Thursday, July 29, 2010

Judge Bolton’s ruling on Arizona’s Immigration Law SB 1070

Of course by now you have all heard about U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton’s rulings on Arizona’s Immigration Law SB 1070.  I see this ruling as a major blow to state’s ability to police their borders.

Bolton’s worse decision was saying that Arizona’s police cannot check on immigration status after a person is arrested for something else. 
The Court first addresses the second sentence of Section 2(B): “Any person who is arrested shall have the person’s immigration status determined before the person is released.”
Arizona advances that the proper interpretation of this sentence is “that only where a reasonable suspicion exists that a person arrested is an alien and is unlawfully present in the United States must the person’s immigration status be determined before the person is released.” (Defs.’ Resp. to Pl.’s Mot. (“Defs.’ Resp.”) at 10.) Arizona goes on to state, “[T]he Arizona Legislature could not have intended to compel Arizona’s law enforcement officers to determine and verify the immigration status of every single person arrested – even for United States citizens and when there is absolutely no reason to believe the person is unlawfully present in the country.” (Id.)
The Court cannot interpret this provision as Arizona suggests. Before the passage of H.B. 2162, the first sentence of Section 2(B) of the original S.B. 1070 began, “For any lawful contact” rather than “For any lawful stop, detention or arrest.” (Compare original S.B. 1070 § 2(B) with H.B. 2162 § 3(B).) The second sentence w s identical in the original version and as modified by H.B. 2162. It is not a logical interpretation of the Arizona Legislature’s intent to state that it originally intended the first two sentences of Section 2(B) to be read as Section 2(B) are clearly independent of one another. Therefore, it does not follow logically that by changing “any lawful contact” to “any lawful stop, detention or arrest” in the first sentence, the Arizona Legislature intended to alter the meaning of the second sentence in any way. If that had been the Legislature’s intent, it could easily have modified the second sentence accordingly." 

I just don’t see how Bolton makes this argument, when states already check people for a variety of other reasons after they are arrested (e.g. outstanding warrants, outstanding taxes and fines, etc). What makes immigration status so special that it should not be checked?

Judge Bolton’s concern about 4th Amendment issues also makes little sense to me. 
Requiring Arizona law enforcement officials and agencies to determine the immigration status of every person who is arrested burdens lawfully-present aliens because their liberty will be restricted while their status is checked. Given the large number of people who are technically “arrested” but never booked into jail or perhaps even transported to a law enforcement facility, detention time for this category of arrestee will certainly be extended during an immigration status verification. 
Legal Definition of Permanent Resident Card: United States permanent residents have an identification card known as the “Permanent Resident Card.” The Permanent Resident Card is also known as are the immigrant visa, permanent visa, Green Card, permanent resident visa, and form I-551 or form I-551. While permanent residents are not United States citizens, they are granted permission to reside and work in the United States on a permanent basis. Before the terrorist attacks of September 11 2001, the requirement to carry the Permanent Resident Card at all times was not strictly enforced. Previously, permanent resident cards were usually only checked when traveling outside the United States. However, now the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) requires that permanent residents of the United States be prepared to show their Permanent Resident Card at all times. DHS also requires that all permanent residents of the United States who are traveling to show their Permanent Resident Card or other documentation that will prove their legal status in the country.  
So where is this burden to lawfully-present aliens that Bolton speaks of?  Is she suggesting that even the Feds drop this requirement? Bolton’s rulings will no doubt be challenged and we will see this case wind its way up to the Supreme Court.

Via: US Immigration Support

Who’s ya daddy? Obama bows to Gov. Chris Christie

Here is an Obama Bow that I too agree with. Perhaps Obama was merely acknowledging Chris Christie’s superior Chief Executive skills.  Chris Christie is not one to let politics stand in the way of doing the right thing for the people. He knows how to fight the special interest by giving them a taste of their own medicine.

Christie: […]The state teachers union said--they had a rally in Trenton against me. 35,000 people came from the teachers. You know what that rally was? The "me first" rally. "Pay me my raise first. Pay me my free health benefits first. Pay me my pension first. And everybody else in New Jersey, get to the back of the line." Well, you know what? I'm not going to sit by and allow that to go unnoticed, so we'll shine a bright light on it, and we'll see how the people react. But I think we are seeing how the people of New Jersey are reacting, and that's how you make it politically palatable in other states in the country. Just shine a bright light on greed and self-interest." 

Sister Toldjah sees the rise of a new breed of Strong Republican Governors.  I see a rise of a new breed of Strong Republicans period. There are some new Republicans out there who (to borrow a phrase from my friend Sam at The Last Tradition) “piss standing up”.  They are less concerned about political expediency and more concerned about doing the right thing for the people. In doing so, they are willing to withstand the hot blast of hatred from their political foes. Some obvious examples would be Palin, Bachmann, Brewer, Christie and West.  I sure you can think of others.

If we want to reclaim our republic, we are going to need more strong politicians like these guys. We will most certainly need them on the left as well, especially since self-serving socialists have hijacked the Democratic Party.

Friday, July 23, 2010

Surprise! Even JournoListers hate Keith Olbermann

We on the right have long ago determined that the Keith Olbermann Show is about as entertaining as watching a special needs version of Barney. What is truly surprising is that the “sick puppies” on JournoList would agree.

The Daily Caller’s latest JournoList findings reveal that Keith Olbermann’s far left buddies find him to be “misogynistic”, “predictable” and “pompous”. 
The Daily Caller: If you were one of the 400 members of the listserv Journolist, perhaps one of the most vicious insults you could hurl at a colleague is: You’re just like Bill O’Reilly and Sean Hannity.
If the reader holds neutral — or even positive — views about the Fox News hosts, the insult may not sting. But in the cloistered world of liberal listserv enclaves, Hannityism is a cardinal sin. After all, Fox is a “dangerous,” “deranged” “cesspool” that, possibly, the FCC should be investigating.
The feelings against MSNBC host Keith Olbermann, then, must run deep.
“He’s become O’Reilly on the left– completely predictable, unfunny, and arrogant,” said Georgetown University Professor Michael Kazin in May 2009. “To my mind, what they do is no different form Hannity and O’Reilly,” said the New America Foundation’s Michael Cohen, “At least Hannity and O’Reilly engage with the other side (if mainly just to yell at them). Olbermann is just an echo chamber.” [...]
The Nation’s Katha Pollitt began the group’s rant. “He and Michael Musto did this whole long riff about beauty contestant Carrie ‘opposite marriage’ Prejean’s breast implants, stupidity, breast implants, tacky clothes, earrings, breast implants. They went on and on about how she was ‘part plastic’ and pathetic.  You’d think they were celibate vegans who spent their lives zen meditating.  It was just a whole TV humiliation of her, and it made me feel sorry for her, which wasn’t easy,” Pollitt said. [MORE]

I will never forget the first time I saw Keith Olbermann’s show. A dear liberal friend of mine was visiting and she insisted that we watch Olbermann instead of Bill O’Reilly.  I had heard of Olbermann but never watched him before. For the next hour I sat in front of the television with my mouth agape wondering how in God’s name could my very smart and witty liberal friend regularly tune into this buffoon?

It will be interesting to see how the egomaniac Olbermann handles the news that this lefty peers think so lowly of him. Perhaps he may just take a permanent vacation.

For your entertainment, enjoy this clip of Glenn Beck mocking the oh-so pompous Keith Olbermann. If you know any J-Listers, invite them to view, they will probably get a kick out of it too.

Video h/t: The Right Scoop  

Sorry Charlie: House Panel finds Charlie Rangel broke ethics rules

Washington Post: A House ethics subcommittee announced Thursday that it found that Rep. Charles B. Rangelviolated congressional ethics rules and that it will prepare for a trial, probably beginning in September. The panel is expected to make the details of his alleged violations public next Thursday.
Rangel (D-N.Y.) has been under the House ethics committee's microscope since early 2008 after it was reported that he may have used his House position to benefit his financial interests. Two of the most serious inquiries have focused on Rangel's failure to declare $239,000 to $831,000 in assets on his disclosure forms, and on his effort to raise money for a private center named after him at City College of New York using his congressional letterhead.
In March, Rangel reluctantly stepped down as chairman of the Ways and Means Committee -- a week after the ethics panel ruled in a separate case that he had broken congressional gift rules by accepting trips to conferences in the Caribbean that were financed by corporate interests. The panel said that, at a minimum, Rangel's staff knew about the corporate backing for the 2007 and 2008 trips -- and that the congressman was therefore responsible.[...]
A judge-like panel will meet next Thursday and read the charges. That will happen just as the House is about to leave Washington for a 6 1/2 -week recess. The full trial is not likely to begin until the week of Sept. 13 -- right before Rangel faces what could be a difficult Sept. 14 primary challenge from New York State Assemblyman Adam Clayton Powell IV. Powell is the son of the late congressman Adam Clayton Powell Jr. (D-N.Y.), who faced his own ethics problems and was bested in 1970 by Rangel in a Democratic primary. 
Talk about bad timing. Rangel and the Democrats brought this upon themselves. Rangel’s questionable dealings have been know for quite some time. Rather than to truly address the matter, Democrats arrogantly chose to ignore it. Now the matter is going to have to be dealt with just before midterm elections.

It will be interesting to see how Democrat’s dim 2010 prospects effect the outcome of Rangel. Given that Congress now has an approval rating of 11%, Democrats can go either way on whether Charlie stays or goes. They may dump him to try to improve their image a tiny bit or they may just say all hope is lost so why bother dumping Charlie.

Stay tuned.

Video: Alvin Greene’s campaign video

The New York Times: Alvin Greene, the Democratic candidate for Senate in South Carolina, who emerged at a public campaign event for the first time last weekend, is now out with his first campaign video. The video, called, “Alvin Green Is On the Scene,” is a 3-minute hip-hop mix, featuring extensive footage of LeBron James — perhaps an allusion to how Mr. Greene intends to make the Nov. 2 election a slam dunk. 

With lyrics like this: 
Well, Greene’s a new face in politics,
And he don’t show porno to college chicks.
But he’s got some ideas that’ll fix the state,
So open up your minds and stop the hate. 
I am completely at a loss for words.

Thursday, July 22, 2010

JournoList strikes again: The smearing of Sarah Palin

This week the Daily Caller has been releasing email exchanges from the now defunct liberal listsev JournoList. We first learned about how lefty reporters, pundits and academics all conspired to play down the Reverend Wright story to help Obama get elected.  Yesterday, the Daily Callers treated us to JournoListers conversations about the joy of watching Rush Limbaugh die, government regulating Fox News and the rapture they all had over Obama’s victory.

Today the Daily Caller shows us how the JournoListers conspired to create a coordinated attack on Sarah Palin after getting picked by John McCain. 
The Daily Caller: In the hours after Sen. John McCain announced his choice of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin to be his running mate in the last presidential race, members of an online forum called Journolist struggled to make sense of the pick. Many of them were liberal reporters, and in some cases their comments reflected a journalist’s instinct to figure out the meaning of a story.
But in many other exchanges, the Journolisters clearly had another, more partisan goal in mind: to formulate the most effective talking points in order to defeat Palin and McCain and help elect Barack Obama president. The tone was more campaign headquarters than newsroom. […]
Daniel Levy of the Century Foundation noted that Obama’s “non-official campaign” would need to work hard to discredit Palin. “This seems to me like an occasion when the non-official campaign has a big role to play in defining Palin, shaping the terms of the conversation and saying things that the official [Obama] campaign shouldn’t say – very hard-hitting stuff, including some of the things that people have been noting here – scare people about having this woefully inexperienced, no foreign policy/national security/right-wing christia wing-nut a heartbeat away …… bang away at McCain’s age making this unusually significant …. I think people should be replicating some of the not-so-pleasant viral email campaigns that were used against [Obama].”
 Ryan Donmoyer, a reporter for Bloomberg News who was covering the campaign, sent a quick thought that Palin’s choice not to have an abortion when she unexpectedly became pregnant at age 44 would likely boost her image because it was a heartwarming story.

“Her decision to keep the Down’s baby is going to be a hugely emotional story that appeals to a vast swath of America, I think,” Donmoyer wrote.
Politico reporter Ben Adler, now an editor at Newsweek, replied, “but doesn’t leaving sad baby without its mother while she campaigns weaken that family values argument? Or will everyone be too afraid to make that point?” [MORE]
It goes on from there. Now some people are defending the JournoListers by saying these are mostly opionators not true reporters. Thus sharing opinions is no biggie. Wrong. As lefty partisan hack Joe Klein shows these “shared opinions” become the talking points of the day.
 Time’s Joe Klein then linked to his own piece, parts of which he acknowledged came from strategy sessions on Journolist. “Here’s my attempt to incorporate the accumulated wisdom of this august list-serve community,” he wrote. And indeed Klein’s article contained arguments developed by his fellow Journolisters. Klein praised Palin personally, calling her “fresh” and “delightful,” but questioned her “militant” ideology. He noted Palin had endorsed parts of Obama’s energy proposal.
This is how all these anti Palin themes get out into the public. Out of all the JournoList pieces, this story about trying to stop Palin will be the biggie. How do I know? Bbecause you had better believe Sarah Palin will be putting out a devastating Facebook note within the next 24 hours and the Palin Hating JournoLister won’t be able to ignore it.

It should be noted that a new JournoList 2.0 has sprung up albeit smaller than the original but nonetheless sinister.  I have often said that, after the Tea Parties have successfully swept Democrats from power in 2010, they must turn their attention to the media before 2012.  A good place to start is by memorizing the known list of JournoList members.

UPDATE: Palin responds

Do I know my Sarah Palin or do I know my Sarah Palin? Before I could even finish posting this post, Sarah Palin has responded.
The Daily Caller: “The lamestream media is no longer a cornerstone of democracy in America. They need help. They need to regain their credibility and some respect. There are some pretty sick puppies in the industry today. They really need help,” Palin said.
Palin said that behavior of the media, in betraying the tenets of journalism – also betrays her son’s decision to serve his country overseas and protect the rights of Americans.
“I have lost all respect for the ‘mainstream’ media because they lied; and still lie. And they abuse America’s freedom of the press — because with freedom comes responsibility. My son chose to put his life on the line to defend that freedom, and I feel like his, and every good soldier’s, efforts are thrown in their faces when the press takes advantage of their sacrifices instead of respecting the freedoms they’re willing to die for,” Palin said. [MORE]
The media jackals will pounce in 5, 4, 3, 2,1 …..

Shirley Sherrod caught in the crossfire

In the great pitch battle between the NAACP and the Tea Party movement over politically motivated charges of racism, USDA Georgia Director of Rural Development Shirley Sherrod got caught in the crossfire.

After viewing the full video of Sherrrod’s remark it becomes clear that her story wasn’t one of black vs. white, but rather a shift in attitude from black vs. white to rich vs. poor. Ms. Sherrod also makes clear that this story happened before the USDA employed her. Ms. Sherrod goes on to state that she became good friends with the white farmer in the end and the white farmer’s family confirms Ms. Sherrod’s claims.

Before the full video was made available, Ms. Sherrod was asked to resign her position from the USDA. In a CNN interview, Ms. Sherrod says the request for her resignation came from the White House and that she was disappointed that the NAACP did not bother to hear her out.

Between the administration and the NAACP, the NAACP’s actions are most egregious. The NAACP’s initial reaction was to condemn Sherrod without hearing her side of the story. Once the full story got out, the NAACP claimed that they were snookered by Fox News and Andrew Breitbart.
With regard to the initial media coverage of the resignation of USDA Official Shirley Sherrod, we have come to the conclusion we were snookered by Fox News and Tea Party Activist Andrew Breitbart into believing she had harmed white farmers because of racial bias.
Having reviewed the full tape, spoken to Ms. Sherrod, and most importantly heard the testimony of the white farmers mentioned in this story, we now believe the organization that edited the documents did so with the intention of deceiving millions of Americans. 
This is complete nonsense. The NAACP was in possession of the full video before anyone else yet they did not bother to view it before condemning Sherrod.  They only people who snookered the NAACP was the NAACP themselves when they decided that covering their own ass was far more important than defending Sherrod.

Regarding the administration, their actions were completely political.  In typical Obama administration fashion their goal was to take a hot subject off the front burner any way they can. So Shirley Sherrod was tossed under the bus just like Rev. Wright, Van Jones and Yosi Sargent.  The administration’s claims that it had no input into the request for Sherrod’s resignation and that the decision came from Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack alone.  This is baloney. The Sherrod story was top news and whatever decision was made about her was going to reflect on the administration one way or another. Are we to believe that the White House did not care about the outcome?

Again, in order to remove the hot glare of attention from the Sherrod incident, the administration did a 180 just like the NAACP and is offering Sherrod her job back.

Regarding Andrew Breitbart, his goal was to launch a broadside at the NAACP. Mission accomplished, they made fools of themselves and pulled the administration along with them.  Where Breitbart can be faulted is for using the edited clips without knowing what the full story was about. In doing so, he has left himself open to criticism from the left and has caused most of the focus to go to Ms. Sherrod rather than the NAACP.

That being said, the left and Ms. Sherrod herself seem to think that all this is the fault of Breitbart and Fox News. Nope. Neither Breitbart nor Fox News fired Ms. Sherrod. It was the administration that chose to do that.

Each and every day, both the Democratic Party and the NAACP put themselves out there as great defenders and champions of the black community. Yet when a black person needed some defending, neither this Democratic administration or the NAACP defended her. Instead their first instincts were to defend themselves by throwing Sherrod under the bus. So in the end, the very people Ms, Sherrod is still putting her faith in are the very ones who betrayed her.

Via: CNN
Via: The Washington Post
Via: Media Matters

Wednesday, July 21, 2010

Full Video: Shirley Sherrod’s comments to the NAACP

As we all know many things have come out about USDA Director Shirley Sherrod’s speech to the NAACP. This is the full video of her remarks. A few commenters on the previous post seem to think I was throwing Sherrod under the bus for racism. Perhaps if they actually read my post they would have seen I was only critical of Sherrod for her love of government largess and the full video doesn’t change my mind on that score. I did come down harshly on the NAACP for racism and that still stands too, because the audience is approving when Sherrod tells of how she initially discriminated against the white farmer.

I will be posting shortly about the various plot twist concerning Sherrod, the NAACP and the administration.

Tuesday, July 20, 2010

Journolist to the rescue! How some members of the MSM conspired to save Obama from the Rev. Wright story in 2008

I have often said if harm comes to this nation under the Obama administration that there should be two parties held accountable. First and foremost the administration should be held accountable and secondly and almost equally the MSM media.

During the 2008 election, the MSM pulled out all the stops to get Obama elected. From throwing Hillary Clinton under the bus to savaging Sarah Palin, the media did everything it could to make sure Obama had an easy glide into the White House.

The Daily Caller now has proof of just how much helping the media did to get Obama elected. The Daily Caller has published excerpts from email from the liberal listsev Journolist. What we learn is how writers from Time, Politico, the Huffington Post, the Baltimore Sun, the Guardian, Salon and the New Republic worked on plans on how to soften the blow of the Rev. Wright controversy.  They even discuss making up charges of racism against the right in order to keep Rev. Wright from damaging Obama.

The Daily Caller: In one instance, Spencer Ackerman of the Washington Independent urged his colleagues to deflect attention from Obama’s relationship with Wright by changing the subject. Pick one of Obama’s conservative critics, Ackerman wrote, “Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares — and call them racists.” [...] 
Ackerman went on:
I do not endorse a Popular Front, nor do I think you need to. It’s not necessary to jump to Wright-qua-Wright’s defense. What is necessary is to raise the cost on the right of going after the left. In other words, find a rightwinger’s [sic] and smash it through a plate-glass window. Take a snapshot of the bleeding mess and send it out in a Christmas card to let the right know that it needs to live in a state of constant fear. Obviously I mean this rhetorically.
And I think this threads the needle. If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game they’ve put upon us. Instead, take one of them — Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares — and call them racists. Ask: why do they have such a deep-seated problem with a black politician who unites the country? What lurks behind those problems? This makes *them* sputter with rage, which in turn leads to overreaction and self-destruction.
This is the exact ploy being used against Tea Party activists. I guess they decided to mothball it for later use. What is astounding is that none on the listsev objects to making up racism, they only object to whether or not the strategy will backfire on Obama.  Given the racial tensions that already exist in this nation, I find it a particularly evil to add to that tension by making stuff up for political gain. 
Read the entire Daily Caller piece, and make sure to share the link with anyone you know who is still getting all their news from the mainstream media.

BUSTED! Video of USDA Director Shirley Sherrod sharing a racist moment with the NAACP

Big Government: We are in possession of a video from in which Shirley Sherrod, USDA Georgia Director of Rural Development, speaks at the NAACP Freedom Fund dinner in Georgia. In her meandering speech to what appears to be an all-black audience, this federally appointed executive bureaucrat lays out in stark detail, that her federal duties are managed through the prism of race and class distinctions.
In the first video, Sherrod describes how she racially discriminates against a white farmer. She describes how she is torn over how much she will choose to help him. And, she admits that she doesn’t do everything she can for him, because he is white. Eventually, her basic humanity informs that this white man is poor and needs help. But she decides that he should get help from “one of his own kind”. She refers him to a white lawyer.
Sherrod’s racist tale is received by the NAACP audience with nodding approval and murmurs of recognition and agreement. Hardly the behavior of the group now holding itself up as the supreme judge of another groups’ racial tolerance. [MORE]
What was all that chatter from the NAACP last week about how the Tea Party must remove racists from their ranks?  The good Lord says; “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone”.  Well, it is time for the NAACP to put down its bag of stones and time for them to do a little house cleaning of their own.

It is rather sad to see what the NAACP has become over the years. Here is an organization that once stood boldly against racial discrimination. Today, the organization is chock full of small-minded bigots who prefer to wallow in hypocrisy rather than stand as vanguards against discrimination for all Americans.

When the NAACP decided to take on the Tea Parties, they clearly thought they would be dealing with your typical elected Republican. Instead they are finding out the hard way that conservative activists are not the same as elected Republicans. Wantonly chucking around the race card simply won’t do. The NAACP is now set to have it biases, hypocrisy and foolishness exposed for all of America to see.

Aside from the racism in the video above, Andrew Breitbart exposes another problem (perhaps America’s biggest problem) from the same event with Ms. Sherrod. Ms. Sherrod is caught out there bragging about how great it is to work for Uncle Sam. How despite hard times for the private sector, good times are rolling on the public nickel.

This is exactly what the Tea Party is fighting against. Why should government employees enjoy better job security than the people who actually pay their salary? American Spectator had an article this Saturday called America's Ruling Class -- And the Perils of Revolution. It is a long read (21 pages printed) but well worth it. In it the author Angelo Codevilla spells out where attitudes like Ms. Sherrod’s come from. Take time to read it. It will enlighten you as to what a big task we have ahead of us if we truly want government to work for the people again.

Oh, and before I forget, after her big YouTube moment, Ms. Sherrod has resigned.

Saturday, July 17, 2010

Sign of the times: The Obama Bumper Sticker (BS) Removal Kit

Don’t you just love how the free market knows how to capitalize on everything? I am surprised someone did not think of this sooner. Where I live, there were a slew of Hope and Change Kool Aid drinkers. Cars around here were plastered with Obama bumper stickers. Today only one of my neighbors still sports one. I think I know what I will be getting him for Christmas.

In case you are wondering the BS Removal kit is quite real.

Friday, July 16, 2010

Epic Fail: Mark Williams’ [National Association for the Advancement of] Colored People change minds about emancipation

Mark Williams, radio host and Tea Party Express spokesman has been out in the media firing back at the NAACP for the anti Tea Party resolution. While calling out the NAACP for their divisive racial politics is generally a good thing, Mark Williams has made a fatal mistake with his blog post titled: NAACP Resolution: [National Association for the Advancement of] Colored People change minds about emancipation.

Basically the post is a fictional letter written to Abraham Lincoln by Ben Jealous of the NAACP speaking for its members. 
Dear Mr. Lincoln
We [National Association for the Advancement of] Colored People have taken a vote and decided that we don’t cotton to that whole emancipation thing.  Freedom means having to work for real, think for ourselves, and take consequences along with the rewards.  That is just far too much to ask of us [National Association for the Advancement of] Colored People and we demand that it stop!
In fact we held a big meeting and took a vote in Kansas City this week.  We voted to condemn a political revival of that old abolitionist spirit called the ‘tea party movement’.
The tea party position to “end the bailouts” for example is just silly.  Bailouts are just big moneywelfare and isn’t that what we want all [National Association for the Advancement of] Colored People to strive for?  What kind of racist would want to end big money welfare?  What they need to do is start handing the bail outs directly to us[National Association for the Advancement of]Colored People!  Of course, the NationalAssociation for the Advancement of Colored People is the only responsible party that should be granted the right to disperse the funds.
And the ridiculous idea of “reduce[ing] the size and intrusiveness of government.”  What kind of world would we have is I  ever  to control and be responsible for my life own?  As [National Association for the Advancement of] Colored People we must have somebody care for us otherwise we would be on our own, have to think for ourselves and make decisions and if you do not agree than there is not enough Colored in your People, as we labeled Ken Gladney [source]
The racist tea parties also demand that the government “stop the out of control spending.”  Again, they directly target [National Association for the Advancement of] Colored People.  That means we [National Association for the Advancement of] Colored People would have to compete for jobs like everybody else and that is just not right.
Perhaps the most racist point of all in the tea parties is their demand that government “stop raising our taxes.”  That is outrageous!    Totally racist!  The tea party expects [National Association for the Advancement of] Colored People to be productive members of society, especially when our mission is to convince them that progress is impossible for them based on the color of their skin?
Mr. Lincoln, you were the greatest racist ever.  We had a great gig.  Three squares, room and board, all our decisions made by someone else.  Please repeal the 13th and 14th Amendments and let us get back to where we say that belong.
Ben Jealous, Tom’s Nephew  National Association for the Advancement of Colored People Head Colored Person 
While I understand that Mark Williams is trying to make a point of how backwards the logic of the NAACP has become, the execution of that point is a complete failure. This “letter” is the kind of thing that simply strengthens the left’s argument about racism in the Tea Parties. So much of it reads like the stereotypical accusations that have been leveled at blacks for eons. Without full background behind the debate between Williams and the NAACP, it is too easy to read this letter and assume the charges are being leveled against all black people. It’s an Epic Fail in execution.

Another reason why this letter is a failure is because it doesn’t directly address the true problem with the NAACP. The NAACP’s problem is that they are using the good they did in the past like a mask.  The mask is designed to look like they are defending or advancing the black race, when what they really are doing is launching racial attacks in order to defend the liberal agenda. Getting into a battle over the term “colored people” does little to remove the mask and expose the true goals of the NAACP.

It is high time we all started challenging those who play the race card for political gain. However, race is still a flashpoint for controversy and thus requires a very thoughtful and tactful approach. Sloppy ill-conceived approaches like this one can only backfire and end up doing way more harm than good.

Arlen Specter to Obama Administration: I need a job

Arlen Specter, the poster child of self-serving politicians, is once again looking out for his bacon rather than his constituents. 
Jake Tapper: Sources tell ABC News that Sen. Arlen Specter, D-Pennsylvania, has informed the White House that he would like to consider remaining in public service after his Senate term ends at the end of this session, and White House officials are keeping an open mind about possible job openings for him. […]
Sources said the job discussions are far from anything other than preliminary, and were not part of any "deal" when Specter switched parties and began supporting President Obama's agenda in earnest.
Neither the White House nor Specter had any comment.

Talk of such a job, however, has raised eyebrows among Specter’s Republican Senate colleagues, who are now eyeing his votes with added scrutiny. For instance, Specter seemed not particularly impressed with Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan, whose nomination as solicitor general Specter opposed last year. This week, he announced support for her Supreme Court nomination.
I am sorry, but there is only one word to describe Arlen Specter and it is “whore”. One would think that after the Sestak quid pro quo both Specter and the administration would know better than to entertain such a notion.

Specter’s request does make you wonder about his sudden turnaround on the Kegan nomination. Was this Specter showing the administration he is willing to play ball or is this payment for a job already promised?  Things that make you go hummm.

Via: Paterico’s Pontifications 
Related Posts with Thumbnails