Archive for Racism

Obama Shouldn’t Embrace Racist Al Sharpton

I feel a ‘Ya Think? Award™ coming on…

It was disappointing the other day to see President Barack Obama embracing the vulgar race hustler Al Sharpton.

And that’s all we’ll bother to cover. But I do want to award the writer at the Chicago Trib, John Kass, our coveted ‘Ya Think Award™ for this brilliant observation.

The President of the United States stood on a podium (and more than once!) with a guy who helped to set off two antisemitic race attacks which resulted in the deaths of eight human beings. The Tawana Brawley affair should have been enough to distance Sharpton from decent people, without the race murders. And maybe it was enough. Decent people avoid Al Sharpton.

- Aggie

Comments

Sueña or Rêve, They’re All Dreamers

I am unafraid to be anti-illegal immigrant. I celebrate the immigrant, but can’t get past the illegal.

Where I draw the line, however, is in stripping citizens of their citizenship and forcing children into underage labor.

Not here, silly:

Children of Haitian descent born in the Dominican Republic are increasingly being barred from attending school following a court ruling that could lead to tens of thousands of people being stripped of their citizenship, according to a report released Friday.

Dozens of families with school-age children say they are being turned away or harassed due to arbitrary interpretations of the court ruling and Dominican laws, according to researchers at the Human Rights Institute at Georgetown University Law Center who compiled the report.

As a result, some children drop out of school or lose scholarships while others are forced into underage labor, said Kimberly Fetsick, one of the report’s authors.

“Children are being harmed, and their human rights are being violated,” she said. “Action must be taken to protect these children.”

Well, if they’re not going to integrate into Dominican society, speak the language and all that… say what?

Untitled

I see. Well, that’s terrible, then. We condemn the Dominicans for their arbitrary and cruel behavior.

But what do you expect us to do about it?

Untitled

You got it. Not traveling there will be my first order of business.

And now a translation for our Spanish-speaking readers:

De nada.

Comments

The Creature and the Preacher

Obama was in a tough spot. He had been caught with an unsavory personality who had concocted a racial hoax, sparked a race riot, and so inflamed racial tensions that a car accident turned into the lynching of a Hassidic Jew. (Not to mention turning up like a bad penny at the Duke lacrosse fiasco and the Trayvon Martin cluster[bleep].)

What’s a post-racial president supposed to do?

“The right to vote is threatened today in a way that it has not been since the Voting Rights Act became law nearly five decades ago,” Obama told the annual convention of Sharpton’s National Action Network in Manhattan.

“This recent effort to restrict the vote has not been led by both parties,” Obama said, speaking to 1,600 people at the Sheraton ballroom in Midtown Manhattan.

“It’s been led by the Republican Party …. If your strategy depends on having fewer people showing up to vote, that’s not a sign of strength. That’s a sign of weakness. And not only is ultimately bad politics, ultimately it is bad for the country.”

Since the president won’t call out Sharpton for who he is, it falls to the nephew of a dead president to pen les mots justes:

“Al Sharpton has done more damage to the black cause than [segregationist Alabama Gov.] George Wallace. He has suffocated the decent black leaders in New York. His transparent venal blackmail and extortion schemes taint all black leadership.”

The strongest, truest words from a Kennedy since JFK said, “Bobby, when you’re done with her, send her over to my room.”

There’s also this from President Obama’s formerly fat friend:

In 1994, Sharpton stood before a crowd at Kean College in New Jersey. “White folks was in the caves while we was building empires,” he said. “We built pyramids before Donald Trump even knew what architecture was…We taught philosophy and astrology [sic] and mathematics before Socrates and them Greek homos ever got around to it…Do some cracker come and tell you, ‘Well my mother and father blood go back to the Mayflower,’ you better hold your pocket. That ain’t nothing to be proud of, that means their forefathers was crooks.”

On behalf of all crackers, I take offense. You homos will have to speak for yourselves.

PS: “White interloper”: sounds like a kind of central African gazelle.

The Rev. Al Sharpton apparently referred to the Jewish owner of Freddy’s Fashion M art as a “white interloper” in a rally three months before the Harlem massacre, newly revealed tapes show.

[I]n a tape of a broadcast from a Sept. 9 rally, Sharpton said, “I want to make it clear to the radio and audience and to you here that we will not stand by and allow them to move this brother so that some white interloper can expand his business on 125th St.

To which the president has replied:

“Just to be clear I know where my birth certificate is,” he joked. “I think it’s still up on a website somewhere.”

The most memorable utterance from an American president since “I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky.” Audio tapes and blue dresses don’t lie.

PS: Just one more picture, because it’s so creepy:

Be afraid. Be very afraid.

Comments

Obama Heading Al Sharpton Event

Completely disgusting

President Obama is lending his political support to fellow community organizer Al Sharpton by headlining the MSNBC host’s National Action Network (NAN) conference this week in New York. Obama’s choice to headline the conference underscores the close ties of the two leaders and provides an increased sense of political legitimacy to the controversial leader and his much-maligned organization.

Sharpton’s conference is held in April “not just to commemorate the anniversary of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s assassination, but to honor his legacy by proactively engaging in dialogue that will spawn change.” The NY Daily News reports that along with President Obama, the conference will feature other high-profile liberal leaders, including US Attorney General Eric Holder, Gov. Andrew Cuomo, and Mayor Bill de Blasio.

Over the years Sharpton’s organization has been accused of engaging in questionable financial practices, including using the threat of boycotts to extort donations from corporations and land Sharpton consultant positions. As the New York Post reported in 2008, nearly 50 companies—including GM, Pepsi and Wal-Mart, and some labor unions—had donated to NAN. The NY Post attributes many of these donations to extortionist tactics:

Terrified of negative publicity, fearful of a consumer boycott or eager to make nice with the civil-rights activist, CEOs write checks, critics say, to NAN and Sharpton – who brandishes the buying power of African-American consumers.” In some cases, they hire him as a consultant.

(Incidentally, one of the panel discussions for this year’s conference is “How Can Corporations Collaborate to Affect Change in the Community.”)

As Breitbart News reports, Sharpton’s organization was charged in 2006 by the IRS for improperly reporting taxes. The organization still owes the federal government $1.9 million in back taxes and penalties.

The ties between President Obama and Al Sharpton are strong. The NY Daily News reports that Sharpton has visited the Oval Office several times during Obama’s tenure. In 2009, Sharpton and Michael Bloomberg met with Obama on education initiatives. In 2010, the president invited Sharpton back to discuss jobs and the state of the economy with other black leaders. Sharpton also took part in the First Lady’s 50th birthday celebration and supported the president’s young black and Hispanic men initiative.

This is the second time Obama has appeared at the NAN convention, also speaking at the event in 2011.

Sharpton is a race-baiter and an anti-Semite. He is one of the reasons that I am no longer a democrat. What a cesspool of a country we’ve become.

Comments

Driving While White

We noted this story yesterday. Two updates: one, they’ve arrested two teenagers on suspicion of being among the mob.

Two, Detroit is the comeback city?

A year or so ago, I was driving out of downtown late at night when I came upon an accident scene. A guy in a pickup had hit a young man crossing the road. The corner was dark — the streetlight was out — and the pedestrian was dressed all in black.

The driver, a white suburbanite just leaving his job at the MGM casino, never saw him step off the curb. He was devastated.

The victim, who was African-American, appeared to have a broken leg, and was in considerable pain. The driver and I covered him with our coats and tried to to keep him comfortable while waiting more than a half hour for the cops.

A lot of passing cars slowed down to see what was going on, but at no point did I feel in danger.

Steven Utash wasn’t as lucky. The Clinton Township man was also driving a pickup on a dark Detroit street last week when he struck a kid who had stepped in front of him. Utash also stopped and got out to help.

What happened next is sickening. Utash, who is white, was seized by a mob of bystanders and beaten senseless in the street. As of this writing, he was still clinging to life. You want to see what a breakdown of society looks like? Watch the video of the attack.

On second thought, don’t. You can’t see anything but the kid getting hit by the truck. It looks bad, but the kid’s fine. Utash, on the other hand, might not make it.

Racism is a two-way street in this region. A black woman stumbles noisily onto a Dearborn Heights porch in the middle of the night and is shot and killed by a panicked homeowner, and we rush to the judgment that race played a role.

A white guy gets beat nearly to death by blacks on a Detroit street and it makes us very uncomfortable to look at the racial element. We’re constantly being admonished that we must have a conversation about race in Metro Detroit. But when we do, it should be an honest one. We shouldn’t shy away from the reality that whites can be the victims of hate crimes, and blacks can be the haters. Everyone must do better.

Detroit is the comeback city, yes. That needs celebrating. But let’s not pretend that a spruced-up downtown solves everything. Detroit is still a city with too much bloodshed. It’s still a city too with many people who have too little hope. And it’s still a city with way too much hate.

The extent to which Detroit is “coming back” is debatable, but was achieved only by hitting bottom. Fiscal bankruptcy allowed the city to climb out from under crippling debt and usurious union contracts. But isn’t there a parallel moral bankruptcy that also requires hitting bottom—and acknowledging it? How can you go about curing a disease without admitting you’re sick?

To be fair to Detroit, everyone was sickened by this attack, There seems to be no attempt at understanding the mindset of these thugs, no phony moral relativism. Black and white, urban and suburban, everyone is disgusted. This may be Detroit’s moral bottom. God help it if it is not.

Comments (3)

Back to the Land

One idea of what to do with the vast wasteland that was Detroit is to plow it under and grow crops.

I don’t know what would grow there, however:

There are two checks on my desk.

The first is my donation toward the bills for Steve Utash, the Roseville tree trimmer who’s lying in a hospital bed two days after he accidentally hit a kid who stepped in front of his truck on the east side.

The second is a donation to the reward fund to find the thugs who ran up and beat Utash nearly to death after he got out to make sure the child was OK.

Utash did what he should, what any human being should. But what were those other guys doing?

Besides loitering? Putting a child at risk? Waiting for an opportunity to descend on defenseless prey like a pack of rabid animals? They were doing plenty.

Utash got out and ran to the aid of a child. As many as a dozen people ran past the child to attack Utash.

They beat him like he stole something. Twenty-four hours later, he still had not regained consciousness. His family says he suffered numerous head injuries.

Now Detroit suffers, too, again.

We have spent a lot of time in recent weeks talking about whether Detroit can work, what with high car insurance bills, high taxes, struggling schools and crime. Much of that recent conversation was fueled by the theft of a prominent resident’s car, followed by the theft of her rental car the very next day.

That resident, Kim Trent, a member of the Wayne State Board of Governors, a woman who loves Detroit, appeared on WDIV-TV (Channel 4)’s “Flashpoint” to say she finally has to consider moving her family out of Detroit.

It is a heartbreaking discussion that too many middle-class Detroiters are having, a conversation that Mayor Mike Duggan has to be listening to as much as any other.

These things cannot happen here. Not when we’re rebuilding, fighting for air out of bankruptcy, pushing for better. Bankruptcy won’t kill Detroit; things like this might.

If the columnist is trying to make a case to save Detroit, she’s failing as miserably as Detroit itself. These “things” are happening there, as she just told us. The only question to answer is: soy beans or corn?

Comments

No Tickee, No Diploma

In yesterday’s blog post about Michelle Obama’s private visit to China on the public’s dime, I noted she said this:

About 800 students attend the Beijing Normal School, and of those, roughly one in four are international students – including some Americans. All the classes are taught in English (one room even has a map of the United States on the ceiling), and the curriculum prepares students to study internationally once they graduate. Many students here hope to one day attend college in America.

To which I retorted:

Which opportunity will be denied to them to make room for affirmative action students. (Am I wrong?)

Looks like I was (and I couldn’t be more proud):

Democrats claim to be a multi-ethnic “coalition of the ascendant,” but identity politics has inherent contradictions. Witness the victory this week by three liberal Asian-American lawmakers in blocking Sacramento’s Democratic supermajority from trying to overturn California’s ban on racial preferences (Prop. 209).

“In the past few weeks, we have heard from thousands of people throughout California voicing their concerns about the potential impacts,” the senators wrote Assembly Speaker John Perez last week, adding that “as lifelong advocates for the Asian-American and other communities, we would never support a policy that we believed would negatively impact our children.”

Their concerns are well founded. In 1996, California voters approved Prop. 209 to block public institutions, notably state universities, from discriminating by race. Asian-American freshman enrollment at the University of California’s 10-flagship universities has since climbed to 40.2% from 36.6% and to 47% from 39.7% at Berkeley.

Admissions rates for Asian Americans relative to other minority groups have also soared. In 1996, Asian Americans were about two-thirds as likely to get into Berkeley as blacks or Hispanics, not controlling for other factors. Today Asian Americans stand a 50% better shot of being admitted. Prop. 209′s ban on racial preferences has helped Asian Americans by forcing admissions officers to focus on such academic qualifications as high-school grades and test scores.

What do grades and test score have to do with getting into Berkeley?

Of course, doing good often comes by way of doing well:

Democratic leaders say they are merely delaying the referendum for discussion, but they know that pushing for Prop. 209′s repeal risks alienating the growing block of Asian-American voters in the same way Republicans have alienated Hispanics. Asian Americans were 11% of California voters in 2012 compared to 6% in 2008, and nearly 80% of them voted for President Obama.

Asian-Americans were in danger of becoming the Jews of the 21st Century (the likes of Jonas Salk and Richard Feynman were rejected from Ivy League schools due to strict quotas), and that would be as wrong today as it was then.

Comments

Juan Williams Exposes The Left’s Hatred For Conservative African Americans

The background: Rutgers University hired Condoleeza Rice to be the commencement speaker this year. The faculty immediately voted to request that the invitation be rescinded. The leftist students piled on too, but what is noteworthy is the faculty response.

Juan Williams is black and liberal. He used to work for NPR until they fired him for publicly stating that he feels nervous in an airport when he sees Muslims in traditional clothing. Now he works for Fox, one of the poor, hapless liberals that provides red meat to the hungry conservatives there. (Sorry Fox, the bias is over the top too often).

Condoleezza Rice lacks “moral authority.” She fails to meet the standards of “exemplary citizenship” and she does not have what it takes to “inspire” graduating college seniors.

That crazy thinking comes from the New Brunswick Faculty Council of Rutgers University. They voted last week to ask university leadership to cancel Rice’s invitation to be this year’s Commencement Speaker and receive an honorary degree.

How is the public served by muzzling one of the most thoughtful, accomplished and respected political voices of her time just because she happens to be a Republican?
Yes, apparently the first African-American woman to serve as National Security Adviser and the nation’s Secretary of State doesn’t have what it takes to be honored by Rutgers.

Rice holds a Ph.D. in political science. She has taught college for decades. She was Provost of Stanford University. She worked her way up from a working-class family in the segregated South to the highest echelon of world power and politics.

But according to the Rutgers faculty council, all of that is negated by her service in President George W. Bush’s administration.

They cited her roles in pushing the false claim of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. They also point to her support for using enhanced interrogation techniques to get information from terror suspects.

The facts are right. The conclusion is wrong.

There is an added element at play here. There is a disgraceful double standard amongst liberals, particularly those in academia, in the hatred they direct at black conservatives.

We saw this last April when the conservative neurosurgeon Dr. Ben Carson was forced to step down as a Commencement Speaker for Johns Hopkins University (where he ably served as the head of pediatric neurosurgery).


I am not a conservative but I have spoken out for years against the staggering amount blind hatred directed at black conservatives by liberals.

Liberals are shockingly quick to demean and dismiss brilliant black people like Rice, Carson, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, U.S. Senator Tim Scott (R-SC), Professor Walter E. Williams and economist Thomas Sowell because they don’t fit into the role they have carved out for a black person in America.

Black Americans must be obedient liberals on all things or risk being called a race traitor or an Uncle Tom.

I’ve experienced some of this vitriol firsthand when I have veered by liberal orthodoxy. I wrote about it in my book “Muzzled – the Assault on Honest Debate.”


How is the public served by muzzling one of the most thoughtful, accomplished and respected political voices of her time just because she happens to be a Republican?

Before her commencement speech, I would like to see any of one of the members of faculty council debate Secretary Rice on foreign policy and then let their students see how well their professors’ critique holds up.

Hell, how about we invite the entire faculty council to take their best shot at Secretary Rice in a debate.

Rice is the most famous Republican woman politician in the country. She gave the best speech of the 2012 Republican National Convention and, despite her lack of interest in political office, still gets mentioned as a potential Republican presidential candidate for 2016.

If she is truly on the fence about a White House run, I would suggest she go for it if for no other reason than to rub it in the faces of these pompous jackass professors.

He must feel as frustrated at Fox as BTL and I sometimes feel in the frozen Northeast. When you live in a world where only one perspective is acceptable, and when holders of that perspective can control whether you have a job or not, it gets a little old. Good for Juan Williams for standing up for Condoleeza Rice, Ben Carson, Clarence Thomas, Sowell and the others.

- Aggie

Comments (1)

Mississippi-on-Hudson

Remember that we reported on the number of abortions among black women in New York City outnumbered the number of births?

Amateurs:

Although whites outnumber blacks in Mississippi by nearly 2-to-1, 71.67% of the babies aborted in Mississippi are black, while 26.6% are white.

Based on data published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 39,052 black babies were killed by abortions in Mississippi between 1995 and 2010. During that same time period, 14,529 white babies were aborted in the Magnolia State.

But you know what?

THAT’S THE GOOD NEWS!!!

Although black abortions comprised 72% of the total abortions between 1995 and 2010, in some years the percentage was higher. In 2009, for example, the percentage of black babies killed by abortion in Mississippi in relation to the total was 76.8%. In 2007, it was 77.8%; in 2005, 77.2%.

The population of Mississippi for 2012, as estimated by the U.S. Census Bureau, was 2,986,450. Among that group, whites comprised 59.9% or 1,788,883 persons. Blacks comprised 37.4% of the population, which equals 1,116,932 persons.

So, barely one-third of the population accounts for three-quarters of the abortions. Hoo-boy.

You know how Michelle Obama and her ilk are always talking about “food deserts”?

Why doesn’t she call for an “abortion desert”?

The pro-life movement has pointed out for years that the abortion industry, including the Planned Parenthood abortion business, targets black women and Hispanics. The way in which it targets black women in more apparent today after a news report shows almost three-fourths of abortions in Mississippi, where a majority of residents are white, are done on black babies.

According to a Life Issues Institute study, 79 percent of Planned Parenthood abortion centers are located in minority neighborhoods.

To paraphrase the great bank robber Willie Sutton, that’s where the pre-natal babies are.

Margaret Sanger would be so proud. Her “Negro Project” (I did not make that up) is right on target. And that target is on really cute, fat, jolly, cuddly black babies.

Comments

Whose N-Word is it, Anyway?

When last we revisited this issue, basketball ex-greats Charles Barkley and Shaquille O’Neal were defending the use of the reddest of “red line” words, ni…—no, I can’t.

It rhymes with “trigger”:

BARKLEY: I’m a black man. I use the N-word. I’m going to continue to use the N-word with my black friends, with my white friends. They are my friends. What I do with my black friends is not up to white America to dictate to me what’s appropriate and inappropriate. What we say in the locker room, the language we use sometime(s) it’s homophobic, sometime(s) it’s sexist, and a lot of times it’s racist. White America don’t get to dictate how me and Shaq talk to each other. And they have been trying to infiltrate (sic) themselves saying, “Well, you guys use it. It’s in rap music.” No, no, no, no, no. That’s not the same.

O’NEAL: Chuck makes a good point. In the Ebonic culture we have programmed ourselves to use the word positive. We have G14 classification to stay it to each other. But when we say it to each other, believe it or not, it’s in the positive sense.

The NBA ain’t the NFL:

The NFL would be asking an awful lot of its officials this season by making it a point of emphasis for them to throw a 15-yard flag upon hearing one player calling another the N-word.

Of course, as former Giants linebacker Carl Banks said, “If the word disappeared from the world’s vernacular, I wouldn’t miss it one bit.”

It’s apparently too much to ask for common decency to take over during the course of a heated violent game in which reprehensible physical behavior — going after knees, eye-gouging, spitting, helmet hits — can bring the worst out of somebody’s mouth.

Banks said if the NFL is going to implement change, then 15 yards is not enough.

“If you are going to take a position on it, eject the player,” he said Monday. “Don’t penalize the other players on the field. Just throw them out of the game. Don’t hold everyone responsible for what comes out of an idiot’s mouth. Just remove him from the game and be done with it.”

Well, not everyone agrees:

[MICHAEL] WILBON: People can be upset with me if they want. I, like a whole lot of people, use the N-word all day every day my whole life. Publicly I wouldn’t do that, but I have no issue with it. I have a problem with — and excuse me, here — white people framing the discussion for the use of the N-word. They better not sit there like plantation owners and tell black people how to use the language that was forced on us!

The NFL is a plantation, or close enough. The punishments are meted out as fines, not lashings, but the white commissioner, appointed by the white owners, very much does tell the black people in the league (perhaps as high as 70%) how to use language. And how to dress (on-field). And where and when to hit people it is their job to hit. And on and on.

And the same Michael Wilbon is still not happy:

Jason Whitlock makes the interesting point that the n-word hasn’t changed its power to hurt; it’s just been adopted by the very people it was meant to injure. Now they use it to injure themselves (just as they use guns to shoot themselves—and ob-gyns to abort themselves).

I thought I needed to know more about the subject, so I went into the bathroom, shoved a towel under the door, turned the water on high and whispered the word to myself. I didn’t like it. I had to wash my own mouth out with soap.

I’m with Carl Banks and other black athletes: if the word disappeared, I wouldn’t miss it. But there’s some talk about how it would be legislated on the field. What if one player says to a teammate, “Nice tackle, n-word!” Do they throw a flag? If not, what if the speaker were white? What if the speaker were black, but the tackler were white? What if they both were white?

If referees are supposed to judge intent, then aren’t we asking the black players who use the word to say it with a smile? And doesn’t that bring up its own racist scenarios? The plantation owners in the NFL already regulate dancing on the field (after touchdowns or sacks); now we’re going to measure the wattage of their smiles?

Good luck with that.

Comments

I’m Black, Don’t Abort Me

When I saw the title of Eugene Robinson’s column, “I’m Black, Don’t Shoot Me”, I immediately flashed to the title above, inspired by the story we posted yesterday that more black babies are aborted than born in New York City.

But I was too late:

According to the latest Justice Department figures, blacks make up 13 percent of the U.S. population but represent 50 percent of homicide victims. Moreover, black offenders kill 90 percent of black murder victims. And in the vast majority of interracial crimes, the victim is white and the perpetrator is black. In 2008 there were about 520,000 interracial violent crimes reported, and 82.5 percent were black-on-white, while just 17.5 percent were white-on-black. Messrs. Robinson and Coates would have us believe that black people in America should be more fearful of the Michael Dunns and George Zimmermans than of fellow blacks. Which is preposterous.

What these crimes statistics don’t show is how early the black-on-black violence begins. The New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene has just released a report showing that more black babies in the city are aborted than born. In 2012, there were 6,570 more abortions than live births of black children. The other groups studied—whites, Asians and Hispanics—all had more live births than abortions. Blacks are 25 percent of New York’s population, but the black babies aborted were more than 42% of all abortions.

Perhaps that might interest black liberals who want to downplay black-on-black violence and lecture us about the value that whites place on black lives.

I’m neither black nor a social scientist, but let me pretend. If I’m black, I’m supposed to feel the shame of slavery, a century and a half after it was abolished. It was the white man’s crime against my great-great-great-great grandfather and grandmother that defines who I am today. Any crimes I may commit or failings I may suffer from can be blamed on a poor self-image born of bondage and dehumanization.

Let’s say that’s true.

If I’m so sensitive to atrocities against people five, six generations removed from me, how can I be deaf, dumb, and blind to what my own mother is doing to me today? What kind of self-image does mass infanticide instill in a young man or woman? To be a black baby in New York City today is have overcome the longest of odds. You can’t see many of your kind around, and it’s only a matter of time before you find out why. Your unborn siblings were “mistakes”, “inconveniences”, as casually discarded as they were conceived. Congratulations, that must make you very special.

Maybe… I’m just thinking out loud here… but maybe the genocide committed by black men against black men (see above) might be an aftershock of the infanticide committed by black women (and their partners) against black babies. Where better to learn the low value placed on life than with the mother’s milk?

I may not make a convincing black person, but I can pass for a PhD in social science!

Comments

Watch Your Language

This is a shocking and wholly inappropriate way to speak of anyone:

[Ted] Nugent is known for making controversial comments about Democrats and President Barack Obama in particular.

Just last month, he called the president a “subhuman mongrel” in an interview with Guns.com.

No. No. No.

This is just as inappropriate:

OBAMA: Well, you know, when I was young and going through the identity crisis that any teenager goes through — I wrote a book about this.

[BARBARA] WALTERS: Yes. … We all read it.

OBAMA: You know, part of what I realized was that if the world saw me as African American, then that wasn’t something that I needed to run away from. That’s something that I could go ahead and embrace. And the interesting thing about the African-American experience in this country is that we are sort of a mongrel people. I mean, we’re all kind of mixed up.

WHOOPI GOLDBERG: Yeah.

Not “yeah”. No!

No. No. No.

Of course, Obama went on to say this:

Now, that’s actually true for white America as well, but we just know more about it.

So, white Americans are mongrels; black Americans are mongrels; we’re all mongrels. It sounds like a good thing.

Obama also once said this:

In his first press conference since winning the race to the White House, President-elect Barack Obama addressed a pressing question: who is going to be the first dog?

Obama told a group of reporters in Chicago on Friday that since his 10-year-old daughter, Malia, is allergic, the Obama family is looking for a hypoallergenic breed. But Obama also said the family wants to adopt one from a shelter.

“There are a number of breeds that are hypoallergenic, but on the other hand our preference is to get a shelter dog, but obviously, a lot of the shelter dogs are mutts like me,” Obama said.

We think all of this language is unfortunate. People are free to say it, of course, but we are free to reject it. And we reject “subhuman mongrel” most of all.

PS: And Nugent was on such a roll!

“I have obviously failed to galvanize and prod, if not shame enough Americans to be ever vigilant not to let a Chicago communist-raised, communist-educated, communist-nurtured subhuman mongrel like the acorn community organizer gangster Barack Hussein Obama to weasel his way into the top office of authority in the United States of America.”

No. No. No…. Yes?

Comments

« Previous entries Next Page » Next Page »