Wednesday, April 14, 2010

That Whitey Obama!


Well...according to his heredity, he has more white ancestry in him than black! Am I in trouble now? Did that title anger anyone? Did that title offend anyone? Am I a racist for labeling Obama a "whitey"? Why did I write this? Why the sudden outburst?

As the cartoon character named Charlie Brown (Note: not being racist...that was his last name!) regularly stated when he was completely exasperated:

AAARRGGGGHHHHHH!!!!!!!

My mind just cannot take the race baiting crap being bantered about in the media anymore!!! I've had it!!

I don't hate Obama.

I hate his POLICIES!

Hating a person's terrible policies have nothing to do with the race of the man!

But progressive lefties have to fall back on something to hurt the TEA Party movement because they cannot win the arguments against their dangerous policial agenda that MOST AMERICANS DO NOT WANT!!

Thus, the false, made-up and stupid calls of "racism" apparently work better for the lousy Congresspeople and their lapdog media creeps (paging Keith Olberdummy???) than for them to actually have to face the TRUTH OF THE MATTER! These people will fall back on their own swords of idiotic, dangerous, expensive, life-denying, evil, hate-mongering policies that goes on in their lunatic anti-Christian, anti-Capitalist, anti-Republic, anti-U. S. Constititution, anti-business, and anti-conservative minds!! Liberalism is a mental disorder and progressivism is head-exploding worse!

The destructive goals of these people will irreparably harm America if we don't counter their sick and twisted efforts towards Marxism!!! Americans are tired of the lies, cheating, scandals, corruption, bribing, illegal activity and most of all - seeing these criminals getting away with it!!

Don't fall for their propaganda.

Common sense will win the day in the end.

These progressive Communists will undo themselves!! They have been found out!

And the first wave of undoing will happen in November, 2010 when the worst Congress in American history is booted out on their arses!!!

Ahhh... I feel better now. Just had to get out some frustration this morning. Will now return to your regularly scheduled Talk Wisdom blog posts.

*******

Also see:

The Steady Drip: Media Maligns TEA Party Movement - Study by Media Research Center

Newsmax: Study: Networks Snub, Malign Tea Party Movement

I Took The Red Pill (and escaped the Matrix): Blacks At TEA Parties

Lloyd Marcus: Black Dem Race Exploiters Trash Tea Party

Caos Blog: beware the marxist infiltraters at the tea party protests

20 comments:

4simpsons said...

I don't like Obama's ideas whether they come from his black or white side.

Objecting to foolish Liberal policies isn't racist.

Playing the race card to distract from unethical behavior and foolish policies is racist.

Christinewjc said...

Ha ha ha Neil!! I love it!

"...whether it came from his black or white side." Yeah...really!

You are 100% correct in all that you wrote!

GMpilot said...

Your God would strike you dead for lying like that, Christine...if there was one.

Care to count the number of times on this blog in '08 and '09 where you called him "Barack HUSSEIN Obama", as if he was somehow related to that OTHER Hussein? (If he'd been related to Jordan's King Hussein, I suspect you'd have been less nasty.)

He sounds too 'foreign' to be one of us, right? Hasn't got a good American name like O'Grady, or Horowitz, or Figueroa, or Nimitz. So he obviously can't be trusted to guide the country as well as some others have.
But I agree you're not racist. You are a frustrated, screeching, middle-aged harpy who happens to be part of the most privileged group in the history of civilization, who feels her personal well-being is in danger. You are a name-calling, negative-using howler whose very tone spits in the face of the Christian principles you claim to expound. You claim to be acting in the name of patriotism when your every word is seditious, from denying that the current president is illegitimate to applauding psychos who murder doctors in church...
But you're not RACIST, heck no.
Just stupid.

Go brew some tea.

Christinewjc said...

GMPilot,

I released your comment just so that readers can see who the really nasty person is.

Here is how Obama's heritage breaks down:

"Barack Hussein Obama is not half black. If elected, he would be the first Arab-American President, not the first black President. Barack Hussein Obama is 50% Caucasian from his mother's side and 43.75% Arabic and 6.25% African Negro from his father's side. While Barack Hussein Obama's father was from Kenya, his father's family was mainly Arabs.. Barack Hussein Obama's father was only 12.5% African Negro and 87.5% Arab (his father's birth certificate even states he's Arab, not African Negro)."

Hey! Since you don't believe in a god, then why shouldn't I say anything that I want? Free speech and all that.

It appears to me that you are highly frustrated with how badly Obama is doing, so you have chosen to verbally attack the messenger, rather than genuinely attempting to attack the message. Typical.

Did you hear the latest unemployment figures this morning? An additional 74 thousand to the usual 400,000 or so new applications for unemployment were added. Many in that statistic include young, college aged and especially minorities. So...how's that black Resident's hopey changey thing working out for them?

But of course you missed the point of my post. What else is new?

If you had been more cordial, we might have had a good discussion.

On Glenn Beck's radio show, a conservative black man called in and stated that when white people support the founding fathers (ff), he sees how they (ff) excluded blacks and wrote into the Constitution that blacks are only 3/5ths (I think?) of a person. Glenn asked the man if he was a serious caller or just a liberal trying to start a fight. The caller claimed to be who he first said he is.

Glenn went on to educate us all about how many of the founders wanted to end slavery, and how one of the former presidents became a congressman after his presidency (can't recall name at moment - the guy after Harding died?) and mentored a young Abraham Lincoln. Glenn shared how he is putting together a show that will reveal many blacks who had contributed to the building of this country - despite the objections (mostly of the southerners and democrats of those days) and how appalling it is that the liberals purposely left out such information from education.

It was really fascinating to learn just that little tidbit of information. Can't wait to see the entire show on the subject!

In another eye opener (for me) last night, a black man by the name of Herman? Cain - who is a talk show host in Atlanta (I think) was on Hannity's American panel last night. He made many positive statements about the TEA Party people and how Obama is purposely destroying this country with his Marxist policies. When Sean asked him, "will it bother you if you are called racist for going against Obama?" He replied, "No. They - the accusers - are racist for even saying that."

The end.

Kevin said...

Hi Christine,
I asked you this before: is Arab a race like black and white? You state above (or someone you quoted): " 43.75% Arabic and 6.25% African Negro from his father's side." How are these statistics created? Is Arabic given as a place or is it a religion?

So Glenn Beck educated his listeners on how the founding fathers wanted to end slavery? Hmmm. Yes, black people were considered to be 3/5 of a person in terms of counting for the census. That man who called was actually telling the truth. Blacks were excluded. Period.
Washingon had slaves. He wouldn't free his slaves even at his death--they could only be freed when his wife Martha died and after she benefitted from them. Jefferson had slaves (the same man who wrote about equality--he was probably being served his dinner and tea by his slave mistress as he wrote these words). Sure, blacks contributed to the building of this country--but as slaves. I don't know where Glenn Beck was going with what he was saying. Cotton, tobacco, sugar--all on the backs of slaves. No doubt about it.
"that the liberals purposely left out such information from education." What proof of that do you have? What part do 'liberals' leave out that conservatives teach? I would really love to hear this since I teach a course on Race, Ethnicity and Immigration in the U.S...

And again I ask--what is Marxist about Obama and his policies? I would love to see some parallels to other Marxist regimes and what our own President is doing. Did you see that article at the CNN website that was from the President of the Socialist USA party? He said that Obama is no such thing. Interesting...

sh007r said...

I am absolutely amazed that Pilate still comes here and writes what he thinks. Its like opening a door to the evils in a prison yard of ignorance.
Why , Pontius GM Pilate, do you persist? Or should it be GM Torquemada?
You bring nothing to the table here, nor much of anywhere. Are you over 18 years old? Do you have a job?
Can't you find some like-minded people to talk to? (that would save so many others from your hateful empty rhetoric)
Maybe you just enjoy trying to pick on others. Is the Alinsky model working for you? NO?
Huh...maybe because you're supposed to attack people in power, like public officials.
Maybe everyone 'not you' IS a person of power.
Idiot.

sh007r said...

Hi Christine.
Herman Cain is ABSOLUTELY wonderful.
Listen to that man any time you can. He used to own Godfathers Pizza and is just an amazing person and American.
Cain and Thomas Sowell are two of my daily reads/ 'listens', when I can find them.

GMpilot said...

sh007r: ”I am absolutely amazed that Pilate still comes here and writes what he thinks. Its like opening a door to the evils in a prison yard of ignorance.”

What a coincidence! That's exactly what I thought when I first came to this site!

”Why , Pontius GM Pilate, do you persist? Or should it be GM Torquemada?”

When I think about the contributions that Christian fellow Torquemada made to society, I hang my head in shame; I can never mach his zealotry or blood lust. As for Pilate, the story says he didn't want to convict Jesus—but if he hadn't, there'd be no Savior to worship, would there? You should be thanking him!

”You bring nothing to the table here, nor much of anywhere. Are you over 18 years old? Do you have a job?”

There's nothing at this table to begin with, except gall...and I can bring plenty of that. As for the other questions, yes and yes. Now, what does that have to do with anything here?

”Can't you find some like-minded people to talk to? (that would save so many others from your hateful empty rhetoric)”

Someone challenged me to come here, someone who thought I'd turn tail and run. As for the 'hateful empty rhetoric', I have found like-minded people...right here!

”Maybe you just enjoy trying to pick on others. Is the Alinsky model working for you? NO?
Huh...maybe because you're supposed to attack people in power, like public officials.”


No, I let professional cowards do that, like that joker who flew his plane into the IRS center in Austin.
Who the heck is Alinsky, and why do you think I'm emulating him?

”Maybe everyone 'not you' IS a person of power.
Idiot.”


Maybe I am, ALSO...you responded, didn't you, Agent sh**7r?

GMpilot said...

To quote someone I know, ”Hey, I'm nice...most of the time.”

Kevin's got a point: IS “Arab” an actual race? Because if it isn't, your whole WingNutDaily-inspired anthropological argument is demolished. (Hint: it isn't.)

”Hey! Since you don't believe in a god, then why shouldn't I say anything that I want? Free speech and all that.”
Don't preach what you don't practice, hostess; you've cut me off on two occasions here, and I didn't even use nasty words that slander your savior or have sexual referents. Free speech and all that, but obviously not here on talkwisdom.blogspot.com!

”Did you hear the latest unemployment figures this morning? An additional 74 thousand to the usual 400,000 or so new applications for unemployment were added. Many in that statistic include young, college aged and especially minorities. So...how's that black Resident's hopey changey thing working out for them?”
Yeah, I saw them, and I'm not happy. The young, college-aged and minorities always take it on the chin in such statistics, but that makes it no better. As for the 'hopey changey thing' working out...well, we'll just have to see, won't we? (Gack! I should've known you would imitate Grandma Sarah...) But that's still not the same as claiming that the president is illegitimately in office, which you frequently do. You say, Where's the birth certificate? I reply, Where's the smoking gun?

”If you had been more cordial, we might have had a good discussion.”
I'm being cordial now, but I also have much experience discussing things with you. How many threads lie dead because you simply abandoned them?

So Beck mentions the Dred Scott decision, which established a Negro to be 3/5 of a person. Does Beck mention that his beloved LDS church didn't decide that blacks were human beings until God revealed it to them? Or that it was okay for them to be LDS priests? (He told them that in June of 1978; by coincidence, the government was looking at them and wondering if this was discrimination or not.)

Blacks weren't allowed to be “full people” in the South for political reasons. They were over one-third of the population (3.8 million of 11 million), and in many areas greatly outnumbered the whites; if they were allowed to vote, well, the world would be turned upside down! There was labor to consider—slaves were cheaper than paying free men; and of course the Good Book supported the institution.
But Beck explained all that...right?

Let's see how he does when he has a whole HOUR to distort US history.

Gary Baker said...

Kevin,

You keep repeating questions like that even though I know I've answered them at least once and probably more than that. How about demonstrating that my answers are incorrect instead of demanding repeats? I know that libs are very slow to uptake info that contradicts their worldview, but try hard.

You also have mentioned several times that you teach a course on race and ethnicity. That's nice, but you seem to be implying that makes you someone informed on the subject. While I agree that would be ideal, it hardly seems a requirement. You wrote to me once that you had seen no evidence that African Americans were admitted with lower SAT scores than whites or Asians and mentioned your teacher creds then, too. And then I referenced an article that showed that black students at some university get in with average scores less of 300 less than whites. When you keep ignoring the facts, it gives us little incentive to take you seriously.

GM,

You also persist in the fiction that the Good Book supported slavery. The Good Book acknowledged slavery. It never supported slavery, though it was used for that purpose. If it really supported it, slavery would still be common, as it is in one form in another in the parts of the world that reject the Good Book. I'm pretty sure that it was actually the little Red Book that was all about slavery. It was Marx's position that the only real value a man (or woman had) was the labor you could get out of them, which is wholly consistent with those who believe there is nothing divine in the nature of man because that could only be given by God.

GMpilot said...

I suppose the bible could easily have said somewhere “thou shalt not enslave thy fellow man”, but it does not. It does give advice on where to get slaves, and how to treat them, and says that one's fellow believers (in this case, the Hebrews) were not to be treated the same way other slaves were.

Paul Copan is on record as saying the same thing you do—that slavery in the bible was not the same as slavery was in the pre-Civil War South, and that the bible should never have been used for that purpose. But it was, and most of the arguments in slavery's favor was from Southern clergymen.

Not to mention that the Southern Baptist Convention admitted, in 1999, their dirty little secret; that their sect was formed exclusively to find and use biblical-based arguments to support slavery. Oh, and that the Roman Catholics didn't find slavery immoral until...1888, was it?

No, Mr. Baker, it won't wash, and your supposition about the Little Red Book is wrong. I'm pretty sure Marx didn't write anything in favor of selling one's daughter.

Kevin said...

Hi Gary, You state: "That's nice, but you seem to be implying that makes you someone informed on the subject." It actually does. That is the whole point of having teachers and having students. Do you know about the 3/5 law? If so, what does it mean? Maybe you can tell Christine about it. I don't know what your point is. Do you agree or disagree with what Beck is 'teaching'? Is the caller right or wrong?

You also state: 'You keep repeating questions like that even though I know I've answered them at least once and probably more than that." That is true, but I want to hear what Christine has to say. She has repeated this thing about 'arab race' twice now. I've never heard of an 'arab race' (I teach the class on race, remember?). What is your opinion then--is there an 'Arab' race?

Maybe refresh my memory on what exactly I said when you stated this: " You wrote to me once that you had seen no evidence that African Americans were admitted with lower SAT scores than whites or Asians..." I KNOW that my African American students have more difficulties in my courses compared to other groups. I KNOW that African American students score lower than nearly all other groups (usually Native Americans are at the same level). I show charts in my Race course showing this. We differ on the reason for the root of the problem.

Besides, I don't see how this relates to what Christine had written above. This is what I wrote to Christine (but never heard an answer from her--however, if you would like to answer that question, I would love to hear it).

She stated: "that the liberals purposely left out such information from education." What proof of that do you have? What part do 'liberals' leave out that conservatives teach? I would really love to hear this since I teach a course on Race, Ethnicity and Immigration in the U.S...""

I teach about the 3/5 Law. I teach about Washington and Jefferson and their slaves. Gary, what part of that is 'hidden' in the teaching of liberal professors? I am a liberal professor and that is what I teach. Therefore, it isn't hidden. So what part of that statement she wrote is hidden by me?

Gary Baker said...

Kevin,

When I wrote that you keep repeating questions, I was referring to your repeated question along the lines of "What about President Obama and his policies are Marxist; I would love to see the parallels." And I have repeatedly answered questions along those lines, yet you keep on asking as though nothing had been said in response. Very irritating and makes you seem a poor study.

With regards to your teaching credentials, it seems very odd to me that you claim to be informed on matters of race and ethnicity and yet claimed that you had no information about African Americans being granted preferential admission to college campuses. I have no doubt that you have enough information to teach a particular viewpoint, but that does not imply a thorough knowledge.

Gary Baker said...

GM,

You are correct. The Bible could have said that you should not enslave your fellow man. It also could have been like the Quran which states that unbelievers should be converted, killed, or enslaved. It does not. What it does say is that God is the Father of all and the rest of us are equal.

"But it was, and most of the arguments in slavery's favor was from Southern clergymen."

You are incorrect. Most of the arguments in slavery's favor were on the grounds of states rights. A lot of people did use language couched in scriptural references to give themselves moral cover. None of which changes the fact that it was Christianity that was the major force for abolishing slavery in the west. Not Islam, and certainly not atheists who favored slavery in various forms right up through the 20th century.

"I'm pretty sure Marx didn't write anything in favor of selling one's daughter."

He wrote at least as much in favor of it as the Bible does. But whereas the Bible argues that man is unique and divine, worthy of protection because he is created in the image of God, Marx wrote that the only value a person has is the labor they contribute. That sounds a lot like how slavemasters think to me. It was also borne out in every country that accepted his philosophy as the governments worked the citizenry to poverty and death, whereas countries embracing Christianity continually promote the rights and freedoms of individuals. Imperfectly, to be sure, but with far greater care than their atheist counterparts.

Gary Baker said...

GM,

It washes perfectly. The Bible claims that all men have great worth because they are made in the image of God. Marx states that the only value men have is the labor they can contribute to society. That is a slave master's attitude if ever I heard one. You also have to look at the record: Every country that attempted to organize itself under Marx ended up as a dictatorship where large portions of the populace were regularly killed and enslaved. Countries formed under Christian principles or with Christian majorities made steady, though imperfect, progress in codifying and protecting the rights of the individual. While some people, many in fact, used religious terms to attempt to defend slavery, without Christian efforts, slavery in the west certainly would not have ended as soon as it did. The major opposition to the institution in Europe and the US was Christianity. Throw all the mud you want, but atheists were the master slave drivers.

Christinewjc said...

Kevin wrote:

"I asked you this before: is Arab a race like black and white?"

I thought it was considered a race. It is at least considered and ethnicity, isn't it?

Where it fits as far as "color" is concerned - I guess they would be considered brown?

The point I was making was that Obama is considered to be only "6.25% African Negro from his father's side." I have read this in several places on the Internet.

Sorry about the delay in answering your second question regarding the 3/5ths representation for blacks in the Constitution. I have been trying to locate the book where I read the reason for that designation. I didn't want to misquote the author. When I find it, I will post the exact quotes. For now, I will try to recall from memory what was written.

I think that I read about this in Mark Levin's book "Liberty and Tyranny."

The main reason for the 3/5ths designation was not really only about race - but about fairness in representation. Since the South had more black slaves than the North, the Framers tried to find a way to even out the huge amount of slaves in the South vs. the North. I don't write this to sound crass, but I am just trying to recall what I read about this several months ago.

I don't claim to know it all on this subject, Kevin. Being an academic, I'm sure that you have far more information about it all than I do. However, I have found that when I read books like Levin's, I find out important information that was never taught to me in school. The same could be said about other events in history, like what I just wrote about today regarding the The Truth About the OK City Bombing.

I know that you probably despise Glenn Beck, but he is a history buff and has educated a lot of Americans about the Founding Fathers and history, in general. His documentary on Revolutionary Holocaust: Live Free or Die contained information that I was never taught in school (nor was my daughter, for that matter) about Communism.

Gotta go. Glenn's show is on!

Kevin said...

Hi Gary,
You wrote: "And I have repeatedly answered questions along those lines, yet you keep on asking as though nothing had been said in response. Very irritating and makes you seem a poor study."

Again, I said that I asked Christine this question--not you. It is fine that you answer, but I want to hear what Christine has to say about this. It is like me asking a student a question and another student keeps jumping in. In cases like that I ask the student directly and ignore the one who keeps jumping in. And Christine answered (hi Christine!).

Gary Baker said...

Kevin,

So basically, when you write: "I would love to see some parallels to other Marxist regimes and what our own President is doing," that's not really what you mean. You aren't interested in the information, whether it is true or false, but who is putting out what statements. That's pretty consistent with modern liberalism: Much less interested in the factual content than who happens to be saying it.

BTW - When you write: "I KNOW that African American students score lower than nearly all other groups (usually Native Americans are at the same level). I show charts in my Race course showing this. We differ on the reason for the root of the problem," I don't think so. The root reason is that the black Americans and American Indians are generally admitted to competitive programs with lower aptitude and/or preparation. You simply believe that past sins, real and imagined, justify setting them up for failure and lowering the integrity of the system. I do not. (And yes, I know your motivations are different, but that is still the end result. Black male failure rates are higher and schools are inflating grades to try and lower the failure rates. In this way, race preferences not only harm the people they were intended to benefit but the entire system.)

Kevin said...

Hi Gary,
You wrote: "...that's not really what you mean." On the contrary, it is exactly what I mean (is that part of modern liberalism as well--actually knowing what one speaks about???). I want to hear from Christine what she thinks is so marxist about President Obama. I AM interested in who answers. Maybe if Christine had answered this herself she would have thought about what a real Marxist is and then actually compared that to the real President Obama. Contrary to some conservatives, there can sometimes be more than one answer to a question...

"You simply believe that past sins, real and imagined, justify setting them up for failure and lowering the integrity of the system." Actually, no I don't 'simply' believe this.

Hi Christine,
Arab is not recognized as a race ( but don't believe me, go ahead and look it up--Wikipedia does a good job at explaining Arab). It is an ethnicity, just like 'Irish' is not a race but an ethnic group. For example, saying someone is 50% Irish is not necessarily saying they are 50% white (or whatever race you want to pick). I still don't understand the '6.25% African Negro from his father's side.' I think the author of this statement is confusing race with ethnicity, unless there is another racial mixture of his African grandparents or great grandparents. This whole percentage thing is rather odd as well, if you ask me. What is the point? If it is to point out that he is different and 'other,' then we have to ask why it is being pointed out.

Christinewjc said...

Kevin,

I think that the question is not "why is it being pointed out," but why has it been purposely hidden? A blogging friend of mine once wrote that he thinks Obama (and all of his cohorts) want to hide his Muslim roots.

A while back, Glenn Beck had a segment on his show about all of the radial socialists, Marxists, Communists, and Maoists who influenced Obama throughout his entire life. He did a quick recap of Obama's life from childhood to adulthood. What I found odd was that Beck left out Obama Jrs. adoption by Lolo Soetoro, the move to Indonesia, and the fact that Obama was taught Muslim practices during his early childhood schooling there. Why did Beck leave that out? Perhaps because of a time constraint. But I think that it had a lot to do with not revealing to the public Obama's Muslim schooling and roots. The Fox News Channel is 17% owned by Saudis - and keeping such information from the public might be deemed important to them.

In another comment, you wanted me to tell you why I think that Obama is a Marxist. One telling sign is that he has been surrounded by, and influenced by them his entire life! But don't just take my word for it. You can read:

1. Barack Obama Argued Strict Revolutionary Marxism to John C. Drew at Occidental College.

2. Sean Hannity's new book - Conservative Victory - Defeating Obama's Radical Agenda. [Only $10.35 at Walmart or $8.00 at Amazon.] Sean labels Obama as a socialist. Just a different degree of the Marxist, Communist brand.

3. Scroll down at the blogsite when you click on the link below and read the The Obama File sidebar links on the right of the page. A plethora of information about Obama's Marxism.

4. Watch former Glenn Beck Program shows online. He points out how many of Obama czars and staff are Marxist or downright Communists!

Kevin, the majority of Americans are now on to Obama, his lies, and all of his terrible schemes. He will become a lame duck after the November 2010 elections and hopefully his disastrous bills will all be repealed. He will be a one term president OTP and our nation will be back to having a sane leader again in 2012 (if not sooner because hopefully, one of the lawsuits pointing out his obvious ineligibility might get a hearing before then).