action (25)

thoughts on taking action

I have been trying to figure out the best way to really get heard and make a stand, is if we all band together and just boycott paying taxes all together. They can't throw everyone in jail if there is enough of us. I think we need our troops to band together also to back us up and just stop fighting a war for the government and fight for us the American People. If organized properly we could win this hands down. It will be hard at first and yes it might make things come to a stand still for a bit but as Americans we can help one another out while this all takes place. (just a thought not even an opinion at this time, but i would like to hear your thoughts and opinions, is it to far fetched or could it be possible)

added note: If they really want to over populate the U.S. with immigrants, then charge them double on taxes at least until they do become a citizen, least this way it will filter out a lot that aren't willing to pay and Americans that were born here or at least legal citizens can get a break.

-sorry if this doesn't make total sense right now I'm tired and not feeling well...I'll double check it in the morning, I just wanted to post this before i went to bed-

Read more…

Obama Home from G-20, with Tail Between Legs

At the July 2010, the G-20 summit members actually told BO that stimulus was not working. BO says, "Keep Spending", click to read 
Obama ignored the G-20 members. The narcissist that he is, has been brought down, BIG Time, on the world stage. 

Obama was at the G-20 summit in France last week. (G-20-Group of  Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors, from 20 major economies.)  He didn't talk about the Greece/Euro situation. Basically Greece borrowed Euros to finance Greeks retiring with benefits and pensions...at age 50. If Greece defaulted it could lead to an European depression. (In a global market we would go down too.) By borrowing more they are able to pay back only delays the inevitable.  Sound familiar?


Obama used the the G-20 "stage" to play to us, taking only 4 questions, all from American reporters. He said,  “My hope is that the folks back home, including those in the United States Senate and House of Representatives,   think twice before they vote no again on a proposal that economists say would actually make a dent in unemployment”  A Dent? Read on and you'll see why he didn't take any questions from foreign reporters.

 First the members implemented the "Canada Action Plan for Jobs Growth", co-sponsored by India. It is "a wide range blueprint for building foundation of renewed world wide growth". Wow! As leaders of the free world, weren't we suppose to do that?

Second, To add insult to injury, they selected Mark Carney as the Chairman of the Swiss "Financial Stability Board".  His actions as the Bank of Canada's governor are said to account for Canada having
avoided the worst of the recent global financial crisis. The Canadian economy outperformed those of its G7,  (The top 7 nations of the G-20.),   peers during the crisis, and Canada was the first G7 nation to have both its GDP and employment recover to pre-crisis levels.   Canada has recovered that means our unemployment should be at 7.8 or lower.  Blaming Bush just isn't working anymore.

Before he left  Pinocchio said, "We can't wait for Congress to do its job,” he said. “The middle-class families who’ve been struggling for years are tired of waiting.  So where Congress won’t act, I will." BO  thinks he's king and is forgetting the Constitution....again! Maybe he learned something at the G-20.

11/4/11-Unemployment rate fell to 9.0 percent in October. A Demoncratic Congress and Senate gave BO $787 billion of our money in Feb. 09.  (He said that unless he got it, unemployment COULD go as high as 8%. It hasn't been anywhere close to that since Bush was President.) Now, less then 3 years later, he wants another $447 billion.   
House Speaker John Boehner: "Today's report underscores the need for immediate action on the more than 15 bipartisan, common-sense House-passed jobs bills (called the forgotten 15) that are piled up at Senate Democrats' door. Senate Democrats are out of excuses and the president must call on them to act. The House has voted to remove government obstacles to desperately needed jobs -- and we've done it in a bipartisan way. At a time when these bipartisan jobs bills are stalled in the Senate, it is unacceptable for the White House to be anything less than 100 percent engaged in the legislative process."


I love this: The House of Representatives passed a bi-partisan resolution Nov.1 reaffirming “In God We Trust” as the official motto of the United States. The 396-9 vote came at the request of Rep. Randy Forbes (R-VA) , "Obama’s refusal to correct remarks he made that misstated the motto as “E pluribus unum” instead of “In God We Trust.”
"I trust God, but God wants to see us help ourselves and put people back to work." BO-11/03/11(What an ass!)

Thank you for being CarolynsVoice, because I don't have one. 

Read more…

 

            “Mr. Obama has shown an undeniable pattern of associating preferentially with left-wing radicals and outright anti-American sorts  (Van Jones has called for the Revolution NOW and he’s just one of the President’s friends making similar pleas: Trumka for example has called for union violence) and he needs to be judged on that every bit as much as he’s judged on his incompetence.

 

 

Obama Preacher Refers to “3/5 of a Human

Being” and Slavery from 148 Years Ago

in Easter Sunday Sermon

 

 

             Feeling the need to attend an Easter Sunday service to remove the heat incurred after the President pointedly refused to utter the word “Easter” altogether, Barack Obama found himself back in Jeremiah Wright’s church – well, sort of. If your thesis about Barack Obama is that he is a race-baiting Black nationalist (which is not the thesis or hypothesis of Rajjpuut) this Easter Sunday would have cemented that notion as a highly probable explanation for all things Obama. This time the race-baiting Black victimization sermon came not from Reverend Jeremiah Wright but from Dr. Wallace Charles Smith, a Baptist minister in Washington, D.C. like Rev. Wright a master at driving iron wedges between the races.

             President Obama choice of spending Easter Sunday at the Shiloh Baptist Church, led by its controversial pastor Reverend Wallace Charles Smith . . . at the minimum showed that the poor judgment which got him in Dutch with the American people (incensed by his former pastor, Jeremy Wright saying “Not God bless America but God Damn America”) is still a part of the Obama psyche. Just as Wright when he blamed America for the 9/11 attacks saying “America’s chickens have come home to roost” based his sermons in the era of slavery, Wallace Charles Smith also has a well-recorded history of constantly reminding people of color that they were victims way back when and therefore they MUST now feel victimized and outside of contemporary American culture. Before looking at that history of Reverend Smith, however, which presumably Obama had NOT shared via videotape prior to attending the church, let’s see what Wallace’s Easter sermon was for the Obama family and the rest of his flock on April, 24, 2011.

            Reverend Wallace Smith talked about his own grandson and then somehow segued into a litany of references to “3/5 of a human being” referring to the census status of the slave on December 31, 1862 on the eve of President Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation . . . that is, he was bemoaning a great wrong that had begun to be corrected over 168 years ago. Tie that into the Easter spirit of uplift and rebirth and renewal if you can!

So we have Washington, D.C. with perhaps 800 Black congregations led by Black pastors all clamoring for the President of the United States to visit them and Mr. Obama winds up front and center at this guy’s church. But perhaps the pastor was just having a bad Sunday? Unfortunately, Reverend Wallace Smith has nothing but bad Sundays it seems. He spends a lot of time talking about White Robes and Jim Crow and a truly surprising lot of the time calling Talk Radio and FoxNews racists almost as if he had a vested interest in his flock only listening to certain media modalities. Mr. Obama, of course, just as he did for twenty years in the church of Reverend Jeremiah Wright was legitimizing this radical pastor . . . ah, but you say, “Reverend Smith doesn’t sound that radical . . .”

             Reverend Smith, unlike Reverend Wright, is not a bombastic fire-eater. He speaks in far more muted tones and in a less pointedly anti-White fashion . . . but that’s merely a difference in style NOT in content. The predominant message at Shiloh Baptist is RACE OPPRESSION. Black victimhood is Smith’s credo and Black grievance perpetuation is his undeniable purpose. A thousand years from now and a couple dozen generations of Reverend Smiths we can expect the man or woman in the pulpit to still be Black-grievance mongering because Black victimhood, damnit should never be allowed to end. Whitey MUST pay!

             Reverend Smith is appalled at Blacks who make it on their own without once resorting to Affirmative Action. Segregation, he insists, has never gone away just become a more subtle societal pressure felt most strongly from talk radio and FoxNews and other monsters who insist that Affirmative Action actually hurts Black and fosters Black dependency upon the Federal Government for non-ending handouts. He blames “the plight of the Black citizen” upon continuing White oppression for hundreds of years  -- an oppression now less easily pinpointed (“Jim Crow has set aside his white sheet and now wears blue pinstripes and carries a briefcase . . . Jim Crow**, Esquire.”).  Smith compared Rush Limbaugh to the Ku Klux Klan and the White Citizens’ Council. In other words, conservatives -  a.k.a. Mr. Obama’s critics – can’t be opposed to his actions because of policy differences but are dyed-in-the-wool racists seeking to perpetuate an Amercan apartheid. For Mr. Smith and many others on the left, disagreeing with progressivism is not only wrong, but evil-deep-seated intolerance and bigotry. Let us remind you, of Rajjpuut’s outlook on this matter in no uncertain terms:

            a)    Barack Obama was elected President of the United States receiving more White votes and a higher percentage of White votes in 2008 than Kerry in 2004 or Gore in 2000 received . . . roughly 48% of the White votes, high for a Democrat.

            b)    John McCain received roughly 4.5% of the Black vote less than 1/10 of that 48%. Since Racism obviously does exist, the questions here are: “Which group is the most racist?”  “Does harping on an unchangeable past and emphasizing unchangeable ills  from almost fourteen decades ago as carried out by Black Separationists like Wright, Farrakhan and Smith help or hurt the Black community in its efforts to gain the American Dream?”

            c)    It is entirely likely that folks like Barack Obama, Reverend Wright, the Democratic Party as a whole, and you, Reverend Smith, have a vested interest in keeping the Black citizen in victim-mode and helplessly dependent upon the government . . . .

            d)   It is entirely probable that the vilification that self-made heroic Blacks like Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas and Florida freshman Representative Allen West constantly receive from people like Louis Farrakhan, Reverend Wright, the Democratic Party as a whole, and from you, Reverend Smith, has done more to hurt today’s Black Community than all the vile acts of the Ku Klux Klan put together.

            e)    President Obama’s judgment is clearly the topic of discussion here: his long relationship with Wright; and then showing up in a church dominated by another like-spirited and like-minded radical hate-mongered (Smith) tends to push three possible conclusions upon us: 

                     1)              This is where President Obama is comfortable because this is what President Obama believes in his heart of hearts . . . or

                     2)             President Obama makes very poor decisions about who he associates with and who he puts into positions of responsibility around him (Van Jones, Eric Holder, Anita Dunn,  John Holdren, Bill Ayers, and even Michelle Obama (“This is the first time I’ve been proud of America”) are all radicals seemingly twenty times more likely to criticize this country than to stand up for her or to seek to advance her traditional goodness.

                     3)             Mr. Obama is comfortable only among the people mentioned because he does not believe that America is good. Van Jones recently joined an organization seeking legal rights on a par with humans for Mother Nature and everything within her.

                     4)             Guilt by REPEATED association is NOT the same as “guilt by association.” As much as Obama defenders like Alan Colmes like to point at every similar criticism of the Anointed One Barack as unfair and resorting to “guilt by association,” the fact is that singular acts are one thing and constant, continual and brazenly repeated acts are quite another. Mr. Obama has shown an undeniable pattern of associating preferentially with left-wing radicals and outright anti-American sorts (Van Jones has called for the Revolution NOW and he’s just one of the President’s friends making similar pleas: Trumka for example has called for union violence) and he needs to be judged on that every bit as much as he’s judged on his incompetence.

 

       In a related story, Obama’s former Green Jobs Czar Van Jones who resigned when his radical past, his vile insults against Republicans and his 9/11 Truther membership came to light is now pushing for a “new global architecture of environmental law” that would give Mother Nature the same legal rights in our courts as human beings.

      Rajjpuut would certainly like to be able to sue Mother Nature for the loss of my mother to mosquito-borne encephalitis almost forty years ago; and then there’s all those times I got sunburned and the cat’s scratching up our carpet  . . . . Oh, sorry, Van Jones isn’t joking. 

      Self-admitted communist, Van Jones is now a spokesman and one of the newer board members of the “Pachamama Alliance” in Nancy Pelosi’s Land (San Francisco) of Nuts . . . seeking to extend human rights (complete with enforceable laws) to nature itself on the international scene, ah me . . . these are the kinds of radicals the President has surrounded himself with (all the while declaiming the “extremism” of the TEA Party, FoxNews, and talk radio?) and it definitely appears that these radicals are NOT loyal Americans . . . by extension, the President’s own patriotism comes under question. Question their loyalties  . . . and you again, by extension, question the President’s loyalties, his greater agenda . . . .

      Just by coincidence, another “spokesman” lost his cushy job the other day . . . The AFLAC Duck got fired, long live the new AFLAC Duck. “Why?” one might wonder did the AFLAC Duck get fired and what has that got to do with the price of Chinese Tea or with Obama and Reverend Smith?  Or with “loyalty” for that matter?

      In essence, the AFLAC Duck, or more accurately the long-time voice of the AFLAC Duck is gone because he knew nothing of common sense and nothing of loyalty. AFLAC’s reinsurance business is well-known in this country but their biggest customer by far is Japan.  Actor Gilbert Gottfried lost his position for making controversial remarks highly critical of Japan. Apparently Mr. Gottfried didn’t realize that he was working for two separate entities: AFLAC itself and AFLAC’s customers. Mr. Obama would do well to learn a lesson from the AFLAC Duck, for he too is working for two separate entities: the American people and more especially the American Taxpayer who pays his check (reduced now to only 53% of Americans). It’s almost as if you’re President of a left-wing Black nation and uninterested in the other 84% of America that is neither Black nor left-wing progressive. You work for us, Mr. Obama, all of us; but it sure looks like you’re enthusiastically at work for those who hate this country and the rest of be damned. 

 

Ya’all live long, strong and ornery,

Rajjpuut

 

** Allow us to nitpick.   Rev. Smith's characterization of Jim Crow above is very, very strange. It’s as if he's got present-day Whites becoming Jim Crow and White-favoring actions and White-favoring laws becoming Jim Crow laws. In point of fact, “Jim Crow” and “Jim Crow laws” has always referred to Blacks themselves and to the segregationist laws originally designed to keep Blacks “in their place” and subservient to the White Supremacist Segregationists.  In Rajjpuut’s not so-humble opinion, Affirmative Action so treasured by the Black Community and the preachings of you, Smith, as well as Wright and Farrakhan are the real Jim Crow laws in this day and age.  We must protest the deliberate pretense by the mainstream media that this Sunday's sermon never happened just as the "God damn America" speech by Reverend Wright never happened . . . Mr. Obama has repeatedly put his character (or lack thereof) on the line for all to see, and the left-leaning media, continues protecting his image as always. 

 

Read more…

Obama Pigford II Case Fails the Smell Test

Pigford I Case Probably Valid;

Obama’s Pigford II Probably Fraudulent
Rajjpuut is predicting that thanks to the contributions of ACORN a whole lot of voting precincts in America this November will wind up with more votes cast than legally registered voters . . . and therein hangs a whole new tale about numbers just not adding up . . . .
The more one wades through the Obama Pigford v. Glickman II class action lawsuit the more one appears to be “stepping in something disgusting.” So as to avoid mincing of words, it seems highly probable that pre-presidential candidate Senator Barack Obama aligned himself against the taxpayers in a fraudulent class action suit aimed at benefitting NOMINAL BLACK FARMERS (remember that word “nominal”) who were supposedly discriminated against by the US Department of Agriculture. At stake, reopening a suit already ended which we’ll call “Pigford I” which addressed purported USDA discrimination from the beginning of 1983 to the end of 1997 a full fifteen year period . . . it seems the claimants were judged to have been right and their suit was settled. But wait, but wait . . . enter the magician . . . . Barack, the ACORN lawyer, Obama. Suddenly out of nowhere beginning as a senator in late 2006, Obama aligned himself with a purportedly whole new set of Pigford claimants (hence "Pigford II") in a discrimination case with a $1.25 Billion payout to redress the wrongs supposedly incurred by 88,000 Black Farmers . . . only one problem, Mr. Obama.

The most Black farmers documented at any one time in this country over the last 35 years is a bit over 39,000 (more on that later). Curious that so many of the Black farm claimants in your Pigford II case have lived their whole life in cities? Curiouser and curiouser yet, that so many of them are leading – “DOUBLE-LIVES or even 2.6 lives apiece??? What, Mr. President, is meant?
Let Ol' Rajjpuut explain.

It seems you’re saying Mr. President, that after all 13,348 of the original Pigford I class action (59% of the 22,505 claimants) payouts were made, that every single Black farmer in the United States still had legitimate beefs with the USDA for discrimination? But wait a minute, let’s be accurate here, don’t you remember, Barack, that the judge adjusted that first case so that a total of 16,000 Black farmers were paid $1 billion? So in effect, since 16,000 already were paid + 88,000 who hope to be paid in your new suit = 104,000 discriminated-against Black farmers. You’re claiming that the average Black farmer in the United states had 2.6 legitimate beefs against the USDA for loans not granted? Might we be so bold to suggest that this is just you and your ACORN background working the Wealth Redistribution angle on all those guilty White bastar-s for slavery which ended in 1865? And by the way, why and how did your friend Shirley Sherrod and her husband get a $13 million Pigford payday, the single largest payout of all? But, tut-tut, let's not speculate, let's just examine the numbers yet more carefully . . . .

Rajjpuut believes the original case was valid although it seems highly likely that not all the successful claimants were valid. But let's say 100% of them were. Good! Very good! However, Rajjpuut strongly suggests that Mr. Obama of 1996, the ACORN attorney (shaking-down and threatening lenders with all sorts of dire consequences including class action suits if they didn’t come up with specific loans for $300,000 homes to people without ID who claimed food stamps as their only source of income or even for illegal immigrants in accord with stage IV – before the Stage V Clinton Steroid version of mortgage-guarantee requirements passed in 1998) was still dormant in the 2006 flesh of Barack and emerged unbidden and then Mr. Obama got carried away and things spun out of control . . . so the only question now is, who Mr. Obama, . . . who are they that are not actually Black farmers that benefit from this new government largesse? The bigger question is this, what subset of Black farmers ever applied for loans in the period say 1975 (give them a few extra years) through 2000 . . . chances are that number might prove to be at most 40% of the whole group which gives us roughly 16,000 who might have been discriminated against if 100% of the loan applicants were actually indeed discriminated against . . . but chances are only about 12,000 of those (75%) might have legitimate claims . . . about 40% of white farmers who apply do get their loans so that seems fair. So if 12,000 were actually discriminated against, than each of them would have to own 8.5 legitimate complaints against the USDA to come up with the 104,000 . . . my, my the math does get out of hand.
Let’s look at another issue, fraudulent census reporting? Could it be that a lot of Black citizens might have developed a sudden need to call themselves Black farmers for the 2000 census?? Well, it is curious, Rajjpuut has investigated and discovered that the actual USDA census for 1987 the midpoint of the claim period we're suggesting (1975- 2000) actually shows there were fewer than 23,000 total Black farmers in the United States. What might explain the sudden jump to nearly double the 23,000 found in 1987 at later dates? Where did all these "nominal" Black farmers come from? And then there is this highly unusual jump to well beyond 80,000 Black farmers involved in this Pigford II law suit, dare one venture that . . . perhaps the very existence of the Pigford case inspired the dramatic increase in nominal Black farmers? When nothing adds up, Mr. Obama, things do actually add up to FRAUD. One wonders about how much ACORN assistance was required to trump up this little swindle?

Ya’all live long, strong and ornery,

Rajjpuut

Read more…

Obama and NAACP Deliberately

Counter-Productive to Race Harmony?

Let’s get one thing straight, when it comes to Andrew Breitbart’s recently released video: Shirley Sherrod was never the story although a lot of people assumed she was. The real story was, and still is the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP). Three things are very clear here . . . recently . . . .

A) The NAACP had just held a meeting in which a key speaker was allowed to praise a preacher and his thug friends who had just been arrested for beating up a Black entrepreneur selling “The audacity of DOPE” buttons. The man had made a fortune selling Obama buttons in 2008, but misjudged his audience when he began selling buttons showing Obama smoking a joint (marijuana cigarette, if you’ve been off the planet for half a century). The speaker was cheered loudly as he repeatedly called the victim “an Uncle Tom” and praised his assailants.

B) Without one iota of proof, the NAACP has once again

joined the Democrats and Obama for the umpteenth time in calling the TEA Party a “racist” group. The NAACP has made its career over the last half century calling Whites “racists devils” and this latest charge happened despite the fact that in the face of claims that the “N-word” was used by TEA Partiers “up to twenty-three times” against Black congressmen on the day that the Obamacare bill passed, it never happened. Breitbart has offered $100,000 to anyone who can show up with indisputable video proof that the N-word was used at all, even once that day. So far despite all the cameras and video devices on site, no one has come forward to prove the event happened. Of course, supposedly one Black congressman said he was “spat upon” but no video of that footage has occurred either, making critical minds think that spitting incident never happened either. Breitbart’s money is still in his bank account.

C) Now to the video itself, Sherrod herself was apparently a terrible victim in her youth when her father was, she said, killed by a White southern man and justice was never done. That was left out. Then later (in the 43-minute speech which the NAACP had recorded in its entirety) she talks about her epiphany that it “wasn’t about black and white at all” or at least not mainly about black and white but rather about helping the poor regardless of race. In other words her epiphany was that she learned how to do her job. Part of that was left out. What was actually left in the video segment? What was left in was while she was talking, the NAACP membership (which did NOT know where the speech and her story were going) was tittering and laughing and giving virtual “Hallelujah, Girl!” treatment to the speech as she was talking about a very uneasy interracial contact in her job with a White man who “thought he was superior to me.” That in a nutshell was the story, the NAACP reaction to the apparently racist story (early in her talk) was uniquely racist for an organization that claims to be seeking equal footing for all races. Notice the parallels between the NAACP reaction in paragraph A above and this paragraph. In the rest of the 43-minute speech, not revealed by Breitbart, were ten minutes of rants against Bush, Republicans and TEA Party members for racism without giving any evidence to back up her charges revealed Ms. Sherrod and her NAACP audience to be absolute reverse-racists.

The most clear and obvious statistics about racism in this country are that 1) Democrat Barack Obama received more White votes and a larger percentage of White votes in 2008 than John Kerry did in 2004 or Al Gore did in 2000, roughly 48%, meanwhile 2) John Mc Cain, the Republican nominee, received only around 4.4 % of Black votes. Those single facts more than any other propelled Barack Obama into office with a 7% edge in the popular vote. In other words, 3) Whites in 2008 were roughly eleven times more likely to cross racial lines in casting their votes then Blacks were.

Rajjpuut suggests that presumably 90-95% of the Whites who voted against Obama and 100% of the Blacks who voted for Mc Cain in 2008 did so for objective dislike of socialism, big spending and high taxes rather than for racial reasons. Today, 55% of Americans now label Obama a “socialist,” yet despite his miserable performance as president, 84% of Blacks still support Barack Obama. Without that support from Blacks, Obama’s overall positive job performance would stand around 36%. Who then are the racists?

To clear the air, here are some side-facts you might be interested in: Rajjpuut, a Libertarian, did NOT vote for Barack Obama because after reading “Dreams from My Father,” and listening to his speeches and going deep into research into his past voting; into the character of his mother Stanley Ann Dunham; grandfather Stanley Armour Dunham; and Barak (no ‘c’) Hussein Obama, Sr. his Kenyan birth-father . . . after that research, Rajjpuut rightly decided that Obama was at least a highly-exuberant socialist but far more likely an abject communist.

The word “prejudice” refers to pre-judging a situation, person, etc. without having all the facts (without doing your homework or research). When that prejudice is along the lines of race or color then the word “racist” is applicable. When the so-called “prevailing direction” of race hatred is breached then “reverse-racism” occurs.

The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) has today become what it says it fears: a group of racists, or more properly a group of reverse-racists. While some liberated Blacks talk about the NAACP as “becoming increasingly irrelevant,” the truth is that the NAACP has for several years now has become a monstrous impediment on the road to better race relations. The biggest impediment on that road, however, is Barack Obama. Our “post-racial” president is either personally a racist or impersonally (for political advantage) the most highly visible race-baiter in America’s history . . . or most likely both.

Emphasizing specifics, the NAACP is a racist organization because unlike the great Martin Luther King, Jr., the NAACP judges Whites on their skin color not by the content of their character; and Barack Obama who seems to be doing the same thing is most likely judging voters on their stance for him or against him and using that prejudice as motivation for calling them “racists” to weaken, he hopes, the strength of their political opposition to him and the will of others to unite against him.

While Rajjpuut throws brickbats around, Shirley Sherrod is also a huge impediment to better race relations . . . a politically-incorrect fact that no one seems to be mentioning since the public-hijinks the other day by Shirley’s former employer the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Ms. Sherrod, is also, outside of her being a reverse-racist (she has labeled all Republicans and the TEA Party as racists much like Obama has, something called a ‘sewer’ or perhaps ‘suer,’ someone who likes to sue in the hopes of achieving monetary gain . . . she will be most likely suing the USDA for unlawful termination (her second big suit) and has called Breitbart “someone I’d like to get even with.” She should, if justice prevails, lose the suits, because her former employer has apologized publicly and publicly offered her a better job than she had earlier, but this is somewhat beside the point.

Ms. Sherrod, the NAACP and President Obama can all be lumped into the same boat, they are prejudiced against Whites who are not prejudiced for forced Black equality. Read that again, if necessary, for it is a key truth, no one except a few Black TEA Party members seems to be talking about. Democrats as a whole (and the NAACP as a subset of perhaps 95% of Democrats) seem to come at the world of race seeing the Black as a victim and someone the government needs to throw money at . . . . hence programs such as “Affirmative Action” which are merely institutionalized reverse-discrimination. As Martin Luther King, Jr. emphasized, equality of opportunity is the only opportunity that matters. Equality of everything (socialism, Marxism) such as Mr. Obama wants to force down our throats might actually work, to put all Blacks and all Whites and all others into uniform poverty at a level much, much lower than the average American Black now faces. Mr. Obama knows this for a fact and admitted as much several times.

During one of the candidate debates, the moderator gave an example of an economic fact and then asked Obama. “Since it’s been proved that anytime personal and business taxes on the highest earners goes above 28%, the nation is then threatened with recession, should we raise these taxes above 28%?”

Without hesitating, Mr. Obama said, “I’m interested in ‘fairness.’” There’s your blessed socialistic equality for you: everybody in the same leaky boat . . . this is why Mr. Obama has been working at cross-purposes to the economic best-interests of the American people . . . so that he can put everybody in the same leaky boat when we all know that the ‘rising tide lifts all boats’ and that’s where to put one’s economic emphasis: on making the country more prosperous as a whole. America’s poorest are wealthier than roughly 86% of the world’s people. Americans, Black or White, living below the poverty line are wealthier than 93% of the world’s people . . . the key, then is to lift the poverty line by say 60% rather than dropping more Americans into much-ballyhooed equality below that old poverty line. Racism used as a political tool by the NAACP and Mr. Obama for political ends is counter-productive of all worthy goals along those lines and a divisive factor preventing Americans from working together.

Martin Luther King, Jr. led the breakthrough for Blacks and all minorities back in the early 60’s, risking his very life and the lives of his followers to do so. It’s time for Blacks to stop playing the racism cards and the victim cards. It’s time for Whites to stop playing the guilt card against other Whites. It’s time for folks to follow that old Chinese encouragement and gung ho . . . “work together” for the betterment of themselves and their families and their country. Folks like Clarence Thomas and the TEA Party's Blacks and Hispanics are doing far more for race relations than virtually anyone since Martin Luther King, Jr.

Ya’ll live long, strong and ornery,

Rajjpuut

Read more…