today for that dream to be made manifest every bit as much as the same Democrat Party that fought for black slavery had to be defeated at all costs in 1865.

Barack Obama, Nobel Prize Winner And Inventor Of The Violent Thieving Flash Mob Entitlement Mindset

We are watching our culture morally and psychologically dumbed-down to a level dangerously below retardation.

And a huge new wave of stupid and depraved as recently arisen during and as a direct result of the age of Obama: the flash mob.

We watched (some of us with horror) the devastation of London, in which a socialistic nanny state was powerless in the grip of entitlement-driven young people who burned and looted as law-abiding business owners learned that the state not only could not but would not protect them.

We saw the results of a government that was presented as the answer to everything – the entitlement society and the entitlement mindset.  We saw the results of a generation conditioned by the political left to be dependent supplicants of the government as Savior.

In particular, we saw in Greece and then again in London what happens when - as Margaret Thatcher said in her description of the problem with socialism - ”we run out of other people’s money.”

What happens when people who have been trained and conditioned to believe that the government will provide for them discover that the benefits have run out?

The answer is violence.

If the rich owe us, as Obama and the left keeps telling us, and if the rich aren’t forking out what they owe society to keep it functioning, then what conclusion is rational and inevitable but that we have a right to take from the rich what they will not give us?

Enter the Barack Obama Flash mob epidemic of young blacks who parasitically prey on “rich” whites (“White folks’ greed runs a world in need” alert!):

Young Black Men, and The Power of Flash Mobs!!
June 13, 2011 by Staff

(ThyBlackMan.com) We cannot police hopelessness and despair!

There are those who are angered and surprised by the violence of urban “Flash Mobs” (quickly forming groups of young people using technology to organize), especially crowds of young Black men, descending on mostly White, affluent downtown American cities. However, if we analyze this phenomenon, it is not so surprising. In fact, it is highly predictable. While there is no justification for young Black men to rob and beat people of any race, the activities of flash mobs are easily understandable in the context of recent social history and current economic conditions.

Most of these young men are poor, desperate and hopeless. They come from broken families and broken communities. They have been failed by their schools and by social and faith organizations in their communities. They don’t have jobs and many of them will never have jobs. They live at the bottom rung of society. The kind of havoc they wreak among us through “flash mobbing” is the kind of havoc they have lived with their entire young lives. For them, there is a perverse kind of justice and sense of fairness in their ability to create flash mobs that breathe terror into the hearts of other Americans.

Predictive factors for young Black males participating in the activities of violent flash mobs in Chicago are shown by recent data:

• This summer, 90% of young Black men in Chicago between 16 and 19 years old are unemployed.
• Only 44% of Black males graduate with a high school diploma from Chicago public schools.
• Only three out of 100 Black boys who start kindergarten in the Chicago Public Schools earn a bachelors degree by age 25.
• 70% of Black children in America are born into and live in single, female-headed households that are usually impoverished.
• Black males are 6% of Illinois’ population but they represent 60% of the state’s prison population.

The power and strength of a flash mob are in its large number of congregants and in its ability to assemble quickly and to disband equally as fast. The word “flash” is an allusion to social media — texting, smart phones Twitter and Facebook. Flash media, an effective tool for organizing a social cause, is the same media that brought down the government of Egypt. Now inner-city youth are using this same media, but instead of toppling governments, they “topple” Macy’s, Neiman Marcus and Old Navy, and they steal IPads and IPhones from defenseless citizens.

The message from the flash mob to us is even more threatening than the mob itself. That message is, “You can’t control us! You don’t scare us! Your police don’t scare us! Your prisons don’t scare us! We are mightier than you! We will take what you have because you have given us few other options in life for earning similar things. And most importantly, we will take your peace of mind. Just as we in our communities cannot ever feel secure, now neither can you! We are more afraid of continuing to live our lives as they are than we are of you locking us up. What do we have to lose? For once, we are more powerful than you!”

Flash mobs are not new. In Black communities across America for the past 30 years, large groups of Black males have attacked others. In the past few years, jobless, desperate, hopeless youth have rioted in France, Greece, Belgium, Sweden, Denmark, Tunisia, and Egypt in efforts eerily similar to America’s flash mobs, but on a much larger scale and with politically clear motives and demands. These youth have taken over business districts, cities and countries and they have destroyed billions of dollars in property while toppling governments. The same root causes for these youth riots and disturbances in Europe and Northern Africa are producing similar actions, and possibly similar politically conscious attitudes, in the youth of Chicago, New York City, Charlotte, Baltimore, Boston, Philadelphia and other American cities.

Politicians and the police are working under the false and dangerous assumption that hopelessness and despair can be policed. The police are out-numbered and out-maneuvered in this battle of minds, spirits, bodies and technology. Even as thirty-three flash mobbers were arrested in Chicago this past week, the communities in Chicago were producing a thousand more potential flash mobbers to replace them. When Black boys are not reading at grade level by the third grade, we are creating conditions for a flash mob. When Black teenagers cannot find meaningful work, we are creating conditions for a flash mob. When young Black boys do not have suitable role models and mentors, we are creating conditions for a flash mob.

The best way to deter a violent flash mob is to stop it from forming. The best time to stop it from forming is when the potential congregants are 2 and 3 years old, not when they are 16, 20 and 30 years old. The best weapons against flash mobs are jobs, not police with guns; education, not incarceration; and positive guidance and direction, not threats or curses. Can flash mobs be stopped? Absolutely. Is America working properly to stop them? Absolutely not.

Welcome to the year 2011 where ethics, sociology, economics, criminology, politics and technology cross! The flash mobbers are trying to tell us, “You can’t stop us, but with your help, we can stop ourselves!”

Written By Phillip Jackson

Founder and Executive Director

The Black Star Project
3509 South King Drive
Chicago, Illinois 60653
773.285.9600 office
312.771.1010 cell
Blackstar1000@ameritech.net

“Flash mobs are not new,” the article says, pointing to incidents in Europe.  But we never saw one in America until the age of Obama.  Liberaism brought Europe to America, while conservatives did everything they could to try to prevent that cultural nihilism from ariving.

Decent people call it mob looting; liberals call it “the redistribution of wealth.”  Decent people call it anarchy and the breakdown of society and civiliation; liberals call it “social justice.”

The hero of liberalism and of the Democrat Party is the black person.  But consider:

The most dangerous possible place for a black child to be in America is in his or her mother’s womb.  Nearly HALF of all black babies are aborted.  The depravity of American blacks since 1973 DWARFS the holocaust that the shocked and horrorfied the world in the genocide that took place in Rwanda.

“Nobility” is defined by the left as killing your own baby.

For liberals, “nobility’ is defined as being a convicted criminal.  Nearly 40 percent of young black men are under the control of the criminal justice system.  Conversely, as the leftist black leadership puts it, more blacks are in prison than were in slavery in 1850 (as blacks have literally placed THEMSELVES in the chains of bondage).

Nearly seventy percent of blacks are in single parent households, as their culture is collapsing all around them.

And I am constantly lectured that white people are the ones who are immoral.  And we’re bad people because 96% of us didn’t vote for Barack Obama the way blacks did.

And I am beyond sick and tired and disgusted with black leaders presiding over a community in total moral depradation calling me a racist when they are people consumed by race and dedicated to the ideology of taking more from other races and giving it to themselves.

You look at the cities that have voted Democrat for a hundred years, and they are ALL in complete collapse and in total despair.  And all they can do is turn their rage outward – ignoring the consequence of their own lifestyles and their own voting record – and lash out at “white folks’ greed.”

Having said all that, this isn’t a failing of “the black race”; it is a total failing of the direction that black leaders have taken their community in America.  Failed leaders have led their people to failure.

Conservatives predicted that Obama’s ”hope and change” policies would lead to food stamps and unemployment.  But now we’re seeing that Obama is leading to even more: it is leading to predation and collapse.

Why This Conservative Criticizes Allen West Over Wasserman Schultz Comeback (Better Read This Before Drawing Conclusions)

Former Lieutenant Colonel and current Representative Allen West had the following response to a prolonged personal attack from Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (who had just attacked West on the House floor and who had previously staged a protest in his own district in front of his office):

Look, Debbie, I understand that after I departed the House floor you directed your floor speech comments directly towards me. Let me make myself perfectly clear, you want a personal fight, I am happy to oblige. You are the most vile, unprofessional ,and despicable member of the US House of Representatives. If you have something to say to me, stop being a coward and say it to my face, otherwise, shut the heck up. Focus on your own congressional district!

I am bringing your actions today to our Majority Leader and Majority Whip and from this time forward, understand that I shall defend myself forthright against your heinous characterless behavior……which dates back to the disgusting protest you ordered at my campaign hqs, October 2010 in Deerfield Beach.

You have proven repeatedly that you are not a Lady, therefore, shall not be afforded due respect from me!

Steadfast and Loyal

Congressman Allen B West (R-FL)

Interestingly, most of the mainstream media outlets omit the part about the fact that this feud “dates back to the disgusting protest [Wasserman Schultz] ordered at [West's] campaign hqs, October 2010 in Deerfield Beach.”  Apparently that little bit of historical context makes West’s response seem more reasonable, so they left that part out.  West had had his fill of Wasserman Schultz.  And she deserved everything she got from West.

That said, West shouldn’t have said the part about her not being a “lady.”

Debbie Wasserman Schultz is a cockroach.  But she is a “lady” cockroach.

As for the rest (particularly the “vile” and ‘despicable” part), West accurately characterized Wasserman Schultz to a ‘T.’

For the record, Wasserman Schultz is a white “lady,” and Allen West is “black.”  By every liberal standard (except the standard that liberalism is quintessential hypocrisy and their own spewage never applies to themsleves), that makes Wasserman Schultz a racist for criticizing West.  Just thought I’d point that out.

The funny thing, of course, is that liberalism who love to play the race card so much it’s literally every card on every deck they play with, are steadfastly ignoring the racial angle now.  Rather, West is a “misogynist.”

Again, Wasserman Schultz IS a “lady.”  It would simply take an entomologist to prove it, is all.

By the way, that protest that Debbie Wasserman Schultz went to Allen West’s district to stage?  Here’s what happened there:

Wasserman Schultz held a small rally last year outside the office of Republican Allen West, denouncing the war hero who was running for the Florida congressional seat he eventually won.  Explaining the difference between the expression of her First Amendment rights and Tea Party rallies, she said, “I don’t see any swastikas or any pictures of the President in black face or burned in effigy here.  The difference between the way we express our First Amendment rights and the way I’ve seen Tea Party extremists—Republican Tea Party extremists—express their right is dramatically different.”

And, for the record, Wasserman Schultz has a documented history of comparing her political opponents to Nazis.

Well, other than the fact that the “swastikas” came primarily from the LEFT who were deliberately and deceitfully trying to falsely smear tea party people, and other than the fact that liberals have demonized Bush at rallies beyond the point of ad nauseum (see also here) – both of which make everything Wasserman Schultz said the “vile” and “despicable” ravings of a self-righteous hypocrite – what the hell business did she have organizing a protest in front of another congressman’s office in that congressman’s district?

Before I go on with my next point about Wasserman Schultz, allow me to first point out that “NAZI” stood for “National SOCIALIST German WORKERS Party.”  And Wasserman Schultz is FAR more of a “Nazi” than Allen West has ever been or ever will be.

That said, let me introduce this comment from Wasserman Schultz about another group of people she demonized; namely, all Republican women (that’s right, Wasserman Schultz hates blacks AND women):

Newly appointed  head of the Democratic National Committee and Democrat attack dog,  Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL), the woman who has built a  reputation on the left for casting aspersions on behalf of female injustice,  recently made a blanket statement that all pro-life Republicans are “anti-women.”

According to Wasserman Schultz, Republicans who seek to save the lives of the  unborn, approximately half of whom are female, are indicative of an “extremely  radical social agenda” on par with waging “war on women.” For liberals, saving life is radical; ending  life is not.

That reminded me of the bumper sticker I have actually seen on liberals’ cars:

This is the equivlenet of being PRO-JEW, PRO-HOLOCAUST.  And Wasserman Schultz and every Democrat who has helped murder more than 53 MILLION innocent human beings in the abortion mills will one day be burning in hell for this incredibly stunning depravity.

“Pro-Jew” Adolf Hitler only murdered 6 million Jews.  So you can understand why Wasserman Schultz is NINE TIMES more “pro-child” than Hitler was “pro-Jew.”

And, yes, AGAIN, Wasserman Schultz and her fellow liberal baby murderers are both ANTI-BLACK and ANTI-WOMAN.

ANTI-BLACK:

And, again, let’s take a jaunt down memory lane and see that Margaret Sanger – a patron saint of liberalism – was a Nazi sympathizer and racist eugenicist who said things like “We don’t want the word   to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population.”  And that Planned Parenthood located its abortion centers in black populated areas because “Eugenic sterilization is an urgent need … We must prevent multiplication of this bad stock.”  Let us not forget that three out of every five black babies conceived in America are murdered by abortion.  And by all means – given Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s love of using the term “Nazi” to demonize her opponents – let’s compare her Democrat Party/Planned Parenthood agenda with blacks to the Nazi Party one with Jews.

ANTI-WOMAN:

Western Governments Are Blamed for Asia’s Shortage of Women
Ujala Sehgal – Sat Jun 18, 4:41 pm ET

In her new book “Unnatural Selection,” Science writer Mara Hvistendahl examines how the trend toward choosing boys over girls through sex-selective abortions has spread through the developing world, particularly in Asia. Coining the term “Generation XY,” Hvistendahl provides the grim results of sex selection: while the natural sex ratio at birth is 105 boys born for every 100 girls, in India the figure has risen to 112 boys and in China, 121. The Chinese city of Lianyungang actually recorded 163 boys per 100 girls in 2007.

The shortage of women is already giving rise to deep societal problems. New markets have been created for women in Asia, including wedding agencies that arrange marriages between South Korean men and women often from poorer nearby countries like Vietnam, that now account for 11% of all marriages in South Korea. There is also a growing practice of child marriage in China, where wealthier families buy young girls to secure wives for their sons early. And with so many surplus men (e.g., up to a fifth of men will be single in northwestern India by 2020), she suggests that the excess testosterone could lead to raised levels of crime and violence.

But what distinguishes Hvistendahl’s book from other similar reports is that, as the Guardian notes in a profile today, she “lays the blame squarely on western governments and businesses that have exported technology and pro-abortion practices without considering the consequences,” unlike other accounts, that solely basing sex selection on cultural practices.

For the record, Asian and Indian immigrant families among others are bringing the practice of selectively killing female babies with them right here to the shores of these United States of America.

As for Debbie Wasserman Schultz being a cockroach, well, cockroaches eat THEIR own young, too.

Colonel West, sir, you once famously said, “If it’s about the lives of my soldiers at stake, I’d go through hell with a gasoline can.”  I believe you’ll find that you’ve got more than a few supporters (even in other states) who would do the same thing for you.

Turning The Tables On Vicious Rolling Stone Leftist Attack Piece On Michelle Palin (Among Other Things, They Plagiarized).

There was a particularly vicious leftwing assault by leftwing rag The Rolling Stone. The only time I ever hear anything about Rolling Stone Magazine is when they do something particularly vile, because on their best day they are still vile and so why read them?  Their last infamous hit piece (on General Stanley McChrystal) was also filled with fraud.  But what can you say?  Liberals are people who swim in an ocean of lies; and why should they be troubled when the people they trust to lie to them turn out to be dishonest???

There are such lines in the Rolling Stone piece as “Bachmann is a religious zealot whose brain is a raging electrical storm of divine visions and paranoid delusions.” I don’t need to read further than that. It was a toxic, rabid hit piece by toxic, rabid secular humanist liberals.

But let us consider the “standards” of journalism that these people follow. Let us consider who the REAL religious zealots whose brains are raging electrical storms of demonic visions and paranoid delusions are. Let us consider who should have the last laugh, and who should be fired as disgraces:

Rolling Stone caught in potential plagiarism flap over Michele Bachmann profile
By Joe Pompeo & Dylan Stableford
June 24, 2011

It’s been a few months since we’ve had ourselves a good-old plagiarism incident to get riled up about. But thanks to Rolling Stone, our sleepy summer Friday just got a bit more scandalous!

The magazine is taking some heat today for lifting quotes in Matt Taibbi’s hit piece on Minnesota’s 2012 Tea Party hopeful Michele Bachmann.

In the story, posted online Wednesday, Taibbi borrows heavily from a 2006 profile of Bachmann by G.R. Anderson, a former Minneapolis City Pages reporter who now teaches journalism at the University of Minnesota. The thin sourcing, as Abe Sauer argues over at The Awl, is part of a “parade of uncredited use of material” from local blogs and reporters who “have dogged Bachmann for years now.”

But the larger issue for journalism’s ethical watchdogs concerns the several unattributed quotes Sauer spotted in Taibbi’s piece, which Rolling Stone executive editor Eric Bates explained away by saying he’d cut out the attributions due to “space concerns” and that he would “get some links included in the story online.”

At least one plagiarism “expert” doesn’t buy Bates’ logic.

“Attribution is the last thing an editor should cut!!!!” Jack Shafer, who is known to grill copy-stealers in his media column for Slate (and who used to edit two alt-weeklies similar to City Pages), told The Cutline via email. “How big was the art hole on that piece? Huge, I’ll bet.”

Shafer added: “If an editor deletes attribution, can the writer be called a plagiarist? I don’t think so. Is that what happened? If Taibbi approved the deletions, it’s another question.”

We emailed Taibbi, who is no stranger to press controversies, with a request for comment and will update this if we hear back.

UPDATE 4 p.m. “I did in fact refer to the City Pages piece in the draft I submitted,” Taibbi told The Cutline. “I did not see that those attributions had been removed. I grew up in alternative newspapers and have been in the position the City Pages reporter is in, so I’m sympathetic. They did good work in that piece and deserve to be credited. But you should know also that this isn’t plagiarism–it’s not even an allegation of plagiarism. It’s an attribution issue.”

In the meantime, Anderson is giving Rolling Stone the benefit of the doubt, although he didn’t let them off the hook entirely.

“I would not consider what the Rolling Stone [piece] contained in it to be plagiarism,” Anderson told City Pages. “What I will say, as a graduate of the Columbia J-School, and an adjunct at the University of Minnesota J-School, I do know that if a student handed in a story with that particular lack of sourcing, not only would I give it an ‘F,’ I would probably put that student on academic fraud.”

You can check out a side-by-side comparison of the two Bachmann profiles over at The Awl.

What is particularly ironic is the use of an image of Michelle Bachmann as holy warrior, gripping the Bible in one hand and a sword dripping in blood in the other as a bloody slaughter continues unabated in the background. It’s an image that is intended to summon the most grisly spectre of the Crusades, of course.

Accompanying the Rolling Stone article on Bachmann:

At the worst of the Crusades, the “Christian warriors” were given Absolution for their sins for taking part in the Holy War. You could literally get away with murder. And too many did just that (at least until they found out the hard way that the Pope’s absolution didn’t give them absolution from a just and holy God).

Now, let us consider the irony of the “Absolution” given by the left. Women are sacred cows (now watch me get attacked as calling women “cows”) in liberalism. You do not DARE attack women. Unless they are conservative women like Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachmann. And then liberals are given total Absolution to attack them as women, as wives, as mothers, as sexual beings, as anything that smears them and degrades them. And they have absolution to do it; no women’s group will come after them. Their sins are pardoned.

Call it a leftwing Crusade; better yet, call it a leftwing jihad.  “Kill thee all the enemies of liberalism.  Nullus Dues lo volt! [No God wills it!].  Thous hast absolution to murder thine opponents by any means necessary!”  And off these “journalists” (or JournoLists) go to do their demonic bidding.

A similar case of such liberal Absolution just occurred with Jon Stewart, who mocked black conservative Herman Cain in an obviously racial and racist manner using his Amos and Andy voice. It’s fine; a Jon Stewart liberal can openly racially mock a black man, provided that black man is a conservative. It’s no different than the most cynical criticism of Pope Pius in the Crusades, who said it was okay to murder as long as you were murdering a Muslim.

We see their “objective” work when they flood to Alaska to search through tens of thousands of Sarah Palin emails and even enlist their readers to help them dig for dirt.  They never would have DREAMED of subpeoning Barak Obama’s emails.  We see their “objective” work when they trip all over themselves to buy a story about a bogus lesbian Muslim heroine (i.e. more liberal fraud) just because she was lesbian and Muslim, and that’s exactly what they wanted to see.

I would love nothing more than to have all the Western “journalists” who have played these games grabbed up and taken to a country governed by Islam and watch the look on their formerly smug faces as they were tortured and killed one after another. Until that day, they will continue to serve as useful idiots for communism and terrorism and pretty much every other “ism” that is eroding Western Culture from within.

Add that abject hypocrisy of the left to the fact that for a writer anything resembling plagiarism is the greatest sin imaginable, and you get to see just how utterly vile these people are. They have no honor, no integrity, no decency. Period.

And then we compare the sheer number of plagiarism cases at leftwing papers such as the New York Times (I’ll just drop a couple of names like Jayson Blair and Maureen Dowd and Zachery Kouwe) to conservative papers like the Wall Street Journal, and you see which side simply has no honor, integrity, or decency at all.  But what should we expect from such a rabid little bunch of Goebbels?  Honesty?

It is also interesting to add that the Crusaders were in fact responding to CENTURIES of Muslim aggression. While many of the monstrous acts that occurred on both sides could never be justified, “the Crusades” themselves were quite justifiable. I make mention of this because the left continues to do to the Crusades what they are doing even today; take the side of the aggressive vicious murderers against Western Culture. And when you look at a major rundown of major plagiarism cases in journalism, it’s the leftwing names like the Washington Post and the Boston Globe and ESPN rather than Fox News.

When America is sufficiently toxic and ripe for judgment, it listens to lies and the bad people who tell those lies and votes for Democrats.  That’s basically where we seem to be now.

Oh, by the way, Barack Obama is a documented plagiarist, too.  That’s part of the reason liberal journalists love him so much; he’s truly one of them.

Attorney General Holder Talks About ‘My People.’ American People, White People, Need Not Apply For Justice

Let’s see if there’s any such thing as fairness in the world when liberals are involved.

“While he may have had the best of intentions, Ross Perot rubbed many Blacks the wrong way during his recent address at the NAACP national convention in Nashville when he referred to Blacks as ‘you people.’”

And just how dare he?

Well, then there’s Eric Holder, a.k.a. Moses, calling those same blacks “my people.”  Which is to say that “his people” are not the American people, and they SURE aint “white people” or “Asian people.”  Racism is fine – as long as it’s liberals being racists while simultaneously getting to constantly throw out the race card.

March 2, 2011
Eric Holder Plays the Race Card
Posted by Van Helsing at March 2, 2011 8:10 AM

Despite the lack of interest by the mainstream media, the revelation that New Black Panther maniacs who intimidated voters were not prosecuted because of a Justice Department policy of only enforcing civil rights laws if the plaintiffs are not Caucasians will not go away. Eric Holder, who denounced the USA as a “nation of cowards,” has stuck his foot in his mouth once again by revealing that his loyalty to his race comes long before any loyalty to the law or America:

Attorney General Eric Holder finally got fed up Tuesday with claims that the Justice Department went easy in a voting rights case against members of the New Black Panther Party because they are African American.

Holder’s frustration over the criticism became evident during a House Appropriations subcommittee hearing as Rep. John Culberson (R-Texas) accused the Justice Department of failing to cooperate with a Civil Rights Commission investigation into the handling of the 2008 incident in which Black Panthers in intimidating outfits and wielding a club stood outside a polling place in Philadelphia.

The Attorney General seemed to take personal offense at a comment Culberson read in which former Democratic activist Bartle Bull called the incident the most serious act of voter intimidation he had witnessed in his career.

“Think about that,” Holder said. “When you compare what people endured in the South in the 60s to try to get the right to vote for African Americans, and to compare what people were subjected to there to what happened in Philadelphia — which was inappropriate, certainly that… to describe it in those terms I think does a great disservice to people who put their lives on the line, who risked all, for my people,” said Holder, who is black.

In other words, it’s okay to chase Whitey away from the polls with clubs, because His People endured worse in past generations.

That Obama would appoint an Attorney General with known terrorist sympathies was the height of arrogance. Every day that he fails to fire him is another finger poked in America’s eye.

There’s more about the New Black Panther story here.

Let me rephrase Holder’s words into a slightly different argument to show how morally idiotic it is:

“Think about that.  When you compare what women endured in Afghanistan in the last few years to try to get the right to be treated as human beings, and to compare what women were subjected to there to what happened in California to Jaycee Dugard - which was inappropriate, certainly, that… to describe it in those terms I think does a great disservice to heroic Afghani women who put their lives on the line…”

Thank you, Attorney General Eric Holder.  Now I’m finally free to find myself as many sex slaves to kidnap as I can fit in my trunk.  Because those women in Afghanistan clearly had it even worse.  And therefore how DARE you uphold that law against stopping American women from being turned into sex slaves.  I mean, both girls were obviously repeatedly raped, but the Afghani girl got her nose and her ears cut off as well.  So let’s not uphold the law against the rat bastard piece of moral filth who ruined Jaycee Dugard’s life.  Because he wasn’t as bad, you see.

Let me refresh your memory about the views of one of the New Black Panthers who was trying to disenfranchise white voters:

Here’s the new political correctness that is perfectly okay in AG Holder’s mind.  These are the words of the New Black Panther who was intimidating white voters:

SHABAZZ:  “I hate white people.  All of them!  Every last iota of a cracker, I hate him!  You want freedom? You’re going to have to kill some crackers! You’re going to have kill some of their babies.”

That certainly isn’t all that the guy Obama and Holder wanted to protect said:

Samir: “We didn’t come out here to play. There is to much serious business going on in your black community to be sliding through south street with white, dirty cracker whores on your arms. What’s a matter with you black man, you got a doomsday with a white woman on your arm.”
……
“We keep begging white people for freedom. No wonder we’re not free. Your enemy can not make you free fool. You want freedom you’re going to have to kill some crackers. You’re going to have to kill some of their babies.

Let us get our act together. It’s time to wake up, clean up, and stand up.”

“I can’t wait for the day that they’re all dead. I won’t be completely happy until I see our people free and Whitey dead.”

“When you have 10 brothers in uniform, suited and booted and ready for war, white folks know these niggas ain’t their niggas. We kick white folks asses. We take it right to the cracker.”

That attitude is just FINE in Barack Obama’s and Eric Holder’s twisted vision of America.  It’s only all white people who are to be permantly deemed guilty for what a few did back before I was born.

If you’re going to kidnap a sex slave for yourself, just make sure she is a white, dirty cracker whore.  Because “her kind” especially shouldn’t count.

Eric Holder is the Attorney General of the United States.  He is the person responsible for upholding the laws of the land.  And he is a shockingly stupid moral imbecile, appointed to his position by another shockingly stupid moral imbecile.

If you have so much as a single functioning moral cell in your body, you do NOT say you don’t give a damn about upholding the law because something worse happened fifty years ago.  Or five years ago, for that matter.

I can now say that Obama is not my president, because he’s not from “my people.”  Nor do I have to follow the laws of the land, because they’re being administered by someone who isn’t one of “my people.”  And when I say that, I am actually backed up by the words of the highest law enforcement offical in the land.  It is absolutely disgraceful and despicable.

Barack Obama and Eric Holder are two truly evil men who are too morally stupid to know that they are truly evil men.

This is God damn America, plain and simple.  And in God damn America, “justice” only works for whomever the tyrant regime wants it to work for.

Harry Reid Continues Race-Baiting Racist Democrat Tradition

Harry Reid was speaking before a group of liberal Hispanics when he said the following:

“I don’t know how anyone of Hispanic heritage could be a Republican, OK? Do I need to say more?”

Why did Harry Reid say that?  Well, as a progressive Democrat, Harry Reid understands the “white man’s burden.”

Harry Reid understands that blacks and Hispanics are little more than animals – millions of years’ worth of Darwinism from attaining the humanity of the white man.  And therefore it is the duty of the white man to guide his less evolved evolutionary cousins toward a course  that will enable them to survive.  I mean, we have programs to protect turtles and frogs; it is the least we can do to protect blacks and Hispanics, too.

Most every progressive Democrat knows all that.

Second, Harry Reid, again as a progressive Democrat, understands the equivalent of “they all look alike”; namely that “those kind of people all think the same.”  I mean, blacks’ and Hispanics’ minds are clearly far too feeble to enable them to think for themselves, right?  I mean, that’s a big part of why we’ve got the “white man’s burden thing” above.

One day, millions of years from now if we’re lucky (you know how Darwinism takes eons of time), blacks and Hispanics will finally be fully human, and then we’ll be able to hold them responsible as human beings just like the white man.  But Harry Reid knows that we’re far from that day in the here-and-now.

Now, of course, I put both ideas in over-the-top language.  But they nevertheless do accurately reflect the incredibly racists underlying assumptions on the part of progressive Democrats today.

First, they lump people into groups on the basis of race and gender.  And then they essentially point out that some of these groups are not able to take care of themselves, and therefore we must redistribute the wealth of the more successful groups in order to help the racial categories who are unable to help themselves (and of course to punish the successful groups, who are assumed to have acquired everything they obtained illegitimately or through greed).

Interestingly, in spite of my being white – or according to progressive Democrats BECAUSE of my white race – I am able to think for my self.  I don’t “vote my race”; I vote my values.  I vote my ideas.  I vote my conscience.  It is beyond a shame that blacks and Hispanics – according to the Democrat Senate Majority Leader – either don’t have or shouldn’t have that capacity.

Stop and think, liberals.  What if a Republican had met a group of white people and said:

“I don’t know how anyone of Caucasian heritage could vote Democrat, OK?  Do I  need to say more?”

That Republican would have been hounded out of office in shame.  And he would be gone.

But if the Democrat Party exists to advance the cause of blacks and Hispanics, then wouldn’t it be just as true that the Grand Old Party exists to advance the cause of some other racial group?  And what group would that be if not whites?

Hey, every single one of you white, dirty cracker whores (at least, that’s what the New Black Panthers consider white women) out there: vote Republican, or be branded a traitor to your own race.

Now, of course, you run into the irony that it was that Grand Old Party that freed the slaves, and fought a bitter war to free the slaves against the Democrat Party that was fighting just as bitterly to keep black people in the chains of human bondage.  But that’s beside the point in the Democrat narrative.

Harry Reid is also on the record admiring Obama as a:

‘light-skinned’ African American ‘with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one.’

Maybe it’s because Obama was half white, but Harry Reid nevertheless praises Obama for overcoming that stupid negro dialect.  And being light-skinned is a huge bonus for Harry Reid.  “Whiter is better” when you’re in the party of “the White Man’s Burden.”

Bill Clinton wasn’t quite as happy with the man who was stealing his white wife’s rightful place as leader of the free world.

Bill snidely told Ted Kennedy,

“A few years ago, this guy would have been getting us coffee.”

I know, William Jefferson.  That’s back when southern Democrats like you had a different way of keeping black boys in their proper place.

Senator Robert Byrd, a distinguished “Exalted Cyclops” and “Kleagle” of the famous Democrat-created Ku Klux Klan, was on the record as once saying:

“I shall never fight in the armed forces with a Negro by my side … Rather I should die a thousand times, and see Old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again, than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen from the wilds.”

Ah.  There’s that depiction of blacks as being in that long-way-from-being-human I earlier mentioned.

And:

“The Klan is needed today as never before and I am anxious to see its rebirth here in West Virginia and in every state in the nation.”

When Bill Clinton honored fellow Democrat Robert “Exalted Cyclops” Byrd, Clinton said:

“He was a country boy from the hills and hollows of West Virginia. He was trying to get elected. And maybe he did something he shouldn’t have done…”

Well, as long as he was just a Democrat trying to get elected, then ANY racism or racism is fine, isn’t it, Hill Billy?

Maybe he did something he shouldn’t have done.  And then again, maybe he didn’t.  After all, Byrd was a Democrat, and therefore can get away with the most shocking acts of racist filth imaginable, right, Hill Billy?

Democrats love to call Republicans “racist.”  And what a racist thing of them to say (if not being “race traitorous,” if the Democrats are white – to throw Harry Reid’s standard back at them).

I pointed this out once before (and we could also point out that the Confederacy voted exclusively Democrat, and that the KKK was created by Democrats as a terrorist arm to target black people and white Republicans).

The first Klan was founded in 1865 in Pulaski, Tennessee by veterans of the Confederate Army. Although it never had an organizational structure above the local level, similar groups across the South adopted the name and methods. Klan groups spread throughout the South as an insurgent movement after the war. As a secret vigilante group, the Klan reacted against Radical Republican control of Reconstruction by attempting to restore white supremacy by threats and violence, including murder, against black and white Republicans.  In 1870 and 1871 the federal government passed the Force Acts, which were used to prosecute Klan crimes. Prosecution of Klan crimes and enforcement of the Force Acts suppressed Klan activity. In 1874 and later, however, newly organized and openly active paramilitary organizations, such as the White League and the Red Shirts, started a fresh round of violence aimed at suppressing Republican voting and running Republicans out of office. These contributed to white conservative Democrats‘ regaining political power in all the Southern states by 1877.

But let me quote myself regarding other parts of the despicable record of the Democrat Party as the party of official racism in America:

I mean, maybe you can go back to President Andrew Jackson and his vicious genocidal Trail of Tears.  But Andrew Jackson was a Democrat, too.  Or you could go back to President Woodrow Wilson who literally fired all the blacks in federal government and RE-segregated the military.  But you guessed it – Democrat.  We can go back to January 26, 1922, when Democrat Senators filibustered a Republican bill that had passed in the GOP-controlled House to make lynching a federal crime.  Or we could mention the vile and evil political party that had a national convention in 1924 that was so dominated by the Ku Klux Klan that it is today known as “Klanbake.”  But, oops.  That was the 1924 DEMOCRAT PARTY CONVENTION.  Or we could consider that President Franklin Delanor Roosevelt was a bigger racist for put American Japanese citizens in camps for nothing beyond racism.  Or for allowing the infamous Tuskegee experiment to begin under his presidency.  Or allowing his New Deal program to be used to help Democrat-supporting labor unions hurt black people and shut them out of economic success.  But, well, you know…So when you hear Democrats today like Patrick Kennedy comparing the Arizona with the Trail of Tears, note that they’re merely trying to pass the buck for their own Democrat historic racism to innocent Republicans.  I mean, what Patrick Kennedy did was analogous to Osama bin Laden saying, “You Americans are the terrorists, just like the murderers who attacked and destroyed the World Trade Center!”  But wait a minute, Osama – YOU’RE THE ONE WHO DID THAT!!!

The Democrat Party is the historic proponent of racism in this country (see also my comment here).  Oh, they changed their tactics from threats to bribes, but they never abandoned their racist “progressive” values.

The Democrats that once deliberately targeted racial minorities for exclusion and even violence as a means of advancing their political power ultimately realized that their strategy wasn’t working beginning in the 1960s.  That was when they realized, “If you can’t beat ‘em, co-opt them.”  And they began to buy the votes of the very racial minorities they used to savagely oppress by offering racial quotas (opposed by great civil rights leaders such as Frederic Douglas and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.) and welfare benefits for life.

So why was it that Democrat Senator Robert Byrd was “MAYBE” wrong for being a member of the Klan? The answer is as simple as it is frightening: because it’s always been okay for the Democrat Party to use racism and race-baiting and racial segregation in order to drive their agenda home.  And that is just as true today when the Democrats buy off blacks through welfare so they will act as the human shields of the Democrat Party as it was when the Democrat-created Ku Klux Klan was riding around with torches.

Let us not forget that both the famous Martin Luther King, Sr. and his even more famous son were both registered Republicans. It’s a shame that the pseudo civil rights leaders of today – and particularly one Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid – frankly aren’t fit to carry Martin Luther King’s shoes, much less criticize his party affiliation.

Martin Luther King, Jr. and Frederick Douglas BOTH fundamentally opposed the quotas and preferential treatment that Democrats have employed to create the equivalent of the “house negro.” Jack Greenberg of the NAACP said in the 1950s that “The chief problem with quotas is that they introduce a potentially retrogressive concept into the cherished notion of individual equality.”

Let’s listen to Frederick Douglas, escaped slave and greatest of all champions of civil rights, has to say:

Frederick Douglass ridiculed the idea of racial quotas, as suggested by Martin Delany, as “absurd as a matter of practice,” noting that it implied blacks “should constitute one-eighth of the poets, statesmen, scholars, authors and philosophers.” Douglass emphasized that “natural equality is a very different thing from practical equality; and…though men may be potentially equal, circumstances may for a time cause the most striking inequalities.”  On another occasion, in opposing “special efforts” for the black freedmen, Douglass argued that they “might ‘serve to keep up very prejudices, which it is so desirable to banish’ by promoting an image of blacks as privileged wards of the state.”

So now conservatives are suddenly racists for agreeing with Frederick Douglas and Martin Luther King, Jr. and against liberals and the vile pseudo values that the greatest civil rights leaders in history condemned?

Richard Nixon, whom Democrats love to make the poster boy for Republican racism, was the first president to introduce the racial quotas that Democrats have been trying to implement and expand ever since.  To whatever extent Nixon was a racist, Democrats have been swimming in Nixon’s racism ever since.

Harry Reid should have resigned in disgrace two vile comments ago.  He should certainly resign now.

Choosing Policies Based On Character, Or Color: Please Choose Wisely

It was the late 1980s, and I experienced something that will probably puzzle me for the rest of my life on this earth.

I had ordered “Blazer Cable” so that I could see the Portland Trailblazer home games.  And in order to help pay for it – and to make it more fun to watch – I got a few friends to go in on it with me.

One night, one of my friends brought one of his friends over on a night when the Blazers were playing the Chicago Bulls.  I thought the guy had some faulty wiring from about the moment I met him, but, what they hey.

In any event, to get to the point, at some point during the game my friend’s friend was sitting on the couch alone with me (everybody else was either in the kitchen or in the bathroom, as it was halftime).  They were interviewing Michael Jordan.  And he looked over at me and said, “Would you trade places with Michael Jordan?”

This was like the stupidest questions I had ever heard, and I’ve heard quite a few stupid questions.

“Of course I would,” I said.  I mean, duh.  Michael Jordan was strikingly handsome, he was filthy rich, he was incredibly successful, and he was one of the best athletes in the history of the human race.  And I wouldn’t want to trade places with him why, exactly?

Then came the only possible answer.

My friend’s friend starting giggling.  I can’t really call it laughing.

“What the hell is so funny?” I asked.

“You’d trade places with a black guy,” he said, still giggling.

Well, yeah.  I waited to hear the cross-eyed albino boy start playing a banjo.

At the time, I was too astonished to be angry at the guy.  It was like encountering someone who – in spite of massive evidence to the contrary – believed he was invisible to the human eye.

I’ve thought about that few second encounter a number of times since.  It still amazes me to this very day.  How can somebody possibly get that stupid?

In the years before that moment, and since then, I had known some black men who were total turds.  And I have known some black men whom I regarded as having superior character to my own.

Lumping people into racial groups and then judging people on the basis of the color of their skin is every bit as stupid as not wanting to change places with Michael Jordan simply “because he’s black.”  But I see it being done all the time these days.  By the left.

I was raised to regard character, intelligence, virtue, attitude and attractiveness of personality as the qualities that determined the value of a person.  It had never even occurred to me to think that the color of one’s skin made on more or less valuable.

I was also raised to want to continue to improve myself.  I was raised to want to become a better human being, to improve my station in, and my quality of, life.

I think that’s why I react so viscerally to the racial attitude inherent in modern liberalism.  To pit people against each other on the basis of color and bigotry, and to label white people as being evil and somehow complicit in some kind of white power structure is bad enough.  But it goes beyond that.

It’s self-taught, self-limiting perpetual victimhood.  It’s providing a class of people with a ready-made excuse for failure; it’s discouraging them from even really bothering to try, and rewarding them for not trying; it’s an evil exchange in which one accepts all kinds of control over their lives in exchange for destructive and cancerous welfare; it’s wallowing in an attitude of bitterness and even self-loathing that dooms one to a life of misery.  It is a guaranteed perpetuation of failure.

It is a completely alien worldview to me.  Every bit as much as that idiot who wouldn’t trade places with Michael Jordan “because he’s black.”

I made the earlier comment that I’ve met black men whom I regarded as being superior to me in the thing that I value most – character.  They were examples to me, and as a result of their friendship, I became a better person.  I’ve also known a number of white men whose superior character helped me advance in my own life.  The point is that you desire excellence, and you take it wherever you can find it.

I have a feeling that Pastor C.L. Bryant would be one of those men, were I fortunate enough to know him.

From ScottFactor.com:

Slavery, Courtesy Of Liberals Everywhere
July 27th, 2010

Comedian Eddie Murphy once joked that Lincoln forgot to sign the Emancipation Proclamation, and that people should go out and claim their slaves. I’m here to tell you that the Democratic Party took that request seriously and have claimed their slaves.
When 98 percent of African-Americans vote Democrat, that tells me that they are psychological and economic slaves to a Party that structures its fiscal policy to keep the black man down.

Welfare policy, government-forced affirmative action, reduced testing requirements for minorities…these are all things that don’t serve to elevate people to greatness, rather, they keep people down.

This video is a movie trailer about a man who proposes that these slaves to the liberals run away from the slave plantation that liberals have created. Its creator, Pastor C.L. Bryant, holds an honest discussion about black conservatives in America. Quote the man, “Run away from the slavery of tyranny toward the blessings of liberty!” Check it out:

David Horowitz rightly calls African-Americans “the human shields of the Democrat Party.”  It simply a fact of history that modern African-Americans have come hat-in-hand to the Party of Slavery, and the Party of the Ku Klux Klan.

That analogy illustrates a simple fact that was well-known only a couple years after the Civil War ended:

And the above isn’t a cartoon from some “right wing” loon, but from the venerable and quite left-leaning Harper’s Magazine.

Even the left-leaning historian Eric Foner observed that:

“In effect, the Klan was a military force serving the interests of the Democratic party, the planter class, and all those who desired restoration of white supremacy. Its purposes were political, but political in the broadest sense, for it sought to affect power relations, both public and private, throughout Southern society. It aimed to reverse the interlocking changes sweeping over the South during Reconstruction: to destroy the Republican party’s infrastructure, undermine the Reconstruction state, reestablish control of the black labor force, and restore racial subordination in every aspect of Southern life” (Foner 1989, p. 425–426).

I wrote the following as part of a comment a few weeks ago to point how how shockingly far black Americans have gone from what should have been their core:

Let us never forget that Democrats were the party of slavery. And that Democrats were the creators of the Ku Klux Klan. It literally took a war in which Democrats had to be militarily crushed to keep them from enslaving people based on the color of their skin. And thank God for the Republican Party and a Republican president for freeing the slaves from Democrats. Let’s not forget that Woodrow Wilson – Democrat president and the father of the progressive movement – RE-segregated the military after Republicans had DE-segregated it. Let us not forget that Wilson cheered the racist propaganda film “Birth of a Nation.” Let us never forget that the national party convention that was so directly tied to the Ku Klux Klan that it was called the “Klanbake” was the 1924 DEMOCRAT convention. Let’s not forget that FDR’s New Deal directly attacked blacks and kept them from getting jobs.

Few know about the incredibly racist history of pro-Democrat labor unions (see also here), but it is both very real and very ugly.  And progressive Democrats were at the very core of it.

Few have bothered to learn the Democrat Party’s profound legacy of racism.  Or the Republican Party’s history of standing up to protect the rights, freedoms and dignities of black Americans.

As we move into the 1950s we find that a Democrat Governor, Orval Faubus, called out the National Guard in 1957 to prevent black children being integrated into white schools. And again, a Republican president had to rise to the occasion, with Dwight D. Eisenhower sending in US Army airborne troops to enforce racial equality that had once again been opposed by Democrats. And of course Alabama Democrat Governor George Wallace would fight for racist segregation all over again in 1963. It was Democrat John F. Kennedy who sent in the troops this time. But few are aware that that same John Kennedy had previously voted AGAINST the Civil Rights Act.

And let us not forget that both the famous Martin Luther King, Sr. and his even more famous son were both registered Republicans. It’s a shame that the pseudo civil rights leaders of today aren’t fit to carry Martin Luther King’s shoes, much less criticize his party affiliation.

Martin Luther King, Jr. and Frederick Douglas BOTH fundamentally opposed the quotas and preferential treatment that liberals have employed to create the equivalent of the Democrat “house negro.” Jack Greenberg of the NAACP said in the 1950s that “The chief problem with quotas is that they introduce a potentially retrogressive concept into the cherished notion of individual equality.”  But it is readily obvious today that the NAACP has fallen far from it’s roots.

Let’s listen to Frederick Douglas, escaped slave and greatest of all champions of civil rights, has to say:

Frederick Douglass ridiculed the idea of racial quotas, as suggested by Martin Delany, as “absurd as a matter of practice,” noting that it implied blacks “should constitute one-eighth of the poets, statesmen, scholars, authors and philosophers.” Douglass emphasized that “natural equality is a very different thing from practical equality; and…though men may be potentially equal, circumstances may for a time cause the most striking inequalities.”77 On another occasion, in opposing “special efforts” for the black freedmen, Douglass argued that they “might ‘serve to keep up very prejudices, which it is so desirable to banish’ by promoting an image of blacks as privileged wards of the state.”

So now conservatives are suddenly racists for agreeing with Frederick Douglas and Martin Luther King, Jr. and against liberals and the vile pseudo values that the greatest civil rights leaders in history condemned?

Richard Nixon, whom Democrats love to make the poster boy for “Republican racism,” was in fact the first president to introduce the racial quotas that Democrats have been trying to implement and expand ever since.  Which is to say that, if you want to argue that Nixon was a racist, Democrats have been baptizing themselves in Nixon’s racism ever since.  And if Nixon employed a racially immoral strategy to win whites, the Democrat Party has employed the flip-side of that same immoral strategy to win blacks.

Liberals are biblical – and never in a good way:

PSA 52:3 You love evil more than good, Falsehood more than speaking what is right.
MIC 3:2 “You who hate good and love evil, Who tear off their skin from them And their flesh from their bones

History proves again and again that DEMOCRATS are the racists, and conservatives have stood for genuine equality again and again.

There are men and women of basic virtue in every race, and even every creed.  The problem is that there are fewer and fewer of these, while the men and women of apathy, degeneration and self-centeredness abound.

Slavery is a terrible thing.  But it is even worse when one willingly applies the shackles to his or her own wrists and ankles and demands the right to a government-imposed easy way out, in pathetic contrast to the principle from an Aesop fable, “Better to starve free than be a fat slave.”

Watch the video.  One of the amazing and tragic facts that emerge is that, with liberal ideology and Democrat policies paving the way, blacks have instituted their own self-genocide, murdering more than one-third of their very own children.

Liberals Glorify Their Messiah Obama By Defiling American Flag

The Gateway Pundit had this genuine gem to provide yet another “live-and-in-color” moment depicting what a truly sorry state we are sinking into.

It’s a cult.

As seen in Indiana, the left is now honoring this year’s Nobel Peace Prize winner by desecrating the American flag… again.
Hat Tip Larwyn

Personally, I am looking for someone to put this on a flag in Obama’s honor:

[Just imagine THAT fluttering majestically in the breeze].

Or this, to honor Barack Obama’s job creating skills:

I found the author’s suggestions for alternate flags utterly brilliant.

Think of it: we’d be the first country to ever use a bar chart or a graph as a flag design.  We’d at least be innovative trend setters then, which we certainly haven’t been for a long time, and certainly won’t be in the future any time soon.  History shows that taxing everything in sight and creating innovation aren’t exactly best buddies.

If you go with the red-and-white striped red-ink version, we might contemplate a new name for our country to go along with the flag: maybe something like “USedebtistan.”

If we go with the unemployment graph as our flag, we can call ourselves, “Willworkforfooda.”

We’ve got government school children being taught Obama Worship songs, with songs about written about God and the former glory of a nation that once worshiped Him having the words changed to be all about Obama: The Battle Hymn of the Republic, Jesus Loves the Little Children.

And now we have our new flag for government children (because they hardly belong to their own parents anymore) to pledge allegiance to.

Remember when Barack Obama’s pastor for 23 years said:

“No, no, no! Not God bless America; God DAMN America!”

There’s a dialog exchange in the movie Wild Bill that comes to mind:

Charley Price: This town reminds me of something from the bible.
James Butler ‘Wild Bill’ Hickok: Which part?
Charley Price: The part right before god gets angry.

And ladies and gentlemen, this what “God damn America” looks like.  It looks like something from the Bible – the part right before God gets angry.