The ascension of Barack Hussein Obama to the United States presidency is something I never though I would see in my lifetime--not that I have a problem with a man of African decent doing so, but that I would see all of the media fall into line in order to support the candidacy and election of a naked Marxist to the highest office in the land.
As poor as our public education system is, it is probably not surprising to learn that people have no idea of what it means for a politician to be a Marxist, but for there to have been absolutely no investigative reporting as to who Obama is and the people who populate his circle of friends and associates is staggering to me. Like lemmings, news anchors, "reporters," and "journalists" of all kinds simply took the words that were fed to them by Obama and his campaign staffers, and ran with it as though they were his willing employees. They offered no scrutiny whatsoever regarding any aspect of his past adult life, what he had done (as little as it was) as a legislator, and the "change" that he touted throughout the past two years he's been campaigning. The only folks who even brought up this essential information regarding Obama were conservative talk-show hosts, and they were poo-poo'd for being "partisan."
Unlike any other major presidential candidate in American history, Barack Hussein Obama entered the race as a blank slate, and all of the news outlets stood back and watched, commenting only about his racial makeup, his "charisma," and his presumed oratory abilities. It did not concern any of them that he had long-standing relationships and associations with radical America-haters and racists. It did not concern them that he had sealed all of his birth, citizenship, collegiate, employment, collegiate, and state legislative records from public scrutiny. It did not concern them that solid evidence exists that Obama was not even a "natural-born citizen," which is a constitutional requirement for anyone either running or holding the office of United States president.
Oddly, there were swirling talk about the constitutionality of John McCain's candidacy, since he was born in the Panama Canal Zone (regardless of the fact that both his parents were Americans, and he was born in an American military base hospital, in an American-held territory). The absurdity of this scrutiny is highlighted by the facts of Obama's origins--since his father was a Kenyan (he NEVER became an American), his mother was American; however, gave birth to Obama only four years after her 14th birthday (constitutionally, if only the mother is American, she has to have given birth to the potential candidate FIVE years after her 14th birthday), he has numerous Kenyan relatives who swear that they witnessed his birth IN KENYA, and to top it all off, Obama refuses to present any proof whatsoever that he was born in Hawaii (we are all simply supposed to take his word for it). Moreover, there is documentation that when he and his mother moved, first to Kenya, and then to Indonesia, she gave up her American citizenship and made them both citizens of these respective countries (since neither country allows for duel citizenship).
And, do not bother me with the alleged "certificate of live birth" that was posted on his campaign website (posted first at the Daily KOS website) that supposedly proved that he had been born in Hawaii. This alleged document has been show to have been altered several times using the software "Photoshop," it does not provide any information regarding any attending physicians, and simply put it is does not provide the legal proof of where and when a person was born.
The way was made straight and plain by willing accomplices in the media, and by the refusal of the Democratic Party to do any vetting at all with regard to Obama. Also, money flowed into his campaign from every source imaginable. In an age where liberals have in the past complained about the need for "campaign finance reform" they no longer seem concerned about the corporate and foreign interests who funneled over 600 million dollars into Obama's war chest. It is incredible to me that the very people who Obama spoke of in the negative for their "selfishness," and "greed" where giving him money unheard of in a political campaign.
And who was supposed to oppose all of this? John McCain--the most socially and fiscally liberal Republican to ever win his party's candidacy, the oldest man to ever run for the office of president, a man who agrees with Obama in areas such as open borders for illegal aliens, public financing of elections, and corporate welfare. Yet, in spite of it all, he was spoken of by past Democrat friends and colleagues he had garnered through years of "reaching across the aisle" as an "extreme right-winger." McCain ran the most inept campaign since Bob Dole's in 1996, and it is a miracle he even won a single electoral vote, let alone 162.
When you consider how poor folks opinions are (and rightly so) of George W. Bush, that McCain was a tired old man who could not mount any sort of effective fight against a machine that had him outspent 3 to 1, and a the mass electronic and print media completely in the tank for Obama, it is no wonder that Obama won...but did he even have the legal constitutional right to even apply to be a candidate, let alone be elected? Many people question Obama's citizenship, not only his "natural-born" status, but whether he isn't still legally either a Kenyan or Indonesian citizen, and has never ever HAD been granted any legal status as an American.
Yet, here we are with a man who is the presumptive president-elect, who has offered only his word, and we are supposed to take it at face value. And what exactly is Obama going to do as president? He says that he's going to "fundamentally change" our country, but what does that mean? If you couple that with what he says about "universal health care,"and raising taxes in order to "spread the wealth" because it is "good for everybody" then it is apparent that he wants to tear down our political and economic system in order to make it closer to the communist centralized government model in Cuba and North Korea, and away from one that provides protection and opportunity for the public sector.
This "economic justice" that Obama spouts is precisely what Castro's Cuba and Kim Jong Il's government offer their masses. In essence, it destroys all classes of people above the poverty level, and provides all that can be had to the bureaucracy and commissars ruling in their prospective districts. It also provides all the necessary funds to the "law enforcement" personnel who are given the task of keeping the people living under this tyranny in their place. Meanwhile, the people live with little electrical power to operate anything, they are constantly in want of food, medicine, and other essentials, and in a standard of living below anything seen nearly anywhere else in the world. If you can find satellite nighttime pictures of Cuba and Korea, the communist-controlled regions of these nations are utterly black, while neighboring countries to them are alight with electricity.
Even if Obama's desire is to make the United State closer to communist China (and since he openly talks about how China is superior to us in every possible way, that is a distinct possibility), it does not consider the fact that much of China's economy is based upon slave-wages, the people are still as oppressed as any on Earth, and they are facing a crisis where only boy babies are being born, while girls are either aborted or left out in the elements to die from exposure and starvation. The demographics with regard to nations who have adopted Obama's "socialist Utopian" ideal are not pretty. Whole populations are dying off because they are not having children. The average birth rate in Europe is less than 1.5 children per couple, and in China they have decreed only one child per couple. The only nations who have growing birth rates are in Muslim countries, and currently in the US where it is just at the rate of growth (2.01).
The most absurd aspect of it all is that what we have in Barack Hussein Obama a do-nothing, never-having-done-anything "community organizer" (what they call "rabble-rowers" nowadays) who only can talk about what he will do, but cannot point to any sort of accomplishment to show that he is capable of doing anything. It's like somebody who demands to be put into a sports hall of fame who never played the game, or a person who wants to be made chief of medicine in a hospital, even though they never spent a single minute in a medical classroom.
To put it as an analogy, the American people are like a patient who needs proper care and rehabilitation, but they encounter someone with no medical experience, and he tells them that he will perform an operation in order to "fix" whatever is wrong with them. The recommended prescription and rehabilitation for the patient would take some time and effort from them to complete, but 90% go on to full recovery, and 100% have a far higher standard of living than before. Meanwhile, the shyster-physician touting performing the operation (which he's never done before) is touting a procedure that has FAILED 100% of patients it has been performed on, and indeed has rendered them as total invalids. So, when the time comes for the patient to decide what to do, he goes to the shyster and tells them that they want him to perform the operation to "fix" them.
But it's worse than that, because if you use the same analogy with what happened November 4, 2008, the patient was not capable of making an informed opinion because no proper physicians provided them with any details whatsoever about what their choices were, or what would happen to them if they did not choose proper medical care. The medical society and physicians of opposing opinions were essentially silent about whether the patient made a proper medical decision or not. In fact, most actually encouraged the patient to go to be "treated" by the shyster.
So, that's where we are. The American populous has made their choice (ignorant as it is), and before long whole regions of the country will be on their backs, utterly dependent upon the good-graces and magnanimity of the Federal Government. Really, that is the case today (thanks to "welfare" and other soul-destroying Federal programs), but thanks to having a naked Marxist and a compliant Congress in control of the country, they will "spread" this misery and rage throughout the land.
We can also look forward to a "crisis" that vice president-elect Joe Biden warned us about, all due to the fact that Obama has absolutely no experience of any sort whatsoever. I believe there will be so many crises during Obama's administration (hopefully, just a four-year term--and he isn't declared president-for-life sometime down the road), that the "Bush 43" period will be seen as "the good ol' days." Hopefully, the numerous crises do not provide the pretext of the utter destruction of all vestiges of our constitutional rights, and we do not fall into a fascist/Marxist dictatorship.
However, I expect the worst. The media has devolved into a propaganda-arm for the socialist Democrat Party. The vast majority of the people in our government are amoral political degenerates, and they are funded by amoral corporate degenerates. The public and collegiate educators in America are mostly America-hating, "diversity"-loving menaces of society. The worst people possible are in charge of America today, when the best people are necessary in order to protect our rights and the rule of law. The rule of law (LEX REX) is what made our United States truly exception on the face of the Earth. The law being over everyone has made us free from being lorded over by the powerful, because the law has stated that we all have unalienable rights. Now, we have a president who has no regard for the rule of law. Now we have a president who demands "fundamental change" of every aspect of American society. Now we have a president who demands that the government decree how much property anyone can possess.
It is a neo-feudalism that Barack Hussein Obama touts, in the dawn of a new Dark Age.
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Saturday, June 23, 2007
Jesse Davis' alleged murder
I'm calling it an "alleged" murder, simply because not much is known about the tragic death of Jessie Davis and her unborn daughter. All we really know right now is that she was found today, and that the unborn child's father, Bobby Cutts was arrested and charged with both of their murders. We do not know for sure that what happened to her was any more than a heated argument that became violent. More will be known as the days and weeks pass.
What I want to talk about regarding this is not so much what happened and who is or is not responsible for what happened, but rather what I expect will NOT happen. What won't happen is that there will not be any cries from anyone about the racial element of this case. What you also won't see is Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton in the streets, demanding that justice be done for this woman, her family, and their community.
As tragic as this is, I cannot help but be infuriated by the racist scum who grab their bullhorns and rent-a-mobs at the drop of a hat whenever a white person is accused of committing an offense against a black person, especially if it's a black woman's accusation against a white man. Does anyone doubt that had this case been about a pregnant black woman's death, and that her suspicious death was apparently caused by a white male, that the usual suspects would already be in that community screaming for "justice?"
As I listen to what the people in that Ohio community say, everything is solemn and relatively quiet. Why? Because there is no racial element considered to what has happened. A woman and her unborn child are now dead, a man is in custody for their murder, and nothing more is being said about it. Am I saying that something more SHOULD be said about it? I don't know, but what if there is? I'm no social expert, but what if somebody who has studied interracial black-men-with-white-women relationships had something to say about this phenomenon? Is there an element of racism involved with a black man's crime against a white woman, or is that charge exclusive with white perpetrators?
All I know is that there is a definite double-standard with how the media covers these sorts of crimes. All that needs to happen in order to make a crime racially-charged is for a black woman to accuse a man or men of rape (as what happened with the men's Duke University lacrosse team and the black stripper), the angle will ALWAYS be about race and how white men victimize black women. It will not matter if the black woman is lying about the charge, that there is absolutely no physical evidence to back up her charge, that she changes her story constantly, or that she can't even identify the men who supposedly assaulted her. The charge itself will always be enough to bring the "racial" aspect straight to the forefront, with the race-pimps like Jackson and Sharpton leading the mob. And, should anyone question motives or disagree with what is going on, then those who do so are ALSO "racists."
If this crime had taken place in Brooklyn, with a pregnant black woman being killed by a white man who fathered the unborn child, there would be riots and bloodshed. As it stands with this being a case of a black man being arrested for the death of a white woman and the black man's unborn child, all is solemn and calm. White people in this Ohio community are not going to go on any rampages to find black people who might be associated with Bobby Cutts (or simply for being black people, because "they're all the same") in order to bring their wrath upon them.
That's just the way things are. One class of people can differentiate between an occurrence that happened between two individuals, and another can't. One class of people understands the reality of what occurs between people as separate individuals, and the other has an irrational belief that they are victims, and that what happens to someone of their race has happened to everyone in their sphere.
Do I want the people in this Ohio community to be enraged? Not at all. I hope that they will keep in mind that the police are still having to investigate whether another person was involved with Bobby Cutts in Jessie Davis' murder, and whether her death was premeditated or a second-degree killing. I hope that everyone will keep their heads while everything is being found out and every avenue in this case has been traveled. It just angers me that we can look at this tragedy in one light and an expectation of those in this community, and have a completely different attitude about another group of people's reaction to a similar situation.
Just think about this the next time you see "Reverend" Jackson and "Reverend" Sharpton making a lot of noise about someones "rights" and "justice." Ask yourself, was it concerning a white person's rights and justice, or was it concerning a black person? Then ask yourself, isn't their double-standard in-and-of-itself racist?
What I want to talk about regarding this is not so much what happened and who is or is not responsible for what happened, but rather what I expect will NOT happen. What won't happen is that there will not be any cries from anyone about the racial element of this case. What you also won't see is Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton in the streets, demanding that justice be done for this woman, her family, and their community.
As tragic as this is, I cannot help but be infuriated by the racist scum who grab their bullhorns and rent-a-mobs at the drop of a hat whenever a white person is accused of committing an offense against a black person, especially if it's a black woman's accusation against a white man. Does anyone doubt that had this case been about a pregnant black woman's death, and that her suspicious death was apparently caused by a white male, that the usual suspects would already be in that community screaming for "justice?"
As I listen to what the people in that Ohio community say, everything is solemn and relatively quiet. Why? Because there is no racial element considered to what has happened. A woman and her unborn child are now dead, a man is in custody for their murder, and nothing more is being said about it. Am I saying that something more SHOULD be said about it? I don't know, but what if there is? I'm no social expert, but what if somebody who has studied interracial black-men-with-white-women relationships had something to say about this phenomenon? Is there an element of racism involved with a black man's crime against a white woman, or is that charge exclusive with white perpetrators?
All I know is that there is a definite double-standard with how the media covers these sorts of crimes. All that needs to happen in order to make a crime racially-charged is for a black woman to accuse a man or men of rape (as what happened with the men's Duke University lacrosse team and the black stripper), the angle will ALWAYS be about race and how white men victimize black women. It will not matter if the black woman is lying about the charge, that there is absolutely no physical evidence to back up her charge, that she changes her story constantly, or that she can't even identify the men who supposedly assaulted her. The charge itself will always be enough to bring the "racial" aspect straight to the forefront, with the race-pimps like Jackson and Sharpton leading the mob. And, should anyone question motives or disagree with what is going on, then those who do so are ALSO "racists."
If this crime had taken place in Brooklyn, with a pregnant black woman being killed by a white man who fathered the unborn child, there would be riots and bloodshed. As it stands with this being a case of a black man being arrested for the death of a white woman and the black man's unborn child, all is solemn and calm. White people in this Ohio community are not going to go on any rampages to find black people who might be associated with Bobby Cutts (or simply for being black people, because "they're all the same") in order to bring their wrath upon them.
That's just the way things are. One class of people can differentiate between an occurrence that happened between two individuals, and another can't. One class of people understands the reality of what occurs between people as separate individuals, and the other has an irrational belief that they are victims, and that what happens to someone of their race has happened to everyone in their sphere.
Do I want the people in this Ohio community to be enraged? Not at all. I hope that they will keep in mind that the police are still having to investigate whether another person was involved with Bobby Cutts in Jessie Davis' murder, and whether her death was premeditated or a second-degree killing. I hope that everyone will keep their heads while everything is being found out and every avenue in this case has been traveled. It just angers me that we can look at this tragedy in one light and an expectation of those in this community, and have a completely different attitude about another group of people's reaction to a similar situation.
Just think about this the next time you see "Reverend" Jackson and "Reverend" Sharpton making a lot of noise about someones "rights" and "justice." Ask yourself, was it concerning a white person's rights and justice, or was it concerning a black person? Then ask yourself, isn't their double-standard in-and-of-itself racist?
Saturday, June 16, 2007
We are in BIG trouble...
I am a conservative, but I am not here to rip one party or so-called ideology. I am here to rip on the utter stupidity that rules this country, regardless of what affiliation the idiot has.
Let's take George "Dubya" Bush for instance:
He doesn't get the so-called "immigrant" problem, involving millions of Mexicans who come over here for the sole purpose of siphoning our welfare system and taking away our jobs. Imagine if I went to another country and attempted to do what these people come here and expect to happen. I'd be ridiculed at the least, and at worst I'd be imprisoned. Bush has completely lost his mind on this issue.
The other day I read where he's being regarded as a HERO in the ISLAMIC country of Albania (they're putting his likeness on postage stamps). Why? Because he's supporting the drive for Kosovo (a province in Serbia) to "gain it's Independence from Serbia," and become an Albanian-majority state. This would be like if Virginia had become saturated with Mexicans, and they revolted to become an independent state from the US. (Not just revolted, but began a campaign of murder and destruction of everyone and everything NOT Mexican.) Kosovo is an ancient, traditional Serbian territory that has been theirs for over 1000 years. It's practically the Christian Serbs' homeland. They've been fighting against Islamic Turks and other enemies to keep it for centuries, and now Bush is pushing to take it away from them!
He's completely dropped the ball on Iraq. The defeat of Saddam Hussein's forces in Iraq was performed brilliantly, but after that he allowed the country's borders to become as porous as OURS. He allowed (and IS allowing) more and more terrorists and enemy weapons to cross the Iraqi border, and tied the hands of the military to do their job effectively. He didn't read and understand the lessons of past wars, and now we're in a terrible situation there.
I wish Bush had lost the 2004 election. If he had, the electorate would have regretted it. He'd be regarded as an excellent leader, due to his handling the 9/11 situation, and getting the overall economy back on track after the 1999-2001 recession. I truly wish John Kerry was president right now, and HE was the idiot bungling everything. Now Bush is the idiot bungling everything, and he's regarded the "face of conservatism." He isn't handling this second term any better than Kerry would have handled his ONLY one. I truely believe that "Dubya" has lost his mind.
So, am I just someone suffering from "Bush Derangement Syndrome?" Can anyone read what I've said above and make that conclusion? I just think it very odd that GWB can support amnesty for illegal aliens, and an Islamic jihad against a Christian nation, and he can't catch a single break from the tinfoil-hat-wearing, koolaid-drinking moonbats. You'd think that they could give him kudos once and awhile.
Let's take George "Dubya" Bush for instance:
He doesn't get the so-called "immigrant" problem, involving millions of Mexicans who come over here for the sole purpose of siphoning our welfare system and taking away our jobs. Imagine if I went to another country and attempted to do what these people come here and expect to happen. I'd be ridiculed at the least, and at worst I'd be imprisoned. Bush has completely lost his mind on this issue.
The other day I read where he's being regarded as a HERO in the ISLAMIC country of Albania (they're putting his likeness on postage stamps). Why? Because he's supporting the drive for Kosovo (a province in Serbia) to "gain it's Independence from Serbia," and become an Albanian-majority state. This would be like if Virginia had become saturated with Mexicans, and they revolted to become an independent state from the US. (Not just revolted, but began a campaign of murder and destruction of everyone and everything NOT Mexican.) Kosovo is an ancient, traditional Serbian territory that has been theirs for over 1000 years. It's practically the Christian Serbs' homeland. They've been fighting against Islamic Turks and other enemies to keep it for centuries, and now Bush is pushing to take it away from them!
He's completely dropped the ball on Iraq. The defeat of Saddam Hussein's forces in Iraq was performed brilliantly, but after that he allowed the country's borders to become as porous as OURS. He allowed (and IS allowing) more and more terrorists and enemy weapons to cross the Iraqi border, and tied the hands of the military to do their job effectively. He didn't read and understand the lessons of past wars, and now we're in a terrible situation there.
I wish Bush had lost the 2004 election. If he had, the electorate would have regretted it. He'd be regarded as an excellent leader, due to his handling the 9/11 situation, and getting the overall economy back on track after the 1999-2001 recession. I truly wish John Kerry was president right now, and HE was the idiot bungling everything. Now Bush is the idiot bungling everything, and he's regarded the "face of conservatism." He isn't handling this second term any better than Kerry would have handled his ONLY one. I truely believe that "Dubya" has lost his mind.
So, am I just someone suffering from "Bush Derangement Syndrome?" Can anyone read what I've said above and make that conclusion? I just think it very odd that GWB can support amnesty for illegal aliens, and an Islamic jihad against a Christian nation, and he can't catch a single break from the tinfoil-hat-wearing, koolaid-drinking moonbats. You'd think that they could give him kudos once and awhile.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)