June 10, 2009
Saw an article about Wright in the DailyHerald.com – though I can’t tell who Wright made the comments to because the article doesn’t say. DAVID SQUIRES writes that Wright is attending Hampton University’s 95th Annual Ministers Conference – so I’m assuming Wright made them to the conference goers. The words and sentiments Wright expresses are nothing new – the fact that he is saying them to where they can be quoted is interesting. I’ll just list the quotes.
JEREMIAH WRIGHT:
Regret for what… that the media went back five, seven, 10 years and spent $4,000 buying 20 years worth of sermons to hear what I’ve been preaching for 20 years?
Regret for preaching like I’ve been preaching for 50 years? Absolutely none.
Of course I voted for him; he’s my son. I’m proud of him. I’ve got five biological kids. They all make mistakes and bad choices. I haven’t stopped loving any of them.
He made mistakes. He made bad choices. I’ve got kids who listen to their friends. He listened to those around him. I did not disown him.
No, but barry did him and it’s clear he’s still angry and racist as ever. Who needs to hear a single sermon when he comes right and shows his hateful, racist self LIVE? When asked if he has he spoken to barry:
Them Jews aren’t going to let him talk to me. I told my baby daughter, that he’ll talk to me in five years when he’s a lame duck, or in eight years when he’s out of office. …
They will not let him to talk to somebody who calls a spade what it is. … I said from the beginning: He’s a politician; I’m a pastor. He’s got to do what politicians do.
He glosses right over the fact that barry is not a candidate anymore – that he is the president and can do whatever he wants and it seems calling Wright is not one of them. And of course he’s angry about it or he wouldn’t be speaking out. And this is a curious comment. There was a “World Conference on Racism” and barry didn’t send anyone? Where were the NAACP and the ACLU?
Ethnic cleansing is going on in Gaza. Ethnic cleansing (by) the Zionist is a sin and a crime against humanity, and they don’t want Barack talking like that because that’s anti-Israel.
He’s proud of his son but then talks like barry has no control over anything. That “they” and “The Jews” are in control.
SQUIRES writes this, which makes me wonder what planet he watched the primaries from.
Perhaps without the Wright controversy, the issue of race might not have become a part of the 2008 presidential campaign.
Without race and race-baiting, barry would not have been the nominee and would not be president. He used Wright and race to get where he is. But how important was the church vs the congregation? Wright vs Jesus? How many times has barry gone to church or any services since he began to separate himself from Wright? He didn’t even acknowledge the National Day of Prayer. And why hasn’t barry found a church to go to in Washington? Same old same old political expedience…right now it’s beneficial for him to be Muslim.
June 3, 2009
Ok it’s gone full circle.
Judge Sotomayor (2001 “racist” statement), Rush (”reverse racist”), Newt’s tweets (new racism = old racism), barry (”would’ve restated it“), Republican video highlights, Gibbs (word choice poor), Sotomayor (poor choice of words), Newt (her words are unacceptable, barry and Gibbs agreed I shouldn’t have said racist) and then Rush(it was definitely a racist statement but I may be able to get around if she’s pro-life enough).
I have to think Judge Sotomayor being pro-life is the cause of these pink-faced men’s conversions. Who knows. it’s all political theater. When has barry not gotten what he wanted? Who besides Germany has said no to him?
And it’s barry’s MO to have someone test the waters before he even makes a verbal stand. Did he ever react to North Korea’s missile launch? I can see Sen Feinstein being the one. Roe v Wade has about as much chance of being overturned as Brown v The Board of Education. Even Roe hasn’t been able to make headway.
Anyway. Rush has seen the light…a halo to be exact….and it’s not barry’s.
LIMBAUGH: I can see a possibility of supporting this nomination if I can be convinced that she does have a sensibility toward life in a legal sense.
I don’t know that it will ever happen, but if you know, the opportunity to get somebody like her, she’s a Catholic, she’s a devout Catholic, she’s a Hispanic Catholic, Puerto Rican, they tend to be devout, she hasn’t got a record on this. Normally liberals do have a record.
And about the Twittering Newt?
LIMBAUGH: I didn’t know why he retracted it. What is it? It’s racism, reverse racism, whatever, but it’s still racism, and she would bring a form of racism and bigotry to the court. But as I said yesterday, folks, I’m — I’m — I may look past that.
June 3, 2009
Judge Sotomayor capitulated through a third person that she “made a poor choice of words” and now Gingrich is backing off from his initial position made known through a coupla tweets. They both meant what they said. She didn’t know it would matter when she said it and Gingrich got the response he wanted…relevance.
They are simply doing what passes for bipartisanship – it’s always just a matter of who goes first.
NEWT GINGRICH: from op-ed in conservative Human Events.
Shortly after President Obama nominated her to a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court, I read Judge Sonia Sotomayor’s now famous words: ‘I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life,’” he wrote.
My initial reaction was strong and direct — perhaps too strong and too direct. The sentiment struck me as racist and I said so. Since then, some who want to have an open and honest consideration of Judge Sotomayor’s fitness to serve on the nation’s highest court have been critical of my word choice.
Doesn’t that sound straight out of barry’s teleprompter?
And then Newt says, see, I was right – time to rehabilitate myself until next time….
With these critics who want to have an honest conversation, I agree. The word ‘racist’ should not have been applied to Judge Sotomayor as a person, even if her words themselves are unacceptable (a fact which both President Obama and his Press Secretary, Robert Gibbs, have since admitted).”
That is the exact distinction of the Double Standard. In one direction, the words are racist and the person saying them is a racist. The other way it’s unacceptable and of course they’re not a racist.
President Obama and White House aides said Sotomayor’s choice of words was a poor one, but immediately fought back against critics who branded the judge racist.
I think it is probably important for anybody involved in this debate to be exceedingly careful with the way in which they’ve decided to describe different aspects of this impending confirmation,” White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said last Wednesday.
Newt got to be relevant, then he got to watch barry squirm, then he got to apologize, and then he got praised…and the cycle will start anew when he gets lonely again…..
Sen. Jeff Sessions, the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee:
Did barry leave his teleprompter behind?I’m very glad he backed off. I think that’s unusual, that commentators do that, and I think it was very good that he did. I think that will… help us. I think that will help us have a real good discussion about the serious issues that the nations faces and the court faces.
Judge Sotomayor is a barry clone. She goes through intermediaries (who can claim to have “misheard” or “misunderstood) instead of going on the record. She still refuses to address her “racist comments” head on and it appears Sen Dianne Feinstein has volunteered (been chosen) to be the mouthpiece.
JUDGE SOTOMAYOR:
I would hope that a wise Latina woman, with the richness of her experiences, would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life. Whether born from experience or inherent physiological or cultural differences, our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging.
CNN: Sen Dianne Feinstein for Judge Sotomayor:
“She said, ‘Obviously it was a poor choice of words if you read on and read the rest of my speech you wouldn’t be concerned with it but it was a poor choice of words.”
And Sen Feinstein is putting out the good word on abortion as well. Though I’m not clear on what Feinstein is intimating.
Feinstein, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, added that she and Sotomayor “generally” discussed the issue of abortion, and that the judge believes strongly in legal precedent.
“I believe she has a real respect for precedent and … if that is really true then I will agree with her and I believe it is,” the senator said.
That makes me believe she is pro0life but as far as the law will abide by precedent. Gibbs was pushing the same word the other day: “strict adherence to precedent” So he knows her stand already.
Wasn’t one of barry’s promises to only pick a Justice who believes in Roe v Wade aka a woman’s right to choose?
Source: NBC 5’s MARCUS RILEY.
Obama just loves refried beans.
Sign in front of RICHARD TISCH’s Will County Loan Company in Lockport, which is clearly in reference to barry’s appointing of Judge Sotomayor. But it’s not a special occasion. He’s put up other signs, which he refers to as “political satire”. When Bill Clinton was in office it was:
Hillary’s Health Plan: Free Condoms for Wild Bill
June 2008:
My choice for President? Dr. Condoleeza Rice
October 2008, when Sen McCain raised the issue of border security with Mexico:
John McCain just loves refried beans.
What do his customers think?
People read the signs, but they never forget the ones they don’t like. It’s not against the Mexican people. It’s only if you choose to read it that way.
Perhaps someone should clue him in that Sotomayor’s parents are from the Spanish-speaking area of Puerto Rico – not Mexico.
TISCH, obviously not a barryfan, has no problem pointing out that barry is once again pandering to a demographic – this time the Hispanic vote. That barry is trying to “buy the Mexican vote” because “she’s not the best qualified person to do the job.”
Racially motivated?
Some people, for instance the sign that’s up there today, like to put a racial issue there. That’s not what it’s intended to do. I’m simply saying that Barack Obama is probably the smartest politician to hold the office, but he made a decision based on politics and not what’s best for the country.
Chicago-based folks clearly see that barry’s MO consists of one thing and one thing only: political expedience.
He is always looking forward – in this case, reelection – when he hasn’t even started to govern. And it’s because he doesn’t know how – just like he didn’t know how to legislate and never would have made it to the US Senate without Emil Jones sending legislation his way.
How many swing states has he been to? As the polls shift, so does barry’s position. What hasn’t he changed his mind on? Abortion? And if Judge Sotomayor is a real Catholic, as in pro-life?
She is just as good as him at hiding her personal beliefs. After all the years she has spent on the bench nobody knows her views. He was actually going for a twofer – a bog box and a little box: women and Hispanics. But if it turns out she is pro-life, which I would bet she is, it’s going to be the last strike for the Hillary people. And it would be just rewards for NARAL’s gassy-eyed Ms Keenan.
The only group barry hasn’t bothered to pander – and has actively dissed – is the LBGT community because there is no pay off. They aren’t about to vote Republican – so by not pandering he’s trying to capture some of the Bible belt.
Tisch is right. barry’s true political genious has nothing to do with all that lofty not based in reality messiah complex ramblings about Change! and team of rivals and shifting the oceans I will never lie to you because I am The One we’ve been waiting for telepromptering. It has to do with how he gets away with saying it and not doing it. I still can’t figure out if folks – including the barrymedia – don’t care or if they are really that ignorant.
Don’t look at barry’s words – they mean absolutely nothing. Just like his ridiculous fairy tale on Iraq that folks bought at face value when his actions did not in anyway follow his politically expedient “speech”. When it came to action – when he finally had to act and set a timetable – it wasn’t at all like he promised (and won the nomination on). He ended up basically following Bush’s timetable. And it’s the same as FISA, military tribunals, release of torture photographs and will be with Guantanamo Bay.
If you really want to know what barry will do – look at the polls and figure out what would reap the biggest political reward and then put your money down. If you need proof – look back on his “refining of policy positions” throughout the primaries, before the convention, the general election, the transition and since he has become president and compare his words and actions. It’s all right there.
What is it going, folks?
Overturning Roe v Wade?
Source: NBC 5’s MARCUS RILEY.
Obama just loves refried beans.
Sign in front of RICHARD TISCH’s Will County Loan Company in Lockport, which is clearly in reference to barry’s appointing of Judge Sotomayor. But it’s not a special occasion. He’s put up other signs, which he refers to as “political satire”. When Bill Clinton was in office it was:
Hillary’s Health Plan: Free Condoms for Wild Bill
June 2008:
My choice for President? Dr. Condoleeza Rice
October 2008, when Sen McCain raised the issue of border security with Mexico:
John McCain just loves refried beans.
What do his customers think?
People read the signs, but they never forget the ones they don’t like. It’s not against the Mexican people. It’s only if you choose to read it that way.
Perhaps someone should clue him in that Sotomayor’s parents are from the Spanish-speaking area of Puerto Rico – not Mexico.
TISCH, obviously not a barryfan, has no problem pointing out that barry is once again pandering to a demographic – this time the Hispanic vote. That barry is trying to “buy the Mexican vote” because “she’s not the best qualified person to do the job.”
Racially motivated?
Some people, for instance the sign that’s up there today, like to put a racial issue there. That’s not what it’s intended to do. I’m simply saying that Barack Obama is probably the smartest politician to hold the office, but he made a decision based on politics and not what’s best for the country.
Chicago-based folks clearly see that barry’s MO consists of one thing and one thing only: political expedience.
He is always looking forward – in this case, reelection – when he hasn’t even started to govern. And it’s because he doesn’t know how – just like he didn’t know how to legislate and never would have made it to the US Senate without Emil Jones sending legislation his way.
How many swing states has he been to? As the polls shift, so does barry’s position. What hasn’t he changed his mind on? Abortion? And if Judge Sotomayor is a real Catholic, as in pro-life?
She is just as good as him at hiding her personal beliefs. After all the years she has spent on the bench nobody knows her views. He was actually going for a twofer – a bog box and a little box: women and Hispanics. But if it turns out she is pro-life, which I would bet she is, it’s going to be the last strike for the Hillary people. And it would be just rewards for NARAL’s gassy-eyed Ms Keenan.
The only group barry hasn’t bothered to pander – and has actively dissed – is the LBGT community because there is no pay off. They aren’t about to vote Republican – so by not pandering he’s trying to capture some of the Bible belt.
Tisch is right. barry’s true political genious has nothing to do with all that lofty not based in reality messiah complex ramblings about Change! and team of rivals and shifting the oceans I will never lie to you because I am The One we’ve been waiting for telepromptering. It has to do with how he gets away with saying it and not doing it. I still can’t figure out if folks – including the barrymedia – don’t care or if they are really that ignorant.
Don’t look at barry’s words – they mean absolutely nothing. Just like his ridiculous fairy tale on Iraq that folks bought at face value when his actions did not in anyway follow his politically expedient “speech”. When it came to action – when he finally had to act and set a timetable – it wasn’t at all like he promised (and won the nomination on). He ended up basically following Bush’s timetable. And it’s the same as FISA, military tribunals, release of torture photographs and will be with Guantanamo Bay.
If you really want to know what barry will do – look at the polls and figure out what would reap the biggest political reward and then put your money down. If you need proof – look back on his “refining of policy positions” throughout the primaries, before the convention, the general election, the transition and since he has become president and compare his words and actions. It’s all right there.
What is it going, folks?
Overturning Roe v Wade?
D.L. approached CNN about being permanently based in Los Angeles, where his family lives. To accommodate this, we agreed upon a new role where he will be a contributor for the network based in Los Angeles. We are eager to continue our relationship with D.L. who is a tremendous talent and a valued colleague.
A comment from “Marci“
I loved his show. His humor was basically tinged with ethnic humor that most white folks just don’t get.
What’s to get?
HUGHLEY: You don’t have to go any further than the Republican National Convention. It literally looked like Nazi Germany. It literally did.
About Governor Jindal:
HUGHLEY: For the last time, no, I’m not the kid from “Slumdog Millionaire”!
I find this hysterical. Mr Transcender of Race decided to come forward and pretend he really intended to Unite! As usual, he waited to see the fallout before he commented.
Was there a poll re: Holder’s comments?
barry appointee Atty General Eric–I forgot to mention I dealt with impeached governor Rod Blagojevich–Holder made his thoughts known that “in things racial we have always been and we, I believe, continue to be, in too many ways, essentially a nation of cowards.”
He was speaking to a rapt audience at the Department of Justice marking Black History Month.
He had the barry obamanating thing going on though: I believe…too many ways…essentially. He didn’t even have the moral fortitude to come right out and say: ‘I believe we have always been and still are a nation of cowards.’
Then he could at least garner some respect.
As was - he covered his bases, saying what was expected, while leaving himself some qualifiers.
That was February 19th.
My post then (with video).
March 6th is when barry decides to speak out and only because he was with Holder in Ohio.
What is going to happen to those officers when the money runs out next year? Will he go back to take credit for that, too?
And haven’t we had enough of these made-for-documentary campaign moments?
Anyway. CNN:
BARRY: I think it’s fair to say that if I had been advising my attorney general, we would have used different language.
I think..it’s fair to say…if I had been…attorney general. Never any definitive statements and he made sure not to mention Holder’s name.
I think the point that he was making is that we’re oftentimes uncomfortable with talking about race until there’s some sort of racial flare-up or conflict, and that we could probably be more constructive in facing up to the painful legacy of slavery and Jim Crow and discrimination.
And I’m not somebody who believes that constantly talking about race somehow solves racial tensions.
Only when he needs the votes.
I think what solves racial tensions is fixing the economy, putting people to work, making sure that people have health care, ensuring that every kid is learning out here.
I think if we do that, then we’ll probably have more fruitful conversations.
We’ve made enormous progress and we shouldn’t lose sight of that.
So much so, 8 million eligible black voters couldn’t be bothered to register to vote for barry.
***
Rev Lowery: “When white will embrace what’s right”
John Ridley: “Are you black enough to be part of all this?”
DL Hughley: “The Republican Convention looked like Nazi Germany”
March 7, 2009
Bob Herbert wrote a column: "Miracles Take Time" in which he wonders why folks are "wigging out over earmarks". He talks about the economy and how bad things are, and, of course, blames the right wingers.
..saved up from the increasingly tragic devastation wrought by the clownish ideas of right-wing conservatives and the many long years of radical Republican misrule.
Predictable, comical and lacking in imagination. One cannot defend barry without mentioning his opponents. But how else to promote barry? What has he to show for himself?
Words.
Words that clearly don't matter.
Whose fault is it that the clowns were allowed to misrule for 8 years?
And then he concedes that barry "is as legitimate a target for criticism as any president". But he starts the next sentence with *but* to make it seem like the previous one actually meant something.
What happens when someone legitimately targets barry?
All hell breaks loose and the proobamedia come a'scurrying to cover for little barry.
But now they're starting to walk. They're starting to realize how they were conned and how foolish they looked - look - and their own rage is beginning to surface.
And barry's answer?
Well, if you don't like what I do, you can vote for someone else next time.
Who's stoking the fear?
It took Mr Bill to tell him not to fearmonger in an attempt to drop expectations so he could look like a miracle worker. Hence the change in tone of that speech.
Listen to these words all strung along:
This intense, impatient, often self-righteous, frequently wrongheaded and at times willfully destructive criticism has come in waves...
One gets exhausted trying to read through it. What does it sound like to you? Like he's punching something?
A cushion with Rush Limbaugh's pink face on it, perhaps?
Why doesn't he just come out and say it in similar terms to HE'S BACK! HE'S BLACK! or IT'S A PHALLIC SYMBOL! Something like, LEAVE MY BOY ALONE!
Well, not *boy* because it's a racial code word dontcha know.
And *coward*?
Here's the but about barry being a legitimate target.
But there is a weird hysterical quality to some of the recent attacks that suggests an underlying fear or barely suppressed rage.
It's called buyer's remorse.
Iraq (and race baiting) got him the nomination. And when he had the chance to fulfill his initial promise of bringing all the combat troops home in 16 months, he didn't take it. He took the middle option. Surprise.
Then it's earmarks.
More than 4.4 million jobs have been lost since this monster recession officially got under way in December 2007, and we've got people wigging out over earmarks. Folks, get a grip. Some earmarks are good, some are not, but collectively they account for a tiny, tiny portion of the national budget — less than 1 percent.
Freaking out over earmarks is like watching a neighborhood that is being consumed by flames and complaining that there is crabgrass on some of the lawns.
Except if the freakers voted for a fireman who could walk on water and actually believed what he promised.
You know that nebulous Change! chant?
I am going to change Washington!
I am going to put an end to partisanship!
I am going to bring in a new Era of Responsibility!
I am going to put an end to wasteful spending!
I am going to do away with lobbyists and earmarks!
I am going to get the troops home in 16 months!
I am going to be transparent!
I am going to let the public review the bills for 5 days before I sign them!
And what has he done?
Broken every single one of them (and more) in just six weeks.
Can you really blame them their freaking out?
They looked past his lack of experience because of the above trade-offs. They looked past his lack of specifics because he spoke of Change! and they were hungry for it. They went along with his poll-driven policy "refinements" because they had no choice.
And then what happened?
He has been anything but transparent.
He has whined about how bad things are when he promised Hope!
And he filled his Change! cabinet with Clinton people, tax cheats, illegal alien harborers and pay-to-play governors.
One by one the trade offs have been negated.
It may not be helpful - but when one is deceived for close to two years and donated time and money to someone who promised them something in return and then in a matter of six weeks proved himself to be like every other politician - impatience and frustration follow.
And who's the one freaking out about the crabgrass that is Rush Limbaugh?
In the midst of the craziness, conservatives are busy trying to blame this epic economic catastrophe — a conflagration of their own making...The right-wingers would have you believe this is Obama's downturn.
Was not barry in the democratic controlled Senate? And Chris Dodd, Barney Franks and Harry Reid? Nancy Pelosi?
They are all just as responsible as the Republicans.
And then there's a reference to Alan Keyes' statement (with video) that barry is a "radical Communist".
Thing is, if one were to honestly break down what barry has proposed, one might very well come to the conclusion that barry is a radical Communist.
Now here is the truth:
I don't know whether President Obama's ultimate rescue plan for the financial industry will work. He is a thoughtful man running a thoughtful administration and the plan, a staggeringly complex and difficult work in progress, hasn't been revealed yet.
People have been waiting two years for him to reveal his plans. What he has revealed - what he has shown with his (in)actions - is not what they voted for. They have every right to be angry.
They don't want thinking - they want results.
They don't want a panel of experts deciding before a policy is announced - they want a decisive leader.
They don't want more speeches - they want someone who can govern.
It is becoming clear that barry can't do much more than stump in swing states, snipe with his opponents and complain that he wishes he didn't have these messes, while trying to convince folks it isn't about him.
Who can take him seriously?
Frustration, fear and rage may not be helpful, but they are healthy responses to what he has done in his first six weeks. Responses that are going to turn to something much worse - as in violence - when what he has been hiding is revealed.
Maybe the nuns in grammar school were right when they counseled that patience is a virtue. The man has been president for six weeks.
Patience may be a virtue, Bob, but lying is a sin.
[reposting - Burris posts just disappeared for some reason]
Chicago City Council members believe the calls for Sen Burris to resign are racially motivated. Dick Durbin used the same thing to get barry elected do he shouldn’t be surprised when it continues. Rep Bobby Rush brought that up the same press conference Burris was appointed. He must have known Burris had made some calls.
Ald Carrie Austin: To just muck up somebody's 30-plus year record of loyalty to the Democratic Party — for all of them to turn turn on him — we say it’s time for this to stop. And if it does not, we shall remember this, at the next election.
Ald. Freddrenna Lyle (6th), city chairman of the Cook County Democratic Party, said the “anti-Blagojevich hatred” has unfairly been transferred onto Burris.
I would just suggest to those people who seek to run in the wards of the city of Chicago where there are people of color living that they should tone it down because some of us are taking notes. They will run at their peril.
I can't go to the residents of my ward and ask them to vote for someone who, they feel, has disrespected them. And they won't. Remember, we just don't vote for people. It is in our history in modern times when we voted against people. In fact, it's usually easier to get people to do that.
Identity politics are alive and well and not at all hidden. Why is it ok for blacks but when whiteys do it it's racism? Race relations will ever change until race baiting and racial threats stop and it doesn’t appear that will be happening any time soon. What was good for the president is good for anyone else. Guess that’s what he meant by post racial - no need to mince words.
And Blago is banking on the fact that they shall never forget who appointed Burris.
February 28, 2009
Republican National Committee Chairman Micheal Steele was on DL Hughley discussing the two parties and the black community. Selected quotes - see transcript for the whole show.
HUGHLEY: I really do. I think you’re a really bright guy. And they hired both of us because we have a black president.
STEELE: That’s right.
HUGHLEY: You don’t have to go any further than the Republican National Convention. It literally looked like Nazi Germany. It literally did.
[...]
HUGHLEY: You, me, Bobby Jindal, we’re all working because of the brother in the job.
STEELE: That’s right. All the brothers in the same room, right?
barry is responsible for the accomplishments of two high-ranking Republicans? It’s goes beyond ludicrous to demeaning.
HUGHLEY: A lot of the things I see Republicans do specifically are reactionary. They’ll go, you know what, they don’t like Hillary? Let’s give them Sarah Palin. They voted for Obama. Let’s give them Michael Steele. And the other guy who we don’t know who he is yet. It is always so plastic, that you go, wow, is this what they think? They think that — they’re missing the entire point of what happened during the Obama transformation. They missed the entire point.
The “Obama transformation”??
STEELE: There was a Michael Steele before there was a Barack Obama. The reality of it is, I had established — I was the only black lieutenant governor in the country at the time. I was the only statewide black elected official when I was governor of Maryland from 2003 to 2007. And then Obama got elected from 2005. So that wasn’t about, oh, geez, let’s do this because of Obama.
Note: Burris was Illinois’ first statewide black elected official (Comptroller) in 1979 making the way for barry, who is now totally snubbing Burris.
Steele was also was the first to be named Chairman of the Republican Party in any state (2000) and he did the GOP rebuttal to barry’s DNC speech (2004). So his being named as RNC Chairman was not based on barry.
Gov Jindal has been around the national seen as long as barry and he’s 10 years younger. They were both sworn in in 2005 - Jindal as a US Representative and barry as a US Senator. Jindal was elected governor all by himself and to somehow say it was because of barry diminishes Jindal’s own hard work and talents. He was a Rhodes Scholar and was accepted to both Harvard Medical school and Yale Law school and chose politics instead, getting his PhD from Oxford. And instead of just talking about ethics reform he is actually doing something.
It’s like Spike Lee saying time will be marked: “before Obama and after Obama”.
Hip-hop legend Chuck D then joined the discussion and brought up the “articulate” reference that is supposed to be a racial code word. In reference to Hughley and Steele’s conversation:
CHUCK D: It was so exciting, just eloquence across TV.
HUGHLEY: He’s an eloquent man. I don’t know that I necessarily agree with him but I can honestly say that I never heard — never heard the Republican agenda articulated so accessibly.
Then Hughley disses Steele to his face.
HUGHLEY: Like Rush Limbaugh, who is the de facto leader of the Republican Party.
STEELE: No, he’s not.
HUGHLEY: I will tell you what …
STEELE: I’m the de facto leader of the Republican Party.
[...]
HUGHLEY: You know what, there’s no doubt that you’re worthy of respect. But this does seem like a common situation when you get in trouble, always bet on black men. You know what I’m saying! You know what I’m saying. I’m just saying. Hey, Michael, hey, listen, they didn’t just do it to you. The whole country went, we’re in trouble. Let’s get a black guy. Always bet on black. We’re in style now, baby!
STEELE: Wait a minute, D.L., when you bet on black, don’t you win?
HUGHLEY: Absolutely! You better come to our side. Michael Steele, Chuck D.
Then Hughley showed a snippet of Alan Keyes’ made for videotape tirade about barry being a “radical Communist” and he remarked:
If you’ll excuse me, I hear the Massa calling me. This cotton won’t pick itself.
Then he proceeded to posit that the white man sitting next to Obama during the Stevie Wonder’s Lifetime Achievement Award performance at the White House - somebody he doesn’t even know or even name - somebody who is doing nothing but sitting there - is thinking:
HUGHLEY: Eight more years of this. Jesus, when did the White House turn into “Soul Train”. ‘When did the White House become Soul Train.’
And then he goes back to Gov Jindal.
GOV. BOBBY JINDAL (on videotape): Some are problem the government will rescue us from the economic storms raging all around us. Those of us who lived through Hurricane Katrina. We have our doubts.
HUGHLEY: For the last time, no, I’m not the kid from “Slumdog Millionaire”!
Why are these ok?
Comparing the people in the Republican Convention to Nazi Germany? Automatically assuming that the white man can’t enjoy Stevie Wonder and that because he is white he is thinking derogatory comments? What does that say about Stevie Wonder’s music?
Hughley was making snap judgments solely based on the color of the man’s skin.
How is that not racist?
Will anyone be calling for his firing tomorrow?
Imagine if it were the other way around.
And the most curious part is how the black community continues to take credit for barry being in the White House when 8 Million eligible black voters couldn’t be bothered to register to vote for barry. That means 1/3 of the eligible black voting population did not find it important to get out and vote for progress in America. Only 2% more black voters came out after 8 years of Bush to vote for the first biracial president in history.
Where was that discussion?
The black vote made the difference in the primary because barry used the race card at every turn. In South Carolina - where barry had already prepared a memo painting ‘The Clintons’ as racists - barry’s policies suddenly became enticing? The same policies that were not attracting black voters at a >95% rate up until that very moment?
No. barry made it about race - the man who claimed to Unite! and Transcend Race! used race to win.
How was that not identity politics?
So why would 95% of white people voting for Senator McCain be considered racist?
Because it’s the Double Standard.
And until it is addressed and abolished, race relations in America will remain the same.
You can’t have it both ways.
It can’t be ok to be racist in one direction and not in the other. There cannot be an exception for one skin color over the other.
Prejudice is prejudice.
Bigotry is bigotry.
Small mindedness is small mindedness.
Making snap judgments based on the color of a white man’s skin is just as unacceptable as making comments about black basketball players’ hair.
Either both are ok or neither.
***
Rev Lowery: “When white will embrace what’s right”
Eric Holder: “[The USA] continues to be essentially a nation of cowards”
John Ridley: “Are you black enough to be part of all this”
February 19, 2009
Just one more example of The Double Standard. It has reached a point of absolute hilarity. Stereotypical whitey jokes, redneck jokes, white trash jokes are told in great abundance in all sorts of affected voices by blacks and nothing gets said. But all hell breaks lose in the other direction.
There is an abundance of video, print and audio evidence of how barry used The Double Standard to get elected. He used the race card at every turn - the pro-barry press a more than willing advocate. He used it to get the black vote behind him in South Carolina and he kept using it to exploit white guilt. And when he got called out using the race card--it took three denials until he actually admitted to it--he accused McCain supporters of yelling "Kill him".
Mr Uniter left The American People he is always talking about but never to with that as the final thought in the final debate. He let The American People that he claimed to want to bring together believe that it was true when it was a complete and utter lie--proven by his own Secret Service--that could never be taken back.
And it is something that Mr Integrity has still never publicly apologized for.
Words clearly do not matter to barry.
He did not become president because blacks "came out in record numbers" to vote for Change! themselves - he is president because a nation of cowards voted for him.
A cartoon of a dead monkey calls for outrage - but a "Too Bad Hillary Didn't Marry OJ" t-shirt does not.
An effigy of barry is discovered and he gets a personal apology within hours. An effigy of Governor Palin with a noose around her neck and hands tied behind her back is allowed to hang for three weeks and is passed off as "art".
Now it's Attorney General, Eric Holder's turn. A man whose family hails from Barbados, a man who was initially given a job by that evil racist President Clinton and a man who received an elite education is coming forward talking about frank discussions about race and the need for changes in the way American History is taught.
What is it he has been doing?
Why is he only know bringing this up?
He says he was inspired by barry's politically expedient speech.
So how meaningful are his words?
HOLDER: To get to the heart of this country, one must examine its racial soul.
Though this nation has proudly thought of itself as a ethnic melting pot, in things racial we have always been and we, I believe, continue to be, in too many ways, essentially a nation of cowards.
...[Race] is an issue we have never been at ease with and given our nation's history this is in some ways understandable.
And yet, if we are to make progress in this area, we must feel comfortable enough with one another and tolerant enough of each other to have frank conversations about the racial matters that continue to divide us.
And who exactly is to change our nation's history?
What's in it for the cowards?
Mr Holder has an American History and Law degree. He is arguably one of the most high profile Clinton Administration personnel. So, if this issue has been so pressing to him, what has he personally done since the Clinton Administration? How many curricula has he demanded be changed? How has he worked to bring about change--himself?
How much campaigning do you think he did for barry?
And how are--why are--cowards to "feel comfortable enough with one another and tolerant enough of each other to have frank conversations" when the one saying these words wasn't honest enough or comfortable enough or frank enough about his connections with newly impeached Gov Blagojevich?
Words don't matter?
What has Mr Transcender of Race done?
Gave one teleprompter race speech where he equated a raging, hate-spewing, anti-American racist "man of God" with his typical white person grandmother just to save his own skin - the white part of which he had refused to acknowledge until that day. Suddenly, when Mr Political Expedience needed the whiteys again, he became "biracial" not black.
And to offset the ignorant vitriol screamed by his spiritual mentor of 20 years - which whiteys can't understand because they haven't been to black churches - he told an uncorroboratable story about his typical white person grandmother. The selfless woman, who had raised him when his alcoholic polygamous father completely abandoned him as trash for Harvard and another white woman, the woman whose final birthday he could not stay to celebrate, the woman whose funeral he could not find time enough to attend, the woman whose coworkers were outraged by his insinuations that she was a racist he equated to a man who raged from the pulpit that Michelle Obama's predecessor "ain't never been called a nigger" and that the government was responsible for AIDS and the single greatest act of terrorism committed against American where 2973 innocent women, men, wifes, husbands, mothers, fathers, daughters, sons, sisters, brothers, Catholics, Jews, Hindis, Muslims, Christians, Americans and foreign nationals were murdered by savages, who were incited by a similar deranged man of hate similarly using the Word of God as his justification.
Forget politics - what does this say about barry as a human being?
As a father of two girls who are 1/4 white and who are that typical white person's great grandchildren?
As a son and grandson who was not at his mother's or grandmother's side when they died?
What does it say about him as a brother that he allowed his sister, who had cared for that typical white person who had raised him while he lived free of filial responsibility, to bury and mourn for his typical white person grandmother all by herself - with not support or caring hand - when he had more than the means to be by her side?
How many typical white persons have a biracial grandson as President of the United States?
How many typical white person cowards voted for the man who said that about his typical white person grandmother?
And how many typical non-white persons did not vote for barry?
8 MILLION eligible black voters could not be bothered to register to vote for the first biracial president.
8 MILLION - 1/3 of eligible black voters - did not even bother to help bring about Change!
And there was just a 3% increase in the black vote after 8 years of Bush and with barry in line to be president.
Cowards?
Whose job, responsibility, mandate or whatever is it to change the way history is taught?
The cowardly folks having frank discussions at the kitchen table and then not voting because they "didn't think a black man could win"?
Or the other cowards who got out there and voted?
If one wants change, one must take the first step by oneself and it sure the hell didn't happen this election.
That is the frank discussion that needs to happen.
How often did the black pundits who talked about race race race every day day day mention the lack of black voter turnout?
Plenty of whiteys are bitter racists who won't vote for a black man ranting...but when those bitter whiteys volunteered, registered, campaigned and voted for barry - there wasn't a single word about the blacks who did not volunteer, who did not campaign, who did not voter or the 8 million who couldn't find the time to vote for the first biracial president in history.
Why?
Because there would be no cowards to blame.
January 20, 2009
The history of the moment came through Rev Lowery. There was more in his voice than barry could ever write or give a speech about. Video and text of the Benediction. Rev Lowery began by quoting the "Negro National Anthem" and concluded with the Civil Rights mantra:
When black will not be asked to get back, when brown can stick around, when yellow will be mellow, when the red man can get ahead, man, and when white will embrace what is right.
Why end with those words? I can see his need and right to utter them. But they were an insult to everyone who volunteered, campaigned and voted for barry - the overwhelming majority of whom were white. Not to mention the "brown" and yellow" and the "red man".
How are those words not denigrating to all non-blacks?
How are those words meant to uplift and inspire?
How are those words moving us toward a More Perfect Union?
I sense it may have been his usual wrap up, but why the need for divisive speech during a benediction meant to begin a post-racial, post-partisanship era?
Why were the last words in a benediction to The American People (and the world) racist ones?
Who is embracing what is right?
Demographics of the black vote: 2000 = 10% 2004 = 11%. 2008 = 13%
Only 2% increase in turnout to vote for Barack Obama. Had only 150K more people shown up to vote in Ohio in 2004, Bush would not have been president. Only a 3% increase in black voter turnout since President Bush was voted into power. Think about that. Eight million black voters eligible to vote could not be bothered to register to vote for the first biracial president. That means 1/3 of the eligible black voting population did not find it important to get out and vote for progress in America.
When will white embrace what is right?
Blacks did not win the election for barry - though they could very well have lost it for him. Blacks, as a whole, did not do what was right and get out to vote. Browns, yellows, reds and whites did. And many browns, yellows, reds and whites marched right along with their black brothers and sisters in the civil rights fight.
Where they embracing what was right?
Did white Iowans embrace what was right?
The demographics of Iowa (2006-2007): 89% white, 2% black (68,442), 5% Hispanic and 3% other. barry won the Iowa caucus at 38%. Barry would not be president, without white Iowans (and the bused-in Chicagoans) embracing him.
How many blacks were embracing what was right before South Carolina?
And what was it that made blacks embrace barry?
Was it the same platform he had the week previous when blacks had not yet embraced him?
No. It was the same tired old argument.
barry's favorite stump line: "Words don't matter?"
Yes, they very much do. And Rev Lowery's words were not acceptable in any fashion - especially in conclusion.
They were a jab to the very people who helped vote barry into office. The young folk who weren't alive 40 years ago, the immigrants who have sought refuge over those forty years, and the older folk, who after 40 years, very much embraced what was right.
What was the message to be ?
How is diminishing others a benediction?
Did not Rev Lowery watch any of barry's rallies? Stop by any of his campaign offices?
If he had, he would have seen that the overwhelming majority of folks doing what was right to get barry elected were white. Right along with the "brown, yellow and redman".
Who finds those terms acceptable?
Acceptable in any utterance, let alone expressed to the entire world?
Who is embracing what is right?
And who is holding on to the fight?
barry chooses to forget, and it seems many other, that he is biracial. He is half-white - his children 1/4 white. Some break it down even further saying he is more Arab than African. Either way, he is genetically 50% white. A half-white president is in the White House. You deny that, you endorse the one drop rule.
What of the twins born of a Anglo mother and a West-Indian father? Both set of twins have one who looks distinctly like their parent: one white, one black.
Yes, barry is technically African-American in that he is first generation African - but he was born a US and British citizen.
So what is he really? Kenyan, Arab, English, American?
He has a white family, who raised him so that he could be President. And as much as barry likes to pretend - he did not get there alone. His father was not a citizen of the United States or even an immigrant - he was an exchange student. He took part in creating barry genetically, but he abandoned barry and his mother for the lure of an Ivy League education and the loins of another white woman.
barry sr did not embrace what was right as a man - black or otherwise. He did not embrace what was right by not telling his American wife that he was already married, having left Africa with his tribal wife pregnant and carrying for their young child. He did not embrace what was right in accepting his responsibility as a father.
But barry's white mother did embrace what was right by choosing to give birth and raising a darker pigmented child as a single white woman in the 1960's. And without her embracing, barry would not be standing there or anywhere.
It was a very, very sad, bordering on pathetic, and certainly cliche in a tiresome way, note on which to end.
Especially the lasting image of the laughing, newly-ordained President who had just urged all Americans, no matter the color, to come together.
Was Rev Lowery doing what was right?
President Barack Obama:
On this day, we gather because we have chosen hope over fear, unity of purpose over conflict and discord.
On this day, we come to proclaim an end to the petty grievances and false promises, the recriminations and worn-out dogmas, that for far too long have strangled our politics.
We remain a young nation, but in the words of Scripture, the time has come to set aside childish things. The time has come to reaffirm our enduring spirit; to choose our better history; to carry forward that precious gift, that noble idea, passed on from generation to generation: the God-given promise that all are equal, all are free, and all deserve a chance to pursue their full measure of happiness.
...But our time of standing pat, of protecting narrow interests and putting off unpleasant decisions — that time has surely passed. Starting today, we must pick ourselves up, dust ourselves off, and begin again the work of remaking America.
...For they have forgotten what this country has already done; what free men and women can achieve when imagination is joined to common purpose, and necessity to courage.
What the cynics fail to understand is that the ground has shifted beneath them — that the stale political arguments that have consumed us for so long no longer apply.
January 20, 2009
This is what Eugene Robinson heard in the speech. He never got around to mentioning that Rev Lowery brought up that tired old argument mired in the sixties.
MATTHEWS: Eugene Robinson - What you heard from the President of the United States.
ROBINSON: What I heard was a fascinating speech in which he did a lot of things. Number one, he wanted to turn the page from what he called the tired old argument of the past that we have been mired in since the sixties. It was the theme of his campaign. He struck that theme again today.
And Reverend Lowery?
What campaign was Robinson watching? barry used that tired old race card at every turn. He finally had to admit to it when he tried it against McCain but he found the "kill him" myth instead.
When are folks going to see reality as it exists?
What is it going to take?
Inaugural Address video & transcript
Rev Lowery Benediction transcript & video
January 20, 2009
Reverend Joseph Lowery's Benediction
God of our weary years, God of our silent tears, thou who has brought us thus far along the way, thou who has by thy might led us into the light, keep us forever in the path, we pray, lest our feet stray from the places, our God, where we met thee, lest our hearts, drunk with the wine of the world, we forget thee. Shadowed beneath thy hand may we forever stand -- true to thee, O God, and true to our native land.
We truly give thanks for the glorious experience we've shared this day. We pray now, O Lord, for your blessing upon thy servant,Barack Obama, the 44th president of these United States, his family and his administration. He has come to this high office at a low moment in the national and, indeed, the global fiscal climate. But because we know you got the whole world in your hand, we pray for not only our nation, but for the community of nations. Our faith does not shrink, though pressed by the flood of mortal ills.
For we know that, Lord, you're able and you're willing to work through faithful leadership to restore stability, mend our brokenness, heal our wounds and deliver us from the exploitation of the poor or the least of these and from favoritism toward the rich, the elite of these.
We thank you for the empowering of thy servant, our 44th president, to inspire our nation to believe that, yes, we can work together to achieve a more perfect union. And while we have sown the seeds of greed -- the wind of greed and corruption, and even as we reap the whirlwind of social and economic disruption, we seek forgiveness and we come in a spirit of unity and solidarity to commit our support to our president by our willingness to make sacrifices, to respect your creation, to turn to each other and not on each other.
And now, Lord, in the complex arena of human relations, help us to make choices on the side of love, not hate; on the side of inclusion, not exclusion; tolerance, not intolerance.
And as we leave this mountaintop, help us to hold on to the spirit of fellowship and the oneness of our family. Let us take that power back to our homes, our workplaces, our churches, our temples, our mosques, or wherever we seek your will.
Bless President Barack, First Lady Michelle. Look over our little, angelic Sasha and Malia.
We go now to walk together, children, pledging that we won't get weary in the difficult days ahead. We know you will not leave us alone, with your hands of power and your heart of love.
Help us then, now, Lord, to work for that day when nation shall not lift up sword against nation, when tanks will be beaten into tractors, when every man and every woman shall sit under his or her own vine and fig tree, and none shall be afraid; when justice will roll down like waters and righteousness as a mighty stream.
Lord, in the memory of all the saints who from their labors rest, and in the joy of a new beginning, we ask you to help us work for that day when black will not be asked to get back, when brown can stick around -- (laughter) -- when yellow will be mellow -- (laughter) -- when the red man can get ahead, man -- (laughter) -- and when white will embrace what is right.
Let all those who do justice and love mercy say amen.
AUDIENCE: Amen!
REV. LOWERY: Say amen --
AUDIENCE: Amen!
REV. LOWERY: -- and amen.
AUDIENCE: Amen! (Cheers, applause.)
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7pEH37JIgBU]
tionittaylor
January 4, 2008
CNN's Don Lemon talks with Senate-appointee Roland Burris.
BURRIS: I am the duly-appointed, legally appointed US Senator from the state of Illinois. And I certainly expect that the senators will recognize that and not deny Illinois it's legal representation as we get underway in this 111th Congress. It is my hope and prayer that they will have certainly got the message that what the governor has done, regardless of his problems, they're not my problems.
There's no taint on me. He has carried out his constitutional duty and found the person most qualified to fill that vacancy and that's what he's done.
I've spent twenty years in Illinois government. I know this state, I know the people, and I know the problems. I am ready, willing, and able to learn my process in the Senate to certainly hit the ground running to represent the 13 million people of this great state.
LEMON: You are aware of Illinois politics and often times there is guilt by association. You know that. And you don't think that by the governor appointing you that there would be some guilt or some taint on you simply because of the controversy that he has found himself in?
BURRIS: Don, is there such things as "taint" in the law?
I am former Attorney General and I never read anywhere in the statute that said if the governor is having some type of serious legal problems that he cannot carry out his constitutional duties. Someone show me that and I will be convinced that there might be something that would impact my ability to serve and to be effective for the people of Illinois. I don't think that's possible.
LEMON talks about how he spoke with Illinois Senate President, Emil Jones (barry's senator maker) who supports Burris, but that there are many leaders, including African Americans, who do not. Do you understand their position?
BURRIS: I respect their positions, but I don't agree with them. What is there to understand? I will ask anyone: Does the governor of this state have the legal authority to make the appointment? And the answer to that is yes. Secondly, am I qualified. Do I meet the constitutional requirement to serve in the US Senate? I do.
There is no such other criteria - other then people got their own private agendas that they may be, in turn, seeking to foster or bring forth.
LEMON: You know the law very well--very well, sir. How far do you plan to take this and do you see any-is there any point or anywhere in the law that you see that you cannot be appointed? Do you plan to take this to the very end and do you see that this is legally possible for you to, in fact, become the senator from Illinois?
BURRIS: Don, I am the senator...I am the senator.
LEMON: Okay.
BURRIS: And the next step is for the United States senate to do its constitutional duty and not disenfranchise the 13 million people of Illinois and have us to be shorthanded with all these crises that are coming down around our state and our nation and Illinois will not be fully represented in the senate. That's the reason why I took this seat. Because I wanted our people in this state to have a voice there speaking on their behalf as we try to tackle the major crises that are confronting Illinois and America.
LEMON: So you're up for the challenge?
BURRIS: I am definitely - can you hear it in my voice, Don? I don't want to get too emotional here, but I'm ready. You known..[laughter in the background] I'm ready!
If we're not seated, then we'll have to take the next step.
Would they be fighting like this if it was about barry? It is insane - the hypocrisy of it all.
Folks, at this point, it has nothing to do with the Illinois senate seat. Roland Burris is more than qualified - more so than barry was. It is the Illinois legislature using it to get rid of Blagojevich. Blagojevich has not been indicted nor has he been found guilty of any wrongdoing. People seem to forget that minor fact. He talked on the phone and make a lot of bleeping stupid bleeping statements but barry's own camp exonerated him by exonerating themselves. Can't have it both ways...not even barry. There is absolutely no reason for Burris not to fight this. And at this point, from what is known, there is no absolutely reason for him to not be appointed.
Period.
January 3, 2009
Just another example of Mr Unity's talk but no action. barry, the leader of the Democratic Party and soon to be leader of the free world, preaches about reaching across the aisle Kumbaya My Lord style. And yet, his soon-to-be minions wants to control--as in physically control--the Senate. They are willing to have a man, who was 100% legally appointed as barry's successor, be hauled off like a common criminal. It's not going to happen for one reason: Burris is black and would be - is - the only black senator in the senate. No matter what the Black Caucus believes, the court of public opinion will take over and dictate what happens ala barry's campaign.
This is why barry's fellow Chicago politicians are pist that hot rod pulled an end run. I find it a brilliant political move from a guy trying to leverage a deal. No surprise - except to barry's home state minions. they have started to emerge from their obamerized state and are seeing barry for what he is, always has been, and always will be: an avoider of action. He has done nothing to take control of the situation - which is in no way surprising - but they somehow believed he would handle it for them. Obamerism at its finest.
79% of The American People somehow believe that barry is great leader. CNN writes, misleadingly, that "Obama's current approval rating is also more than 50 points higher than President Bush's current approval rating, which now stands at 28 percent --- with 71 percent disapproving of the way Bush is handling his job as president."
Thing is -- barry has done nothing but defer to Bush as in "one president at a time". He's picked a bunch of excellent proven folks - which he needs because he has no practical experience with anything - but has stressed that the policy will be coming from him. Anyone know what his present views are?
Anyway here's what the good folks in the Senate plan on doing if the legally appointed junior Senator from Illinois, Roland Burris shows up next Monday for his first day of work.
Burris will not be allowed on the Senate floor, according to this aide and a Senate Democratic leadership aide....if Burris tries to enter the Senate chamber, the Senate doorkeeper will stop Burris. If Burris were to persist, either trying to force his way onto the Senate floor or refusing to leave and causing a scene, U.S. Capitol Police would stop him, said the aide.
"They (police) probably won't arrest him" but they would call the sergeant-at-arms."
Now here's what's truly odd:
The senate sergeant-at-arms, Terrance Gainer, served in the Illinois government at the same time as Burris. Gainer was the director of the Illinois State Police from 1991-95. Burris was the Illinois attorney general from 1991-95.
How many phone calls has he been getting? I had no idea there was a sergeant-at-arms. There's a lot of things I had no idea of. I wonder if he will make folks check their shoes at the door.
BURRIS:
[I am] not going to create a scene in Washington. We hope it's negotiated out prior to my going to Washington.
We're certainly going to make contacts with the leadership to let them know that the governor of Illinois has made a legal appointment. And that I am currently the junior senator for the State of Illinois. And we're hoping and praying that, you know, they will see the reason in appointing me as a very qualified, capable, able and ready-to-serve individual.
And it gets odder still - Blagojevich is allowed as sitting governor to enter the senate and stroll around. He can't vote or address the Senate but he can strut and "enjoy the limelight" has he has been "the last couple of weeks". Do not count him out. Especially if Lt Governor, Pat Quinn keeps on proclaiming that Blagojevich will be convicted and impeached.
A preview?
courtesy of innuendo4
December 26, 2008
Morning Joe
Mika is introducing folks and Joe cut in and said John Ridley is here.
JOE: Sometimes he's got a beard - sometimes he doesn't have a beard.
MIKA: He always looks good, Joe.
Ridley smiling.
MIKA: He's always dressed nicely. And he's groomed. You outta take a lesson from him.
JOE: Why don't you just call him articulate. We're going into a territory, John Ridley, that we don't want to go...Mrs Biden.
RIDLEY: Storybook, man. We're looking back on the year - it's ok to bring that back up again.
Mika was referring to Joe's scruffiness and lack of grooming and manners and Joe morphed it into the Biden comments on Obama being clean and bright and articulate.
RIDLEY: Starting in 2009 that might be the question everyone asks: Are you black enough to be part of all this?
Note that Ridley was not a barry fan at the beginning.
[...]
JOE: What do you think we'll be talking about this time next year?
RIDLEY: What a fantastic job Barack Obama has done.
RIDLEY: You have Geraldine Ferraro saying he's just a lucky black man.
JOE: Can you admit one thing? Because Geraldine Ferraro was compared to David Duke for saying that in some ways his race helped him. A lot of people think race helped him...
RIDLEY: But you can also--you look at all the people who were at these rallies saying 'Kill Him'. I mean people yelling 'Kill him, he's a terrorist'.
JOE: Aw, c'mon, John
RIDLEY: Joe, what a second. Did that not happen, Joseph Scarborough?
JOE: Kill him?
RIDLEY: Joe, it happened.
No it absolutely did not.
And how did anything those folks might have said mattered? They were never going to vote for barry.
JOE: I guarantee you Barack Obama had no more people yelling kill him at a rally as I do every time I walk through a democratic rally. Shouting at me. Come on. That's such a cop out.
RIDLEY: Joe, it happened. Joseph.
No it absolutely did not.
Back and forth.
RIDLEY: Listen, just because George Bush got a shoe thrown at him at the end of the year - that means nothing, Joe Scarborough. For many of us race did not take a vacation turning this.
He's comparing an assault on the POTUS by an Arab in Iraq with comments that never happened. How would he feel if it was barry having shoes thrown at him? Would it mean absolutely nothing?
And what are the chances barry would have stayed hidden behind the podium? The Secret Service would have hauled him away...willingly.
HEILEMAN: There was no question it was a plus in driving African American turnout. That was a big deal in a number of states that Obama won that he would never have won without that happening. Places like North Carolina.
Black enough to be part of it?
Black voter turnout increased 2%. That is all. 2% and it went up 1% from 2000-2004. Eight million eligible black voters did not bother to register to vote for the first black POTUS. The black vote did not win barry the presidency. Helped in the primary with the race-baiting but that's it.
RIDLEY: I think Barack Obama will be the most American president we have ever had. From Hawaii, biracial, made himself in Chicago. Went back and became a community organizer and really ran for the people. He's the most American president.
Do they even hear themselves?
Parts of the US are not more patriotic than others?
Really ran for the people?
The most American president we have had is the most ridiculously arrogant comment of this election season...next to the black enough to be part of this.
What has he actually DONE? Absolutely nothing. And why are people expecting this will all of a sudden change?
When is he going to figure out that no one "makes" themselves in Chicago - they pay to get where they are and so did barry. It will eventually come out when Rezko starts talking and connects the dots between blago and barry because they're there.
And Ridley still thinks the "kill him" actually happened. It didn't. It was disproven by the Secret Service as "that's him" and the case in Pennsylvania was made up by the reporter. The Secret Service and other law enforcement had a large presence because of the previous comment and they were surprised to read about it in the paper the next day. And what happened to the reporter? His editor stood behind him. The paper endorsed barry.
It is absolutely reprehensible that barry has not yet set The American People correct. His false hearsay comments were made in the last debate. The last words from both candidates and barry accuses McCain/Palin of inciting crowds to yell death threats.
OBAMA: In which all the public reports indicated were shouting when my name came up things like: 'terrorist' and 'kill him'. and that your running mate didn't mention, didn't stop, didn't say 'Hold on a second, that's kind of out of line'.
"In which all the public reports" is irresponsible and as a lawyer he knows all about hearsay. It is very hard to yell hold on a second to something that was never heard because it was never said. The terrorist comments were directed at Ayers. And how many votes did that win barry?
You want the measure of the Man of Integrity and Transcender of Race and the Great Uniter?
Each of his opponents (plus Mr Bill) left the race racists when none of them started that way. He never spoke out against Rep Lewis' horrifying statements about Sen McCain. And he never apologized to Sen McCain or Gov Palin for lying on national TV to pander for votes.
I have a draft put together somewhere with all the evil things said about Senator Clinton during the campaign that barry never once stood up and objected to. I'll have to post it. Here's something Micheal Graham said about Sen Clinton in 2003:
Anyone listening to Hillary Rodham in her speech last week about patriotism, that screaming, screeching fingernail, I wanted to bludgeon her with a tire iron.
And the outrage?
It's called The Double Standard.
That is the race issue that is still not being discussed and I don't see barry giving a politically speech about it.
December 26, 2008
Morning Joe
They're are talking about the campaigns - extolling the greatness of barry's campaign. He outspent and outraised Senator Clinton and they both got the same amount of votes. He out spent her in PA and she won by 10 points. He won 11 in a row and couldn't get the required amount of delegates. He never beat her. He was handed the nomination. Period.
BUCHANAN: [Sen Clinton] had one of the greatest comebacks I've ever seen in politics.
MIKA: Yeah, that was something.
BUCHANAN: April and May she's pounding that guy. [He looks at Watson] You're smiling now. You weren't smiling then.
CARLSON WATSON: Here's the truth and I hate to say this outloud. Her husband, I believe, loves her death. I think her husband wanted her to win - but I think if Bill hadn't done what he did in South Carolina, that comeback could have been complete.
And here's the greater truth. barry's camp went into South Carolina with a memo made up painting Sen Clinton as a racist. All set and ready to go before Mr Bill or anyone else said a thing. Their race-baiting strategy was going full force. He needed to get the black vote behind him and how better than to paint his opponent as a racist? How many you are aware of the memo? How about Mr Bill's actual statements and what lead up to them? What about Rev Jackson's comments that he was not offended and did not read anything into them?
It's all so tiresome and not worth going into. I'll find the links to the old posts.
