In an article inspired by “What does Ray Nagin, Diane Downs and Richard Reid have in common?”, I decided to write what Lori Drew, Osama bin Laden, and Adolf Hitler have in common. If you are thinking that I am lumping all of them together, which they all have been subjected too, especially with Lori Drew. You are wrong. Well, no one is going to argue that Drew, Bin Laden, and Hitler are the most reviled figures in history and are rightfully regarded as public enemies. Let’s review who they are and their evil misdeeds.

Lori Drew, husband Curt, daughter Sarah, and Ashley Grills harassed a girl to suicide by using MySpace in Fall of 2006. Bin Laden masterminded the 9/11 Terrorist Attacks on the East Coast of America in 2001. Hitler was the leader of Nazis Germany from 1933 to 1945, which started World War II and Holocaust.

On the surface, what they did are dramatically different. One girl died from suicide after being mentally tortured; 3,000 people died on live television and many more could die from the toxic dust and smoke; 30 million died in genocide and left Eurasia in shambles. Beyond that, Drew, Bin Laden, and Hitler have a lot in common. What is it? They feel that they are being victimized and persecuted by imagined enemies. They are addicted to victimhood and maintain that feeling to assert dominance and control other people, by bullying, mass murder, terrorism, or genocide. They always see themselves as victims and blame the victim for their problems.

Recall the Secret Service study they conducted on school shooters after the Columbine Massacre. There was no one clear profile of a so called typical profile of a school shooter. However, they found that 71 percent of school shooters felt a sense of persecution. Few of them were actually bullied, contrary to popular beliefs. Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold saw themselves as victims, when in fact they were bullies themselves with a laundry list of discipline problems and brushes with the law. Quite frankly, after the Columbine Massacre, I took great offense at the way the media portrayed Harris and Klebold as victims of bullying. This is the same mantra used after Columbine, 9/11, Seung-Hui Cho, Steven Kazmierczak, and Nidal Hasan. The media plays “blame the victim” game because the attackers were tormented. All the victims killed had no connection to the perpetrators.

One can say that Harris and Klebold were bullies because bullies bully because they feel they are being bullied themselves and have to lash out. They bully to feel “good” about themselves. Yes, it is generally true that bullies do not have any lack of self-esteem. They have high self-esteem, but having high self-esteem does not translate into success. In fact, high self-esteem is dangerous because people do not have to will to change. They are happy and content with their life as it is. People with higher self-esteem are more likely to be addicted to alcohol and drugs and commit crime. Ask any person who remembers the bully, chances are they will say they ended up as either drug addicts, in prison, or dead.

Lori Drew posed as “Josh Evans” to see if Megan Meier was talking bad about Sarah after Megan allegedly called Sarah a “ugly Lesbian”. Drew was motivated by protecting her daughter from bullies. The Drews were described as over involved and pushy parents, especially in regards with Sarah, which made people feel resentful. The Drews are a classic “helicopter parent”. Also, Lori Drew was described as sociable and clingy to a point of annoying. She was considered an outcast in her neighborhood. Drew wanted to snoop and teach Megan a lesson for not being friends and bullying Sarah. Drew scapegoated her for all problems in life because Sarah was not happy and was no longer a friend. Compounding it, Drew was upset that Megan was losing weight faster than Sarah and she bad mouthed her for that. Drew viewed herself and family as being repeatedly victimized by Megan. The Drews and Ashley Grills would later send ugly messages that called her “fat” and “whore” to Meier and she committed suicide on October 16, 2006. The case would be revealed a year later by Steve Pokin, which would make her one of the most hated persons in years.

The Megan Meier case is reminiscent of Gertrude Baniszewski, who was enraged after Sylvia Likens accused her daughter Paula and Stephanie of being prostitutes. Baniszewski felt the sense that Likens was persecuting her and her family and she needed to stop it at all cost. Baniszewski got her children and neighborhood children to torture Likens to death to teach her a lesson. Also, she wanted to protect her and her daughter’s reputation and tried to portray themselves as “virtuous” and “clean” and attended a fundamentalist church. In reality, Stephanie and Gertrude were sexually promiscuous and had a child out of wedlock. Baniszewski was often subjected to abuse at her live-in boyfriend and constantly felt victimized over and over and Likens pushed her over the edge. Baniszewski thought torturing Likens would be an act of redemption.

Osama bin Laden, the leader of Al-Qaeda, was behind the horrid September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attacks in New York, Arlington, and Shanksville. Four airplanes were hijacked by terrorists and they attacked the World Trade Center, Pentagon, and a failed one near Shanksville. The attack leveled the World Trade Center and left the Pentagon burning. 3,000 people died in the terrorist attack on live television, mostly from the collapse of the towers. Bin Laden was partly motivated by how Saudi Arabia allowed America to use the land to attack Iraq in the Persian Gulf War of 1990. He blames America for that, despite the fact that the Saudi Royal Family allowed and they could of denied that access to America. Bin Laden sees America and the West as being oppressive to Muslims and supporting Israel. He views Muslims as victims of “Western Imperialism” and “Islamophobia”. Bin Laden sees Palestinians being oppressed and victimized by the Jews, who are helped by America. This is despite the fact that the Israeli/Palestinian conflict is more political than religious.

Bin Laden believes that suicide bombers are courageous and should be employed to teach America and the West a lesson. Also, Bin Laden encourages that Muslims protect fellow Muslims from America and the West by engaging in Jihad or “Holy War”. Also, where Bin Laden is from, they have a revenge culture because the climate is desert, which is dry. Dry climate makes bodies decay less and people are more likely to remember.

Adolf Hitler took advantage of Germans’ desperation from the Great Depression. It was after World War I and the Treaty of Versailles imposed harsh punishment on Germany. They had to pay huge reparations. They had to print a lot of money, which led to hyperinflation during the Great Depression. Hitler blamed Jews for all of Germany’s problems from hyperinflation to Treaty of Versailles. Hitler saw Jews as backstabbers and traitors out to destroy the Germans. He viewed Germans and Germany as victims of “Jewish” control and it had to be stopped. Hitler believed that Jews “raped” Germany during and after World War I. Hitler is voted in the 1933 election and rose to power on the guise of “hope” and “change”.

Hitler wanted to protect the Germans from the Jews by passing laws that discriminated against Jews. Hitler wanted to teach Jews a lesson in every way possible. By the time World War II starts, Jews were rounded up and sent off to death camps to be killed. Hitler also went after Slavs, Gypsies, Jehovah’s Witness, and disabled people because he saw them as undesirable. In the end, 30 million people died and Eurasia was left a total mess with 80 million killed in World War II. Nearly 70 percent of the European Jews were wiped out.

Many genocidal maniacs are paranoid and obsessed with protecting people. They use their persecution complex to impose their tyranny on the people. Joseph Stalin was another paranoid psychopath like Hitler. He went after anyone who were enemies of the state. Stalin viewed the state and himself as being victimized by dissidents. He had those infamous show trials, caused famines that killed 7 million Ukrainians, and many untold number of people would be sent off to Gulags in Siberia to a life time of hard labor and death.

Another example of a dictator with a sense of constant victimization is Saddam Hussein. He believed in protecting the Arab people from the Persians. Hussein viewed Arabs as victims of “Persian” cultural imperialism. He invaded Iran after the 1979 Islamic Revolution because he was afraid of Shiites would spread their influence, which he saw it as Persian cultural imperialism. The 1980 Iran-Iraq War had Arabs of all religious background, Muslim and Christian, because they saw Persians as the common enemy worthy of destruction. When Hussein was executed in late 2006, his last words were “Down with Persians”, a testament to his hatred towards Persians.

Cult leaders are often paranoid and use that paranoia to maintain control on their followers. Cult leaders feel victimized. Jim Jones, Charles Manson, and Fred Phelps come to mind. Jones was an avowed communist and Stalinist and felt that the CIA was spying on him and People’s Temple. They would later flee to Guyana to establish Jonestown. Than Congressman Leo Ryan came to investigate that followers were held against their will. Jone’s men attack Ryan’s convoy and from their 909 people die from mass suicide and murder. Manson was paranoid about a race war called “Helter Skelter”. Manson’s cult went on a brutal killing spree that killed actress Sharon Tate and LaBianca couple in 1969. Phelps is the leader of the Westboro Baptist Church. They are notorious for picketing funerals and hating homosexuals. He always talks about how his so-called church is being persecuted and that picketing funerals is a way to stop the persecution. Phelps is clearly a closeted homosexual with serious issues of self hate. It is probable that Phelps might have illegitimate children because Shirley Phelps-Roper has an illegitimate son named Samuel.

Many so-called civil rights leaders, like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton are very paranoid of racism and bigotry against Blacks and are addicted to victimhood. Victimhood becomes part of them. Any slighting that Blacks are subjected too will put them in the spotlight. In many ways, Jackson and Sharpton are addicted to victimhood. They feel that Blacks are denied equal access whether it is education or a job. In reality, Jackson and Sharpton are racists themselves and have expressed bigotry. Jackson called New York “Hymie Town” because of its largest Jewish population. Jackson is part of another underlying problem, anti-Semitism. A sad irony because Jews helped Blacks in the Civil Rights Movement.

What does this all mean? Feeling the sense of persecution and victim blaming are recurring theme among evil people. Does paranoia and feeling the sense of persecution lead to evil and violence. Not always. It is healthy to have some paranoia. It makes us human. It is common that we are all paranoid to some extent. We don’t like it when people talk bad about us. Who does? Of course we do not get so consumed with it to a point that it drives us to feel victimized. We all have felt victimized at some point. There are other factors as well to consider. Paranoid is a sign of a personality disorder, which is the hallmark of a psychopath.

The constant state of paranoia and feeling victimized day in day out and it becomes part of them. That is unhealthy and dangerous. Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Jim Jones, and Lori Drew come to mind. Also, their paranoia was mixed with anti-social, narcissism, and deviance, which is a dangerous mix. Hitler, Stalin, Jones, and Drew are considered psychopaths. However, feeling victimized and psychopathy need not to be the case. Bin Laden who lacks any psychopathic behavior is very focused on one thing. A psychopath usually lacks focus, which would be a bad thing for terrorist, especially in an organized one like Al-Qaeda.

Being paranoid and feeling victimized are not a bad thing in healthy doses. For some, being paranoid and feeling victimized is an addiction that can turn deadly. Just look at Adolf Hitler, Osama bin Laden, Jim Jones, Eric Harris/Dylan Klebold, and Lori Drew. They constantly felt victimized and took it out on other people.

I am always amazed how conservative white guys jump up and declare Rev. Jesse Jackson and Rev. Al Sharpton spokesmen for the so-called black community. It is so ignorant to suggest that black people need one or two spokespeople to speak on their behalf as if they’re too stupid to speak on their own. Where are the leaders for the white community, the Latino community, the Asian American community or the Native American community? And, if they are out there, why are they not being set up to be attacked as Rev. Jackson and Rev. Sharpton are being put into position to be attacked?

This is from a Midland, Mich. writer named Chris Stevens, who states in a blog titled “Anything goes: Instead of Limbaugh, let’s say ‘no’ to Jackson and Sharpton”:

So Rush Limbaugh’s bid to be one of the buyers of the St. Louis Rams is being opposed by, among others, the Revs. Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson.

Why doesn’t that surprise me?

Sharpton and Jackson have as much politically in common with Limbaugh as the Detroit Lions have with Super Bowl championships.

Zilch.

That’s not the whole story, of course. If Sharpton and Jackson are involved in something nationally, typically race is involved.

That’s their shtick. They are, and have been, the designated spokespeople for the black race. And that’s quite puzzling.

He stats that if Rev. Jackson and Rev. Sharpton are involved then race is probably an issue. But, who is asking the questions? Rev. Jackson and Rev. Sharpton don’t run CNN and MSNBC and they sure as hell don’t run the far-right Fox News. They don’t run NBC, CBS, ABC, the New York Times, Los Angeles Times, etc.

So, a conservative white guy declares that Rev. Jackson and Rev. Sharpton are spokesmen for the so-called black community. Now, this is done because conservatives in the media have worked for decades to demonize Rev. Jackson and Rev. Sharpton as a means of knocking down and keeping down what they call “the black community.” They declare Rev. Jackson and Rev. Sharpton the so-called leaders of “the black community” or the so-called spokesmen for “the black community” and then turn around and attack the two. Is this a disguised attack on blacks as a people?

Is Rush Limbaugh the spokesman for the white community? He is for a large number of far-right conservatives.

So, this writer ends by stating:

Sharpton and Jackson have had their time in the limelight.

It’s time for them to go away.

He seems to have left Limbaugh’s name out of that statement. Should be surprised? Of course we should not be surprised.

Don’t for one minute believe conservatives like Chris Stevens want men like Rev. Jackson and Rev. Sharpton to go away. I agree that the media should allow other strong and young black voices (alternative voices) a platform in the media, but that is not the interest of conservatives like Chris Stevens.

It’s a disguised and passive-aggressive way of attacking black people.

On Al Jazeera this weekend, a very interesting debate took place hosted by Avi Lewis regarding the The Color of Recession.  Addressing the statistics of unemployment, while the unemployment rate for minorities is around 34%, unemployed white Americans are only at 7.2%, according to the NY Times.

The programme featured four panellists who debated the issue of race, including ‘Jesse Jackson of the Rainbow Coalition; Rosa Clemente, an activist and former Green Party Vice Presidential candidate; Linda Chávez, director of the conservative Center for Equal Opportunity and the Reverend Greylan Hagler of the United Church of Christ.’

The discussion focused a great deal on the Obama administration, at times criticizing the new president’s failure to focus on helping minorities, who have been affected more strongly by the economic downturn.  Referring to Obama’s focus as a ‘colour blind approach’, Lewis puts the question to the panellists: Is Obama letting down people of colour?

The answers, surprisingly, are more varied than one might expect.  Rosa Clemente, for example, was dissatisfied with Obama’s actions so far, criticizing that the President has not focused his energies on minority unemployment issues.  Linda Chavez agreed, but also added that Obama is offering the ‘same old solutions’ to the economic crisis.  She believes this will only cause more problems for America in the future.

Reverend Jackson, who in many ways represents more traditional ideas about racial inequality, didn’t show any great opposition to President Obama.  Jackson did, however, disapprove of banks investing from the ‘top down’ rather than the ‘bottom up.’

Obama’s only supporter seemed to be Reverend Hagler, who suggested that people support the President rather than holding him to ridiculous standards.   He reminded the audience that Obama is a president, who must answer to and work with other groups such as the legislative branch.  ‘He is not a king,’ said Hagler.

Though the discussion centred around the effects of the economic crisis on minorities, there was ultimately an argument about reparations to people of colour.  Should reparations be made?  All but one believed there should be.  Chavez maintained that the generation of minorities existing in America today are so disconnected from those who suffered from racial discrimination that there would be no point to making reparations. 

What was most disturbing about the discussion is that in almost everyway it seemed to undermine what President Obama is trying to do.  And what is Obama’s goal?  Is it simply to get a nation through one of the worse economic crises it has ever experienced?  Is it to end a war, while ensuring that Afghanistan is not left in such a weak state that the Taliban can easily overtake it again?  While all of these goals are no doubt part of Obama’s plans, it becomes clear from his campaign that a loftier goal is in place: Saving a nation from their own short-sidedness in regards to race.

So much of Obama’s presidential campaign appears to have focused on race.  And it seems clear that Obama understood what Europe has known for many years; Race is America’s greatest problem.  The children of oppressors and the oppressed have been taught by their ancestors that race is indeed, a huge subject and should be treated as such.  And while this poses no problem for the American who is accustomed to making race a very big issue, it consistently undermines the great cultural theorists of this generation who wisely maintain that the only way to overcome racism, sexism and the classification of ‘Otherness’ is by giving absolutely no respect to the ideology of classification.  In other words, ignoring the idea of race forces or at least impels others to deal with a person’s humanity rather than their skin colour.  It is a reminder of that which makes us similar, rather than what makes us different.

President Obama is, no doubt, a part of this new school of thought at least to some degree.  While he does not ignore race, he certainly has committed himself to making decisions that do not focus on the race of the American in crisis.  His proposals for healthcare, economic solutions and war will likely not include reparations to any race in particular.

Is this a good plan of action?  It may be more accurate to say that it is a necessary plan of action.  Who among us wants a leader, who makes decisions based on skin colour.  It was morally wrong when it was done by those who formerly held positions of power.  It would be wrong now.  In fact, it might further destroy the task of healing the wounds between races in America.  The ‘what about me’ syndrome exists on both sides.   

People are discriminated against for all sorts of reasons including gender and race.  It is ridiculous to believe that an epoch of racial prejudice has not been passed down to both black and white Americans the way family heirlooms are passed down to grandchildren.  Why would you believe even the most righteous of equality leaders over your own parents unless you were ready to challenge everything you had ever been taught?  Yet, it is equally ridiculous to believe that the consequence of such programming does not also include a fundamental fear and mistrust of anyone who is different.  Even small children teach us this in grade school where the slightest abnormality causes a student to be the focus of ridicule and cruelty.

Still, what is crucial here is whether or not Obama’s regime of ‘colour blindness’ seeks to be an example by teaching people to function beyond the idea of race.  If the goal of the current administration is to eliminate the need for classification, the very idea of discrimination, therefore, is called into question. After all, is it productive to use classification as a defence?  For example, is it effective for someone to say, ‘He is treating me inappropriately because I am Indian and a woman?’  Or is it more effective to say, ‘He is treating me inappropriately?’  How much more useful would it be to focus on the issue of mistreatment, rather than the issue of race?

There is no doubt that if Obama is a student of the school of thought that seeks to take the focus from classifications, therefore eliminating the power of ‘Otherness’, he has his work cut out for him.  Enticing people from a lifetime of programming is not something that can be done in four or even eight terms of a presidency.  Yet, Obama’s biggest followers have often interpreted his message as one of hope.  And since a minority has managed to obtain the highest position in America, then we can only imagine that change is possible and that perhaps, Americans are on the cusp of that change.

For NY Times statistics on unemployment in America, please go to http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2009/11/06/business/economy/unemployment-lines.html

Jesse Jackson says that the United States Government can’t be a “tightwad” now.  Yes, that’s right — after the federal government has spent hundreds of billions of dollars in borrowed money on TARP funds, the “stimulus” package, “Cash for Clunkers,” bank bailouts, home ownership incentive programs, GM and Chrysler bailouts, and countless other examples of unbridled government largesse, Jesse Jackson says it is time to finally open the purse strings!  Otherwise, state and local governments may be forced to actually lay off workers to reflect lower tax revenues, and California college students who have enjoyed heavily subsidized tuitions might actually have to pay something close to what their college education actually costs!  What a cold world it would be if those things were to happen!

I had no idea that Jesse Jackson had such a subtle and keenly developed sense of humor.  Nearly 300 years later, Jonathan Swift’s A Modest Proposal finally has some competition in the satire category.

Too often, it seems that black people are always sitting back, upset because someone has something that they do not. More times than not, the person who has what they want is another black person. Instead of being happy for a fellow brother or sister making it, more than likely they tear down what they are doing.

From a local level right up to a professional level, this is happening. Take black politics, for example. Ever since he almost won the Democratic nomination for president, in 1988, Jesse Jackson has become one of the most revered leaders in black America. His voice was getting a little old to some, but they hardly ever said anything.

Once Barack Obama became president, people felt free to put Jesse Jackson down. While some of the things that he says are not valid, he does not deserve to be put down in such a manner. Ever since Obama first rose to fame, in 2007, Jackson has been one of his most vocal critics. Why can’t he just be happy for Obama?

The religious sector is just as bad as the hip hop sector of black America. Most middle-aged black people claim to be saved. If that is the case, why do they pass judgement on the teenagers who listen to hip hop. They should be trying to understand why they do what they do. If there is a problem, they first need to understand it and then try to help.

Speaking of hip hop, it is the main place of black-on-black hating. The rap industry has produced quite a number of black multi-millionaires. At one point, the top two hip hop executives were Suge Knight and Sean Combs, they should have been happy just to make it. Instead, they sent cheap shots back and forth that ultimately led to the death of two of rap’s greatest ever.

One of the more recent squabbles were between Chamillionaire and Michael Jordan. As odd as it sounds, it is true. Apparently, Cham wanted certain recognition from Jordan, but he did not receive it. As mature as Chamillionaire pretends to be, he should have ignored it and moved on. He did not, instead, he publicized it to many hip hop websites and magazines.

It is time for all of this to stop. Black America is very wide and diverse, just like every other ethnic group in America. There is no need for all of this hate going on. Black people have all reached success, just in different ways. At least everyone seems to be making it, which is all that matters.

The Wall Street Journal writes that liberals are more interested in identity politics than a color-blind society.

Jesse Jackson accused Alabama Congressman Artur Davis of selling out his race when he voted against the health-care bill.

Source:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704204304574545913962628736.html?mod=djemEditorialPage

Insiders have revealed the internal diagram of the Obama administration…shown here exclusively for the first time…..
Here we go…it’s time to spin like you’re an Obama cabinet member..or Bill Moyers..or Jesse Jackson..or Jeremiah Wright..or Funky Louie..or Bill Ayers..or a thrower of shoes..or David Letterman..or any celebrity from the A to the D list…let’s GO!…….C’mon Folks Let’s SPIN!

For the longest time, Jesse Jackson has felt that it is his job to be the political leader of black America. Now that Barack Obama has been elected to become president and there are many other black politicians following Obama’s lead, Jesse Jackson is becoming less-relevant by the moment. The most prominent politician in the Obama era has to be Congressman Artur Davis.

Taking a cue from Obama, Artur Davis has decided to run for Governor of Alabama. Obviously, this is a very conservative state. That means that it is very hard for a Democrat to have very much success and it is very hard for a black politician to have very much success. Despite all of that, Davis is currently serving his fourth term as a black Democratic congressman.

In order to be as successful as Artur Davis has been within the state, he has had to take conservative stances on a number of issues. Because of that, he has become the leading candidate for governor. Despite the fact that he is a black Democrat in Alabama, he stands a strong chance of winning this race.

This has not gone overlooked by many other black political leaders. One of the main reasons that Davis has remained so popular in his quest to become governor is because of the fact that he has voted against every health care bill proposed by President Obama. Realizing that something has to be done, quick, a lot of Democrats are upset with Congressman Davis. But, he has an election to win, also.

In the past, Jesse Jackson has been criticized for only looking down on Barack Obama. He hardly ever came to the president’s defense. That can no longer be said because he has gone directly at Artur Davis for not voting for this new version of the bill. It is one thing to criticize him behind closed doors, but Jackson did this in a public manner. He may be wrong for voting against the bill, but he has an election to win, first.

It almost seems as if Jesse Jackson is jealous of these new black politicians because they are achieving the success that he always wanted, but could never attain. This rip from Jesse Jackson may cost Davis his home district, which is predominately black and Democratic. Of course, these voters supported Jackson during his presidential runs. Davis has used that as his base and has expanded. But, it is hard to win without the base.

Jesse Jackson was definitely wrong for publically blasting Artur Davis. There is a time and place for this kind of thing. If he has an issue with Congressman Davis, he should definitely find the time to talk with him in private. Doing something like this may cost Davis his chance to make history.

The latest ACORN video.  But Fox definitely shouldn’t mention this in the news, right?

Breitbart to Eric Holder: Investigate ACORN, or else – As if the videos to date aren’t enough, there are more shoes to drop.  I’m with the author:

Principle over party, Attorney General.  Or your party gets hammered.  Your call.  Speaking as a Republican, I hope that you try to keep stonewalling; speaking as an American (which takes precedence), I suggest that you don’t.

—

Surprise!  Global warming proponents play the same as evolutionists do: “Your views aren’t science because they aren’t in peer reviewed journals and they can’t be in peer reviewed journals because they aren’t science.”  And if they if they do make it into a peer reviewed journal, then just insist that the peer reviewed journal is no longer valid.  Either that, or destroy whoever let the view in.  Voila!  How very scientific and ethical.  Heh.

—

More problems for Al Gore & Co., if only the media would report them and ensure that everyone who saw An Inconvenient Truth were aware of them: Global warming hysterics burned by predictions.

—

People are rightly outraged at fraud, but are wildly naive to think it only happens in business.  There is already a ton of fraud with the TARP funds and other government programs.  Who’d have thought that would happen?  I mean, just because a massive amount of money is thrown around with little controls, why would that attract bad guys?

—

Liberal media rep Norah O’Donnell tries to play “gotcha” with 17 year old – She interviewed her once, then gathered some data, then turned the cameras on.  But no media bias here, folks!  Now maybe Norah could question Obama & Co. over all their health care lies and broken promises of bi-artisanship.

—

Jesse Jackson: “You can’t vote against healthcare and call yourself a black man” – I’d say you shouldn’t be pro-legalized abortion and call yourself a black man.

—

Take that, Jews. White House guts annual Hannakhah party; meanwhile, Obama wishes there were more Muslim holidays to celebrate – great commentary from my favorite gay Chicago bloggers

Dat ain't cool!

It ain’t be O-Tay if a black man does not toe-the-line for Jesse Jackson and CBC.

“We even have blacks voting against the healthcare bill from Alabama,” Jackson said at a CBC reception in his honor.

“You can’t vote against healthcare and call yourself a black man.”

Just what must one do to call one’s self a black man?  Can Bill Clinton call himself a black man?  Agreed, it is merely an honorary accolade, a term of endearment that was harshly revoked when he dared speak fiery rhetoric while campaigning for his legal partner’s candidacy as POTUS.

Bill Clinton’s honorary appointment as a black man has just about as much credibility as Jesse Jackson’s academic and theological credentials.  Honorary.  Neither Jackson nor Clinton are worthy of any honor, they actively, passionately and wantonly dishonored themselves, those close to them, their families and anyone who believed their words. 

Clinton was counseled by Jackson over Lewinsky while simultaneously paying for his own harlotry out of organizational funds and then, both men vehemently denied anything to do with those women and their own sexual and predatory appetites that consumed them.

Karin Stanford, Monica Lewinsky and at least a score of others, both of these rogues are false as falsity can speak.

Now comes, Jesse MAXIMUM HYPOCRITE Jackson to scourge, excoriate, and excommunicate from the black race, anyone daring to take a position outside of the standards established by the Cult of black Congressional liason, the black klan of Congress, masquerading as a caucus.

Piss on you Jesse Jackson and piss on your Caucus of Black Congressional Klansmen.  Your very name brings the wind of contempt, you defile that which is associated with you.  You run along now with your ”cut his nuts off” dictatorial stuff.  My guess is that Congressman Davis will be just fine without your “abiding admiration.”

Keep in mind, Reverend Jackson, Michelle Obama was never proud of her country before her Kenyan-American husband made the network news.  You were there, all of her adult life.  Pretty humbling, isn’t it. 

That’s Ok.  This country has lived through McCarthy, Kennedy(ies), Nixon, Johnson and hundreds of hideous congress cretins so far.  You are just another cow pie in the pasture.

And thanks for staying out of those Minnesota airport bathrooms…

 In his effort to stay relevant Jesse Jackson has thrown out the race card in the healthcare debate. Jackson said “We even have blacks voting against the healthcare bill from Alabama.” “You can’t vote against healthcare and call yourself a black man.” Jackson called Artur Davis out because Davis cast a no vote against the bill. Jackson said he did not call anyone by name, but Davis is the only black member of Congress from Alabama, and he is the only member of the Congressional Black Caucus to have voted against the healthcare bill. Jackson made these remarks at a reception commemorating the 25th anniversary of his run for the presidency. Davis has elected to take the high road he said “One of the reasons that I like and admire Rev. Jesse Jackson is that 21 years ago he inspired the idea that a black politician would not be judged simply as a black leader,”. The best way to honor Rev. Jackson’s legacy is to decline to engage in an argument with him that begins and ends with race.” Jackson represents the old school thinking that all black people must speak in one voice, and in 2009 that simply is not the case. Davis is eyeing the governor’s office in his home state and his views are more centrist. It is unfair to question his black credentials because he votes independent of the Caucus which incidentally has not supported him. Lastly let us not forget that Jackson the ultimate black man said of our president last year that he wanted to “cut his balls off.” So I don’t think Jackson is in the position to question anyone’s allegiance.

Up this morning working on my scripts (or, as it currently appears, not working on them), and read an item in the Wall Street Journal online that caught my eye.

I can often be critical here of our politicians, particularly for the lack of godly leadership they exhibit.  However, if I come across something admirable, I want to point that out too.

I do not know Rep. Artur Davis from Alabama, and if I did his politics might excite me or repulse me — I cannot say.  But Davis, a member of the Congressional Black Caucus, was the only CBC member to vote against the House’s recent “Health Care” bill.  I’m not a fan of many of the provisions of that bill, but I’m not writing this to discuss his political stance; I have no idea why he did not vote for it and it may have been out of sheer political calculation for all I know.

However, he was attacked recently by Jesse Jackson (note: I will never use the word “Reverend” before that man’s name) at a reception on Capitol Hill, where Jackson said, “We even have blacks voting against the health care bill… You can’t vote against health care and call yourself a black man.”

Rather than defend their colleague and uphold Martin Luther King Jr’s dream of a society where people are judged by their character rather than by the color of their skin, apparently some simply rolled over and excused Jackson’s shameful comment.

However, to Mr. Davis’ credit, he responded respectfully and deferentially, according to the WSJ:

For his part, Mr. Davis declined to get into a spitting contest. “One of the reasons that I like and admire Rev. Jesse Jackson is that 21 years ago he inspired the idea that a black politician would not be judged simply as a black leader,” he said in a statement. “The best way to honor Rev. Jackson’s legacy is to decline to engage in an argument with him that begins and ends with race.”

Kudos to Mr. Davis.  I know from personal experience that heeding the admonition of Proverbs 20:3 and balancing the advice of Proverbs 26:4-5 is no small feat.  And I do not know all that has gone into Mr. Davis’ decision to respond as he did, but regardless of color I would say that the incident indicates which individual — Mr. Jackson or Mr. Davis — is truly able to call himself a man.

- – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – -
[UPDATE: Apparently, I have mentioned Mr. Artur Davis in this blog, before: "Tip of the hat to Rep. Artur Davis of Alabama" on 10/7/2008.  If his actions are an indicator of his character as opposed to pure calculation, they are good signs.]

Rev. Jesse Jackson will conduct your orientation.

“We even have blacks voting against the healthcare bill from Alabama,” Jackson said at a reception Wednesday night. “You can’t vote against healthcare and call yourself a black man.”

 

That’s right.  Your skin color determines your votes.  In fact, if you could just register your skin color with the government, you will never have to actually use your brain to think for yourself again.

Ugly racial politics were on full display yesterday when Rev. Jesse Jackson spoke to a reception held by the Congressional Black Caucus. Long a racial demagogue, Jackson used the occasion to call out a black congressman who voted against Pelosi’s health care bill. Via the Hill:

“We even have blacks voting against the healthcare bill from Alabama,” Jackson said at a reception Wednesday night. “You can’t vote against healthcare and call yourself a black man.”

Jackson didn’t mention him by name, but it was clear he was talking about Rep. Artur Davis of Alabama. Davis, a Democrat, is one of the more conservative members of the CBC and is running for governor of Alabama. He stayed classy and had this to say:

One of the reasons that I like and admire Rev. Jesse Jackson is that 21 years ago he inspired the idea that a black politician would not be judged simply as a black leader,” Davis’s statement said. “The best way to honor Rev. Jackson’s legacy is to decline to engage in an argument with him that begins and ends with race.”

I don’t know what’s worse – Jackson’s statement or the coy messages of approving appreciation Congressional Black Caucus gave afterwards. Jackson later tried to ridiculously claim that he wasn’t saying black lawmakers should vote a certain way, just that a healthcare bill would help Davis’ home state of Alabama. In other words, don’t listen to what I said, listen to what I said I said.

This is just another despicable episode of racial identity politics rearing its head. I call BS on Jackson’s equivocation of his remark and the shrugs of his supporters. Conservative blacks are routinely roasted for holding right-of-center political views or voting Republican. Just look at how Condoleezza Rice, Michael Steele, Clarence Thomas and numerous others are treated as token blacks, race traitors and sell-outs.

When Jackson says he doesn’t think black lawmakers should vote a certain way, I quite frankly don’t believe him. According to some people, a person’s political outlook and voting patterns should be a direct result of the hue of their pigmentation. It’s bitterly divisive and moves us farther away from a color-blind society where we are judged by the content of our character and the merits of our ideas alone.

:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::

I play the race card against everybody 'cause skin color don't matter!

Je$$e Jack$on loves the spotlight. He runs to it anytime there is a chance to exploit the race-card. Now, this race-baiting, victim vendor is attacking another man because of his vote on Nancy Pelosi’s health care scam. Je$$e Jack$on is making a racial issue out of health care. I’m shocked that Jack$on would do this [major sarcasm].

Reverend Race-baiter informed America, and Rep. Artur Davis (D-Ala), that ’You can’t vote against healthcare and call yourself a black man.’ That’s Je$$e being Je$$e. In Je$$e’$ world, color means everything and blacks should follow in lock-step with all Democratic policies because they have such a great record on civil rights [100 % out of this world sarcasm].

In Je$$e’s world, black men should all think the way he does and vote accordingly. How dare a black man use common sense and vote against a bill that is unconstitutional? Even Davis’ opponent for the governorship of Alabama, a white Democrat named Ron Sparks, jumped on the fact that a conservative democrat [Davis] voted against the bill.

“He was the only Black Caucus member to vote against it. I don’t get it,” Sparks said last week, according to The Associated Press. It’s always about race and group politics with liberals. They expect the black vote and have taken it for granted since 1964, when they claimed to be the party of civil rights [look at the Democratic Party's history and votes to see the myth].

I wonder what Martin Luther King, Jr. would say, if he were alive today, about Jack$on’$ comments. I think Davis is an individual who voted the way his constituents wanted him to. Davis voted for the people he represents, not because of the color of their skin. Something Je$$e Jack$on should know to judge someone by the content of their character, not the color of their skin but his history shows his intent to turn everything into a racial issue.

And I thought liberal/progressives were so against the “status quo?”

11-19-2009

The Rev. Jesse Jackson on Wednesday night criticized Rep. Artur Davis (D-Ala.) for voting against the Democrats’ signature healthcare bill.

“We even have blacks voting against the healthcare bill,” Jackson said at a reception Wednesday night. “You can’t vote against healthcare and call yourself a black man.”

The remark stirred a murmur at the reception, held by the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) Foundation as part of a series of events revolving around the 25th anniversary of Jackson’s run for president. Several CBC members were in attendance, including Chairwoman Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), who’d introduced Jackson.

Read Rest here

It seems to me that Jesse Jackson has made a good argument himself for voting against Health Care Bills that fund abortions- because he warned in the 1970’s ” What happens to the mind of a person, and the moral fabric of a nation, that accepts the aborting of the life of a baby without a pang of conscience? What kind of a person, and what kind of a society will we have 20 years hence if life can be taken so casually?“ ( LOOK AROUND YOU JESSE AND SEE)

Oh- but that was well before Jackson sold his soul to run for president in a pro-abortion party ! OOPS! My Bad!

Jesse you need to watch the film: Maafa21 - I think you are mentioned in this film, it will enlighten you on why you , as a black man, SHOULD VOTE AGAINST any health care bill which allows for ANY abortions:
(Clip here)

Also Read: Rev’s: Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, consistent on racist finger pointing ?

The Rev. Jesse Jackson on Wednesday night criticized Rep. Artur Davis (D-Ala.) for voting against the Democrats’ signature healthcare bill.

“We even have blacks voting against the healthcare bill,” Jackson said at a reception Wednesday night. “You can’t vote against healthcare and call yourself a black man.”

The remark stirred a murmur at the reception, held by the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) Foundation as part of a series of events revolving around the 25th anniversary of Jackson’s run for president. Several CBC members were in attendance, including Chairwoman Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), who’d introduced Jackson.

Davis, who is running for governor, is the only black member of Congress from Alabama.

He is also the only member of the CBC to have voted against the healthcare bill earlier this month.

Davis referred to Jackson’s 1988 run for president in a statement, issued through his office, that said he would not engage Jackson on his criticism.

“One of the reasons that I like and admire Rev. Jesse Jackson is that 21 years ago he inspired the idea that a black politician would not be judged simply as a black leader,” Davis’s statement said. “The best way to honor Rev. Jackson’s legacy is to decline to engage in an argument with him that begins and ends with race.”

Jackson said later that he “didn’t call anybody by name and I won’t.”

He added that he wasn’t saying that black lawmakers must vote a certain way. Instead, they should vote the interests of the people in their districts, and he said the healthcare bill would help Alabama because it’s one of the poorest states in the country.

“The poorest people need healthcare protection,” Jackson said. “They have the highest infant mortality and the lowest life expectancy. They’re dying from lack of access.”

Other members of the CBC found no fault in Jackson’s words. Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D-Mo.) was in the audience. He called Jackson’s criticism of Davis “accurate,” but said he did not hear Jackson say “You can’t vote against healthcare and call yourself a black man.”

“If it is an issue that disproportionately impacts black folks, race has to be considered,” Cleaver said. Jackson, he added, “is expected by his constituency to call balls and strikes.”

Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) called the remarks “vintage Jesse Jackson,” but said Davis’s vote against healthcare was consistent with a voting record more conservative than many CBC members.

“Artur Davis has a more conservative constituency,” Waters said. “Since he’s running for governor of Alabama, he reflects an even more conservative constituency.”

Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-Texas) said each man was doing what he considered the right thing.

“People have a right to vote their constituency, and people have a right to speak their conscience,” Jackson-Lee said. “Both happened.”

Davis’s Democratic primary opponent, Agriculture Commissioner Ron Sparks, highlighted Davis’s status as the lone African-American vote against the bill.

“He was the only Black Caucus member to vote against it. I don’t get it,” Sparks said last week, according to The Associated Press. Sparks is white.

Davis said he voted against the healthcare bill because “House leadership’s approach is not the best we can do.” He said he preferred a version passed by the Senate Finance Committee because it reduces subsidization of the healthcare industry, taxes high-value health plans instead of wealthy people, and is more effective in getting employers to help with health coverage.

Davis has countered that Sparks’s position on healthcare has changed over time, saying he’s being “deliberately dishonest.”

The primary will be June 1. All of the GOP candidates for governor have been critical of the healthcare legislation, according to the AP.

This article courtesy The Hill.

That’s right, the race pimp Jesse Jackson has brought race into the health care reform debate.  He said:

“You can’t vote against healthcare and call yourself a black man.”

Why does everything with you have to be about race, Jesse?  Get over it already.  It’s not about race, and it’s not about being black or white or yellow or whatever.  It’s about one thing:  Do we want the federal government to control your health care?  It’s that simple.

Get over it Jesse.  Brush that huge racial chip off of your shoulder — you might actually accomplish something if you take responsibility for yourself and quit blaming your problems on race.

Jesse Jackson: ‘You can’t vote against healthcare and call yourself a black man’

Ahhh – if yo black yo better agree with Jesse

The Rev. Jesse Jackson on Wednesday night criticized Rep. Artur Davis (D-Ala.) for voting against the Democrats’ signature healthcare bill.

“We even have blacks voting against the healthcare bill,” Jackson said at a reception Wednesday night. “You can’t vote against healthcare and call yourself a black man.”

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

The remark stirred a murmur at the reception, held by the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) Foundation as part of a series of events revolving around the 25th anniversary of Jackson’s run for president. Several CBC members were in attendance, including Chairwoman Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), who’d introduced Jackson. Davis, who is running for governor, is the only black member of Congress from Alabama.

He is also the only member of the CBC to have voted against the healthcare bill earlier this month.

Davis referred to Jackson’s 1988 run for president in a statement, issued through his office, that said he would not engage Jackson on his criticism.

“One of the reasons that I like and admire Rev. Jesse Jackson is that 21 years ago he inspired the idea that a black politician would not be judged simply as a black leader,” Davis’s statement said. “The best way to honor Rev. Jackson’s legacy is to decline to engage in an argument with him that begins and ends with race.”

Jackson said later that he “didn’t call anybody by name and I won’t.”

Ive always wondered what he calls those kids running around with their pants down to there ankles?

He added that he wasn’t saying that black lawmakers must vote a certain way. Instead, they should vote the interests of the people in their districts, and he said the healthcare bill would help Alabama because it’s one of the poorest states in the country.

“The poorest people need healthcare protection,” Jackson said. “They have the highest infant mortality and the lowest life expectancy. They’re dying from lack of access.”

Other members of the CBC found no fault in Jackson’s words. Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D-Mo.) was in the audience. He called Jackson’s criticism of Davis “accurate,” but said he did not hear Jackson say “You can’t vote against healthcare and call yourself a black man.”

“If it is an issue that disproportionately impacts black folks, race has to be considered,” Cleaver said. Jackson, he added, “is expected by his constituency to call balls and strikes.”

Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) called the remarks “vintage Jesse Jackson,” but said Davis’s vote against healthcare was consistent with a voting record more conservative than many CBC members.

“Artur Davis has a more conservative constituency,” Waters said. “Since he’s running for governor of Alabama, he reflects an even more conservative constituency.”

Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-Texas) said each man was doing what he considered the right thing.

“People have a right to vote their constituency, and people have a right to speak their conscience,” Jackson-Lee said. “Both happened.”

Davis’s Democratic primary opponent, Agriculture Commissioner Ron Sparks, highlighted Davis’s status as the lone African-American vote against the bill.

“He was the only Black Caucus member to vote against it. I don’t get it,” Sparks said last week, according to The Associated Press. Sparks is white.

Davis said he voted against the healthcare bill because “House leadership’s approach is not the best we can do.” He said he preferred a version passed by the Senate Finance Committee because it reduces subsidization of the healthcare industry, taxes high-value health plans instead of wealthy people, and is more effective in getting employers to help with health coverage.

Davis has countered that Sparks’s position on healthcare has changed over time, saying he’s being “deliberately dishonest.”

I saw this on MSNBC.com and had a cynical laugh.

Race-Baiter Extraordinaire Rev. Jesse Jackson: “The Rev. Jesse Jackson on Wednesday night criticized Rep. Artur Davis (D-Ala.) for voting against the Democrats’ signature healthcare bill. ‘We even have blacks voting against the healthcare bill,’ Jackson said at a reception Wednesday night. ‘You can’t vote against healthcare and call yourself a black man.’”

But, yet, I’m the racist for opposing Liberal Socialism.

And this on Politico: The New Heavyweight Champ

Senate bill weighs in at 2,074 pages

In the Battle of the Health Bills, the Senate wins out, bulk-wise – weighing in at 2,074 pages.

The House health reform bill was a mere 1,990 pages when introduced.

That means the Senate bill — like the one in the House — runs more pages than War and Peace, and has nearly five times as many words as the Torah.

First Bribe uncovered: Mary Landrieu of Louisiana is one of three Democratic senators that Harry Reid has to win over to begin debate and there are few better ways of doing that then throwing a little home state sugar their way.

So perhaps it’s no surprise that the health bill includes a 50 percent boost* in federal Medicaid money for states that have been declared disaster areas in the past seven years. Hurricane Katrina, of course, hit the Pelican State in 2005.

You can find the provision on page 432 of the bill.

2014: The Senate bill pushes back implementation of major parts of the reform to 2014 — a change from 2013 under the Finance Committee bill.

So you get 4 years of Tax Increases, even if some of the provisions do provide some meat to keep the wolf from fully blowing their house down.

Opt-Out:

This is a very inventive fake out. And a very cunning political ploy. Don’t make insurance portable. Just make it a State Issue. Thus is the state opt-out then the states that have it can use it to bash the states that don’t and make it an economic issue.

And then force the politicians in the state to pass it. And if the do, the liberal media will be all over them like a pack of Raptors. The media will destroy them.

So they won’t do it.

Thus, fiscal responsibility will go right up someone’s arse.

Commendably clever ploy.

The Senate bill includes a public insurance option that allows states to choose not to participate. In order to opt-out, states would have to pass a law, a Democratic Senate aide said.

Pure Liberal Thinking:  All politics All the time

(the following ditty was found as the first response in the public forum on Politico.com and perfectly illustrates the Liberal mindset)
“I LOVE the opt-out. It’s pure political genius! It will force Republican dominated state legislators to vote against benefits for their citizens. Just like with the stimulus funds, they will never do it. They’ll end up looking like complete hypocrites and will totally **** off their base at the same time. Opt-out all the way!”

‘Nuff Said.

The Reid bill only slightly toughens the requirement that people carry insurance. It levies a $95 fine in 2014 and scales up to $750 by 2016. The Senate Finance bill (aka the bogus “Baucus” Bill) had no penalty in the first year.

Critics worry that people will choose to pay the cheaper penalty rather than buying the more expensive insurance plans because the bill also requires insurers to offer coverage to people who are sick. That combination could lead to an older, sicker and more expensive risk pool.

And what does that lead to: Higher Costs and Higher premiums. Whoops! 

Fight isn’t over yet.

Even when the Senate gets this though they still have to go meet the even more Socialist Liberals in the House and come up with compromise bill.

Mind you, the Senate bill just unveiled most likely had absolutely nothing to do with the Baucus circus over the summer and was “Transperancy”-lite in the fact that it was done behind closed doors in secret.

And you thought electing these clowns was “Hope and Change” and end to partisanship in Washington.

WASHINGTON – The government paid more than $47 billion in questionable Medicare claims including medical treatment  showing little relation to a patient’s condition, wasting taxpayer dollars at a rate nearly three times the previous year.

Excerpts of a new federal report, obtained by The Associated Press, show a dramatic increase in improper payments in the $440 billion Medicare program that has been cited by government auditors as a high risk for fraud and waste for 20 years.

Couple that with Stimulus money going to non-existent Congressional Districts and you want these people in charge of whether you live or die?

Are you Nuts!

But it’s not like they are going to little to the People. No, this is the “cornerstone” of the Liberals Holy Grail.

The ability to decide who lives and who dies.

They will be like Gods!

<Insert Over-the-top megalomaniacal laughter here>