Another person weighs in on racism – certain he can read the minds of folks he has never spoken to. He talks about peace and unity and thoughtfulness and yet is totally clueless about how his own blanket statement is divisive. And of course it’s CNN feeding it to him.
CNN: President Carter said he thinks that a lot of the animosity directed toward President Obama is race related.
Dave Matthews:Of course it is! I found there’s a fairly blatant racism in America that’s already there, and I don’t think I noticed it when I lived here as a kid. But when I went back to South Africa, and then it’s sort of thrust in your face, and then came back here — I just see it everywhere. There’s a good population of people in this country that are terrified of the president only because he’s black, even if they don’t say it. And I think a lot of them, behind closed doors, do say it.
Is he behind the closed doors with them? Has he heard them say it? Has he polled the population?
Does he even realize how bigoted that answer was?
Does he remember what barry polled at? The margin of victory he had? The demographics of the screaming crowds? O his volunteers and campaign workers?
Did he think Republicans were going to love barry and his massive overhaul? That they weren’t going to be angry at the way barry is protected by the media and Bush was trashed? The way barry has not been vetted in any fashion?
Did he consider how little is known about barry? About how far he has gone to keep it hidden? And how frustrated folks are that the media still refuses to vet him?
Does he know how much the media has not revealed about barry that is negative? How little they covered Van Jones an admitted Communist? How little they are covering ACORN – how little they covered it when they were actively engaged in voter fraud so barry could win?
Has he given thought to how terrorized Secry Clinton would be? How the sexist and misogynists would be screaming angry and how no one, including the press, would do a damn thing about it? Why? Because it happened throughout the primaries.
Matthews: Maybe I’m paranoid about it, but I don’t think someone who disagreed as strongly as they do with Obama — if it was Clinton — would have stood up and screamed at him during his speech. (Shakes his head) I don’t think so.
CNN: Everything has gone to such a frenzied pitch.
Matthews: I think a lot of it has to be on the press. We give the podium to a lot of people who shouldn’t have the podium. The message that’s delivered the loudest and in the most entertaining way is the one that we’re going to put on because that’s what we want. We want ratings more than we want to deliver information. That’s just where the culture’s gotten.
First of all, no one stood up and screamed. What are the chances Matthews even saw that with his own eyes? And at that point barry was lying – he had included illegal aliens in the number he used to count uninsured “Americans”. Rep Wilson had read the bill – how many Democrats do you think read it? I’ll bet Rep Johnson didn’t read it.
And it’s ok for a black man to say – because a man said two racially neitral words – You lie – that that man is the face of the KKK?
That’s perfectly fine?
Why?
And Matthews should not have been given a podium on this like he doesn’t want others to have.. Write songs and incite your audience. Don’t talk about a good population of folks you know nothing about – especially when you know nothing about barry. Anyone allowed to make such blanket statements should be quizzed on what they actually know about barry. Then Matthews would be exposed for backing a man he knows nothing about and who uses race to hide behind.
How much do you think Rep Johnson knows about barry?
Reckon he and Matthews believe barry released his birth certificate?
Since they know so much about other folks – can they name the hospital barry was born in?
Unless barry is exposed for the fraud he is – the next three years will be spent listening to claims of racism everywhere. It’s exactly what barry counted on – what he wrote in his book – what he used in the primaries – what he used in the general election and what he has done thus far in his presidency. He only weighed in about race and Wilson’s comments because Michael Steele called him out on it. He is anything but a uniter or transcender of race – he traffics in it.
All you folks who free to make blanket statements of racism and believe people’s outrage is racially motivated – name one thing barry has done that will improve the lives of the next generation. Right now eight months in.
Anything?
And do you really believe he won’t raise taxes and that the budget deficit isn’t going to increase with his health care whatever he’s decides on this week?
And what about the President of the United States going abroad and apologizing for the US?
And what about President Carter going over and hanging out with HAMAS?
You don’t think that hasn’t outraged folks rightfully?
What has barry done that he has actually – he himself – taken responsibility for?
Anything?
Has anyone out there put together a graph on barry’s race baiting and how it correlates with his dropping poll numbers and primary losses?
Then it will be right there in black and white for all to see.
I’m happy this is the last thing I have to post on this. Taitz, in her zeal to go mano a mano with Judge Land, abandoned her client (and her “followers”) and then filed a motion on behalf of her client that her client did not authorize. A client now in Iraq had to read those words in Taitz’s crazy motion that were ascribed to her. If Taitz actually cared about Capt Rhodes and what her life is going to be like, she would have read the judge’s ruling.
Yes, he was completely unprofessional using “birther” and should never had had a hearing in the first place, but the ruling was very clear and Taitz had no chance at challenging it. And if she was going to she should have challenged the basis of the ruling, which she never even mentioned.
Judge Land should be sanctioned as well. He should never have had a hearing, let alone three, he should have been professional and concise in his ruling – sticking only to abstention and not addressing anything else, including standing, money spent on campaigns, or whether an impeachment hearing had been instituted as if any of it mattered – and he should not have written this type of ruling.
Here he gives “birther” a footnote and takes the time to further his own political agenda. The ruling should have been three paragraphs. He warned Taitz with his first ruling, she didn’t listen, so he sanctioned her. She has 14 days to come up with some reason why he shouldn’t fine her $10K.
Beyond that, Taitz filed the motion without her client’s approval – her client only finding out about it on the news before she went to bed. Capt Rhodes wrote a letter to the judge apologizing for Taitz and said she was going to write a letter to the California bar to report Taitz. Capt Rhodes has been deployed to Iraq.
Unfortunately, whatever chance there was with Judge Carter is now gone with Taitz at the helm. Those military plaintiffs had better look closely at what she did to Capt Rhodes and decide where their loyalty lies.
I do not understand why Taitz filed on something that could never have been won and should not even been brought to hearing. Judge Land dismissed the case because he had to. Because the Court is not authorized to rule on the matter of Capt Rhodes (or anyone else’s) deployment.
Period. End of story. No reconsideration of any sort is going to change that and a judge that hostile even if there were a chance would have not allowed it.
And the worst part is Capt Rhodes, who is going to be deployed, now has to worry about how she is going to pay the defense’s court costs. I hope someone stays on that story. They make Capt Rhodes pay, that will show how scummy barry is.
If Taitz was going to do anything she should have tried humble and asked the judge to withdraw that part of the ruling.
Instead she claimed that Capt Rhodes was denied her Fifth Amendment right to due process because she was denied an opportunity to address the defenses’ motion to dismiss. And in an incredible feat of circular logic – that Capt Rhodes had no meaningful access to the courts because Land’s ruling didn’t address any of her arguments.
He didn’t address the plaintiffs arguments because there was no need to because the Court is not authorized to interfere with military deployment.
And she writes this:
Plaintiff avers that there is increasing evidence that the United State District Courts in the 11th Circuit are subject to the same political pressure, external control, and most likely, subservience to the illegitimate chain of command, which plaintiff has previously protested in this case, except that the de facto President of the United States in not even nominally the Commander in Chief of the Artilce III Judiciary.
Does that sound like anything a soldier would allow to be written, especially after she lost and knows she’s going to Iraq?
And it seems barry sr was guilty of treason too.
It is reasonably certain that the men who framed the constitution did not anticipate the election of a man as a president who appears to have prevaricated about his place of birth and then ordered his loyal followers to ridicule all those who questioned the contradictions inherent in his own biography, such as the obvious fact that his father was an (admittedly disloyal and possibly treacherous) subject of the British Crown when he was born, even though this fact alone would disqualify the president as a ‘natural born citizen,’ regardless of his place of birth.
Here’s a better copy of Capt Rhodes Affidavit as to why she was unable to keep the initial court hearing — her supervisor wouldn’t let her. The images downloaded off Taitz’s site disappear.
Does WND really want to get to the bottom of the birth certificate issue?
You know at one point they certified that COLB to be authentic?
Or do they want to be known as “the only site to cover it from the start” and string readers along to fund more whatevers?
I became convinced after I watched the exchange between Lester Kingsolving and Robert Gibbs. Kingsolving could have gotten to the bottom of this before barry took office and most definitely he could have forced them to Gibbs hand at the end of July.
But why didn’t he?
They had a new video set to be released on barry’s birthday that would be meaningless if they had exposed barry. My guess is they’ll wait till the revenue from the video drops and then say something – but not deal the final blow – unless someone else is close.
Look how they stepped in to attack Lucas Smith so they could get in on that action. They worked with Taitz – Farrah even going to Washington with her and now are turning on her (perhaps with good reason).
It’s sad. Folks who have the power to end this are hypocritical cowards and WND #1, Bill O’Reilly #2, the entire MSM#3.
[For full exchanges with videos/transcripts, follow the links or the one at top.]
If they wanted to end it, Lester Kingsolving would be asking Gibbs every day. The first time he was asked on record MAY 27, 2009.
GIBBS:Are you looking for the President’s birth certificate?
KINGSOLVING: Yes.
GIBBS: It’s on the Internet, Lester.
KINGSOLVING: No, no, no — the long form listing his hospital and physician.
GIBBS: Lester, this question in many ways continues to astound me. Thestate of Hawaii provided a copy with the seal of the President’s birth.
Why did he wait so long to get Gibbs on record?
So they could get their billboards in full swing?
How much cash did/are they hauling in?
And look what Gibbs said – he said Hawaii provided that COLB. Lester could have narrowed Gibbs down on when they asked for it, who sent it and who he could confirm that with. And he could have asked straight out for a copy of the COLB.
Does WND have a copy of that COLB?
My guess is, yes, absolutely.
Next time Lester asked was almost 7 weeks later on JULY 13.
He asked Gibbs about the letter [which was conveniently broken while barry was out of the country] and what the name of the hospital was barry was born in.
KINGSOLVING: While you and the President were overseas on July the 7th, there was on the Internet a copy of a letter on White House letterhead dated January the 24th, 2009, with the signature “Barack Obama,” which stated “Theplace of my birth was Honolulu’s Kapi’olani Medical Center.”
And my question is, can you verify this letter?
Or if not, would you tell us which Hawaiian hospital he was born in, since Kapi’olani, which used to publicize this, now refuses to confirm?
MR. GIBBS:Goodness gracious. I’m going to be, like, in year four describing where it is the President was born. I don’t have the letter at my fingertips, obviously, andI don’t know the name of the exact hospital.
KINGSOLVING:Can you check on this?
MR. GIBBS: I will seek to interview whoever brought the President into this world. But can we just — I want to do this once and for all, Lester. Let’s just do this once and for all. You can go on this — I hope you’ll take the time not just to Google “President, January 24, Hawaii hospital, birth” and come up with this letter, but go on the Internet andget the birth certificate,Lester, and put –
KINGSOLVING:It’s not a birth certificate.
GIBBS:I KNOW.
Just a document from the state of Hawaii denoting the fact that the President was indeed born in the state of Hawaii.
KINGSOLVING: But it doesn’t say where he was born or who the doctor was.
GIBBSthen talks about “the noble truth”:
….Do all of your listeners and the listeners throughout this country the service to which any journalist owes those listeners, and that is the pursuit of the noble truth. And the noble truth is that the President was born in Hawaii…they can look to you for that momentous search for the truth, and you can wipe away all the dark clouds and provide them with theknowing clarity that comes with that certainty.
Why hasn’t anyone sought to interview who brought barry into the world? Why hasn’t one stepped up? Not even one kook? And again Gibbs states it’s a “document” from the state of Hawaii. No. It’s a digital image of what appears to be something that could have come frm the state of Hawaii but was never proven so.
And after being ridiculed with sarcasm and lectured to about “the noble truth” by a man who is a clear liar, this is what he says:
KINGSOLVING:Another question.
And goes on to ask why some staffers weren’t invited to the WH Fourth of July fireworks celebration. No kidding. And then Gibbs brings the birth certificate back up all by himself.
GIBBS:I haven’t the slightest idea what the invitation system is for the July 4th fireworks. I’ll do this. I’ll figure that out.
You figure out the Hawaii birth certificate.
We’ll meet here sometime next week and we can discuss it all over again.
How about that, Lester?
Indeed, how about it Lester?
Did he ask the following week JULY 20 as Gibbs instructed – offered?
Nope.
KINGSOLVING: Robert, just two questions?
GIBBS:I thought we were going to do yours at 4:00 p.m. today, Lester. Go ahead.
KINGSOLVING: Oh, Robert.
GIBBS:I know, I’m going to skip you for right now, Lester, I know.
KINGSOLVING: You’ll be back?
GIBBS:Do you have your birth certificate with you,can you — go ahead — (laughter.) You do?
KINGSOLVING: I’m not going to ask about that.
GIBBS:We’ll save that for next week.
Wouldn’t someone ask if they really and truly wanted to get to the bottom of it — especially when Gibbs is the one bringing it up?
Someone else brings up the birth certificate issue – not Lester – and they have themselves a good chuckle.
BILL: Robert, I hate to bring this upbut somebody has to.
GIBBS: Uh-oh.
BILL: Is there anything you can say that will make the birthers go away?
GIBBS:A year-and-a-half ago I asked that the birth certificate be put on the Internet….The President wasborn in Honolulu,Hawaii…He’s acitizen.
18 months ago was January 2008. So he asked then and it wasn’t put up for another 5 months. Did Lester make him clarify why the discrepancy?
GIBBS: But I have no doubt that Lester will ask me soon, and that I will receive e-mail –
KINGSOLVING:You’re wrong — I’ve got another question.
This could have been solved very easily in the press briefing in 3 consecutive days. At most.
Even Ms Helen Thomas has gone soft. The words in RED here were intentionally omitted from the official WH transcript and of course Lester said nothing.
MR. GIBBS:See, there we go. I’ll take my winnings and put it in my son’s college fund. But no, nothing will assuage them. But there are 10,000 more important issues for people in this country to discuss, rather than, uh, [he pauses]
HELEN THOMAS:Violation of the Constitution.
LESTER:Violation of the Constitution.
GIBBS:…uh, whether or not the President is a citizen,when it’s been proven ad nauseum.
When Thomas said “violation of the Constitution” she proved she was aware of it and then disingenuously asks this:
THOMAS:Why do you think it keeps coming up?
MR. GIBBS: Because for $15, you can get an Internet address and say whatever you want.
And for $15 barry could put it all to rest.
And the following week?
Was barry’s birthday when their documentary was released.
And the following week?
When the Kenyan BC #1 happened to mysteriously appear several days before WND’s documentary debut?
Did Lester ever ask about the Kenyan BC just to get Gibbs’ comments on record?
Perhaps ask how he’s certain they’re fakes?
Perhaps to push the issue since there was an immediate reason to see the Hawaii birth CERTIFICATE?
Nothing.
And the next six weeks?
Nothing.
What more is needed to prove they are as corrupted as FOX and the rest of the MSM?
Fine to agitate every once in awhile to increase traffic to their site and start a new fundraising campaign.
How much money did they make while those 400,000 folks went to their site to sign the petition?
If they were not willingly corrupted and were actually interested in making barry produce his birth certificate – Lester could have asked every day for the last 8 months.
That’s at least 150 days he voluntarily chose not to ask.
The press has been completely corrupted and that includes Helen Thomas, FOX and WND.
The press, talk radio, and the courts are clearly not going to solve this – independent film makers and regular citizens on “weird little internet sites” are will.
Seems barry doesn’t have much to say to his old employers and coworkers at ACORN = Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now. Maybe he used to give pimp advice? barry’s only “community organizing” accomplishment was registering the most ever low income folks in Chicago. Well it’s clear how he must have accomplished. Do you think he used Disney characters and the Cowboys too? And who were those votes? Good old racist Mr Bill. Guess he wasn’t racist at that point. Guess not every whitey was racist then.
barry:
What I saw on that video was certainly inappropriate and deserves to be investigated.
It appears betraying them might be a little harder. Asked if he supported cutting off government ACORN grants:
This is not the biggest issue facing the country. It’s not something I’m paying a lot of attention to.
ACORN has already gotten over $50 MILLION and were to get in the billions for the bailout. Think anyone will go back and investigate how much of barry’s campaign funding came from those offices and other like them or are there more pressing issues than finding out how barry funded his campaign?
Recall barry’s campaign words: We did not use ACORN in the general election. By then what did it matter. He got the nomination.
The Senate & House Have both called for stopping ACORN funding.
FBI, who said ACORN was being investigated back before the general election, is moving slowly.
Already there are 11 states investigating ACORN for alleged voter registration fraud in the general election. And those are only the most glaring.
ACORN CEO, Bertha Lewis, told FOX she has fired anyone shown on videotape to have acted improperly, launched an independent internal review and will announce on Monday an independent audit of the organization.
And what has she been scrambling to do over the last week?
It appears Orly Taitz acted independently and filed the appeal without her client’s permission. Capt Rhodes said she had no idea what Taitz was doing until she saw it on the news before she went to sleep. So she wrote the judge a letter stating the facts and her intent to write a letter of censure to the California State Bar concerning Taitz’s reprehensible and unprofessional behavior.
This is what Taitz submitted to the court that Capt Rhodes did not authorize.
Capt Rhodes evidently shipped out to Iraq Friday.
Here’s her letter – she told the judge that she “simply wanted to verify the lawfulness of her orders”.
I’ll put up the other stuff in a while. Taitz filed, Taitz misfiled, Taitz lost, Tazitz was threatened with $10K sanction.
Well, that’s what it was supposed to be. Drop the pl and add the 6th letter of the alphabet and you’re there.
Unfortunately the anchor who said it, Ernie Anastos of FOX affiliate WNYW, had no idea. The funniest part is his co-anchor Dari Alexander’s eyeballs – other wise it might have passed. The weatherman, Nick Gregory, didn’t seem to get it.
luke2k
It takes a tough man to make a tender forecast…
Keep *ucking that chicken!
APOLOGY:
I misspoke during last night’s newscast. I apologize for my remarks to anyone who may have beenoffended.
I’m convinced Taitz has crossed over to mediablitzer. Instead of concentrating on her cases, she files a rambling motion re: Rhodes v MacDonald that is worthless because her case could never have succeeded anyway: the Court was not authorized to interfere with deployment orders. She should have known that and she should have known that without some verification outside a one time kidney seller oh not not if you don’t pay me dude who’s had the thing since Feb and all she has to do is talk to the hospital administrator.
Why does she think they will be anything other than ridiculing and why doesn’t she speak of the case and not all that other crap?
Isn’t there any sane person involved over there?
Has there been a single court filing that was done correctly the first time without typos or rants?
Anyway she tries out Dylan Radigan, who is a sexist to begin with and just plain nasty and has already said birthers are nuts and hello it’s MSNBC. He attacks her with his first response and she goes on.
She starts saying they’re wrong after MSNBC’s Kitty Pilgrim mentions Taitz’s case.
RADIGAN:What’s your plan from here?
TAITZ:
I wish, for once, you people would give truthful information.
RADIGAN (combative):
Which people are you referring to?
Since I’m the only person here, can you tell me what I said that was wrong?
That’s why he had Alex do the summary. So he wouldn’t have to debate. He doesn’t know anything.
She responds by talking about Judge Carter and gives the address and the court date…he gets agitated with his uh-uhn and she keeps going and then he explodes:
RADIGAN:
Orly, Orly, Orly, ORLY! This is not a monologue, ORLY! This is not a monologue. Now, I will let you answer, but you will let me ask you questions, or you will not come on this show, ok?
TAITZ laughs: OK, that’s a real threat.
RADIGAN:
This is a new plan. I talk and you talk. You just don’t come on TV and talk. And I won’t do it either.
He looks more a rude idiot than she does. It’s clear his agenda was to make more fun of her than Shuster & Hall.
RADIGAN:
The first judge said basically you are wasting people’s time.
Again the judge threw it out because the Court can’t rule on it. It should never have been brought to hearing.
RADIGAN:
Why do you think the other judge is indulging the prosecution? What’s different about the two judges?
On the screen: ‘Taitz: Judge is a “puppet”
She talks about Judge Carter being a former Marine and that “he really believes in Constitution”. Radigan says she’s been prosecuting the president. You can’t prosecute unless a case gets heard.
RADIGAN;
He says it’s been reviewed and reviewed and reviewd and reviewed and reviewed and reviewed and all the evidence CONTINUES to show he was born here.
Who’s reviewing it? Rick Sanchez, Kitty Pilgrim, Olbermann and Maddow, who all think that is a copy of his BIRTH CERTIFICATE? The court cases – none of which have ever gotten to the discovery phase and have never been about the birth certificate per se? There has never been a ruling that barry WAS born in Hawaii. Why doesn’t she just for once point that out and nothing else? Make them name it.
And what evidence?
There is not a single document released to the public that definitively proves barry was born in Hawaii. Not a single person outside the two Hawaii officials have seen his “original birth certificate” “original vital records”.
RADIGAN:
At what point do you think ‘Hang on, I’m either acting as a political operative or I’m just wasting my time’. Even if you believe it you, maybe go to the beach and doing something else?
He equates going to the beach with a possible usurper president conning The American People and the world.
TAITZ:How can you lie to your viewers ike?
RADIGAN: Ok. Where’s my lie?
TAITZ:
Nobody in this country, not one single person, has seen a hospital birth certificate….
He shakes his head in disgust and looks off camera. Really he is very rude. Don’t these people realize how it reflects on them as human beings? He invited her on the show just to be cruel.
RADIGAN:
The genius thing about people like you is that you like to accuse others of being liars as a way to cut a boulevard so you can just blather on a bunch of lies.
He thinks it’s the BIRTH CERTIFICATE too. Comedy hour – they put up that one-sided COLB that even Chris Matthews has figured out is a worthless piece of crap.
They fight back and forth. She sits back and smirks at him.
RADIGAN: I appreciate your attempting the conversation.
TAITZ finally says what she should have led with:
Show me the name of the hospital.
RADIGAN:
I appreciate your attempting the conversation. I admire your passion. I’m hopeful that after you’re done with the birthers that maybe you can direct it towards helping us restore free and fair competition in America and not just play political spitball fighting.
Restore free and fair competition? What in the hell does that have to do with anything?
As much as I hate to see the Bears lose to GB – it couldn’t have been a better start for Cutler to wipe that rich kid look off his face. He sucked and the media let him have it including the national media. His body language says it all and his face just adds to it. He looked frightened and clueless. And the receivers aren’t going to be pleased to catch those high passes over the middle. Here he is hiding under his hate.
Coach Lovie Smith tries to lower expectations for the Steelers. Thing is the defense is going to be a mess because Uhrlacher’s gone for the season so Cutler is not going to be able to rely on the defense for scores. Although it was funny that our first score of the year was a safety.
What are the chances Devon Hester will every return another punt or kickoff?
Why doesn’t Matthews stick to something else he’s less clueless about?
He clearly has no grasp on the “birthers” except for the mandatory sarcasm and vicarious pleasure of trashing them. Unfortunately, in order to trash someone on 24/7 cable and readily available video/transcripts, one must be in the ballpark close to truth.
Accurate and unbaised no longer exist in the MSM.
Here is his “Sideshow” segment: Birther be gone. He reads Judge Land’s ruling about Capt Rhodes – delighted with the Alice in Wonderland quote.
What he has absolutely no clue about is the case was dismissed not because of a “frivolous claim” as Judge put on the front page – but because:
The COURT FINDS IT IS NOT AUTHORIZED TO INTERFERE WITH HER DEPLOYMENT ORDERS.
Sure good old sexist Land made a case for shaming Capt Rhodes and Taitz, going through bizarre facts like – no one has instigated impeachment hearings (he skipped over quo warranto), the amount of money spent on campaigning, as some sort of vetting tool and the Hawaii anniversary resolution that has absolutely ZERO legal worth. And besides that unprofessional quote he used “birther” all over the place – including “birther movement” which doesn’t exactly have a nice ring to it.
Bottom line:
Capt Rhodes could have walked in there with barry’s birth certificate and Land still would have denied her TRO for deployment because the COURT REFUSED IS NOT AUTHORIZED AND REFUSED TO INTERFERE.
Judge Land should have summarily dismissed the case. Instead he had 3 unnecessary hearings and ruled that the Plaintiff, an Army physician who signed up because she couldn’t pay for medical school, shall pay the defendant’s costs.
So have a good laugh on barama. A guy who chose the Peace Corps route should not be joking about an Army physician going into a combat zone.
First up: Nice try. A doctor in the Army trying to get out of being sent in Iraq filed a suit claiming that the commander in chief, President Obama, doesn‘t have the right to cut the orders. The officer takes the nut country view that the president was born elsewhere, that he somehow tricked his birth announcement in Hawaii, with the notion of getting himself unconstitutionally elected president 40-some years later.
Notice he is no longer waving around the “birth certificate”? Someone finally clued him in. Perhaps they should have another chat with him.
Now he just reads selected portions of Land’s ruling.
Well, a U.S. district judge in Georgia has just thrown out the case. Here‘s his ruling—quote—“Plaintiff‘s challenge to her deployment order is frivolous. She has presented no credible evidence and has made no reliable factual allegations to support her unsubstantiated conclusory allegations. Instead, she uses her complaint as a platform for spouting political rhetoric, such as her claims that the president is an illegal usurper, an unlawful pretender, and an unqualified impostor.”
Well, here is the judge‘s final order: “Unlike in ‘Alice in Wonderland,‘ simply saying something is so doesn‘t make it so.”
I love this judge.
Of course he does…sexists hang together when they should just follow each other down the rabbit hole.
And this is unconscionable besides being ignorant.
So, how would you like to be a member of the service serving our country needing medical treatment over in Iraq and learning the doctor in charge is that doctor?
I don’t know why this is happening again but posts are disappearing again.
September 17, 2009
Undercover ACORN video featuring Hannah Giles as “Eden” a faux ho and James, a law school student cum aspiring politician pimp trafficking in 12-15 y/o El Salvadorean girls brought to you by Andrew Breitbart’s biggovernment.com.
Star: ACORN worker Theresa Kaelke, admits on camera, without reticence or enticement, that she shot her husband point blank, that she used to run and escort service, Heidi Fleiss is her idol and that she’s not a fan of the IRS.
Police looked into her claim about her husband and said there appeared to be nothing to is.
I do believe she had some non-indigenous chemicals on board. How’s the meth trade there?
Undercover ACORN video in Baltimore: ACORN workers lacking mammary support freely offer concrete advice on prostitution. All that’s missing is how to get the underage girls into the country.
What’s alarming is they are talking about prostitution and underage sex trafficking with children in the next room.
Do have to give her props for saying the kids have to go to school.
Also, whoever is answering phones mentions OBAMA. (5:40)
Donttreadonme
You’re a performing artist so you’re not lying.
If the police come put pressure on you, I can’t cover you.
An overwhelming portion of the intensely demonstrated animosity toward President Barack Obama is based on the fact that he is a black man, that he’s African-American. I live in the South and I’ve seen the South come a long way. And I’ve seen the rest of the country, that shared the South’s attitude toward minority groups, at that time, particularly African-Americans. That racism in connection still exists. And I think it’s bubbled up to the surface because of a belief among many white people, not just in the South, but around the country, that African-Americans are not qualified to lead this great country.
BLITZER: Very strong words from former President Jimmy Carter. Let’s get some reaction from the chairman of the Republican National Committee.
MICHAEL STEELE, REPUBLICAN NATIONAL CHAIRMAN: Hey, Wolf. Good to be with you, buddy.
BLITZER: What do you want to say to the former president?
STEELE: Well, I’ll make it as short and sweet and simple as possible — you’re just dead wrong. I think the president’s interpretation of what racism is is not a reflection of what this is about. And the reality of it is, this is about policy -- differences in how we approach solving some of these issues that we’re confronting on health care and the economy. And the fact that there are citizens around the country — I don’t care what color they are — that are outraged or — or confused or concerned or whatever, however they come to this debate, you know, that has nothing to do with the color of the president’s skin. I am, like a lot of Americans, concerned and disagree with the president’s policies and approaches, from the stimulus spending to this health care strategy.
BLITZER: But — but…
STEELE: Am I racist because I disagree with that?
BLITZER: But there is…
STEELE: I don’t think so.
BLITZER: There is an element — a tiny element, I should say, a small fringe element out there — and you’re sensitive to this, I think — that — that does have racist views of the president.
STEELE: Well, look, hey, they have the racist views about me. I mean they’re — they’re racist, if that’s the case. But that has not been the nature of this policy debate. And that’s where I have the problem with the president’s comments, because he’s elevated it to the point that is it now, you know, a reaction to everything. Everybody who has this negative approach or view on this subject is a racist. And that’s not where we are. That’s not where the country is. And I just thought that the president was out of line. And I think that he takes this to a point and to a level that is not reflective of what’s been transpiring in this debate.
BLITZER: The…
STEELE: My second concern, Wolf, is that when you go down that road, when you just look behind every corner and see race and racism — now, that’s not to say it doesn’t exist. Lord knows it still does. And I’ve had a problem with this post-racial attitude that some in the Obama campaign, now in the administration, have tried to — to hoist out there. But when you go down this road and you start just willy- nilly, as I believe President Carter has, throwing race out there, you diminish real instances of race…
BLITZER: All right…
STEELE: …racism that needs to be addressed.
BLITZER: Let — let me point out what Maureen Dowd, “The New York Times” columnist, she wrote a very powerful column last Sunday. She had another one out today. And today she suggests that — and she has an interview with James Clyburn, the congressman from South Carolina, the highest ranking African-American in the U.S. Congress, Democrat. He’s the whip.
And she writes this: “Over the years, Clyburn tried to look past things that bothered him” — referring to Joe Wilson, the congressman who screamed “You lie” to the president. “Wilson’s membership in some groups that call into question his feelings about this whole notion of white supremacy and his defense of the Confederate flag flying above the Columbia, South Carolina statehouse.”
It’s not just Jimmy Carter, it’s Maureen Dowd and others who are suggesting this racial…
STEELE: Yes, it is…
BLITZER: …overtone is out there.
STEELE: It is (INAUDIBLE). Oh, yes,it is this wonderful ivory tower liberal elite who think they know racism better than I do, who think they understand what it’s like better than I do…
BLITZER: But…
STEELE: …that they know…
BLITZER: But James Clyburn…
STEELE: …it better than I see it.
BLITZER: …understands what racism…
STEELE: And the reality of it is…
BLITZER: James Clyburn understands racism, right?
STEELE: Well, yes. But James Clyburn’s — James Clyburn’s experience is different from mine. I don’t hear someone call an individual a liar and immediately jump to racism. And so that’s the problem. This generation of Americans don’t do that. Dr. King laid a foundation that we have progressed from, where we are better at distinguishing vestiges of racism that exist in this country. And so when you step back and you try to wrap around the way Clyburn, Carter and Maureen are trying to do, I think it is disingenuous and it — it negates…
BLITZER: You know…
STEELE: …real effective approaches to solving racism where it is.
BLITZER: This was the statement that Congressman — Democratic Congressman Henry Johnson of South Carolina made. And it — it’s causing a lot of consternation out there, as well. Listen to this.
==============
REP. HENRY “HANK” JOHNSON (D), GEORGIA: It instigated more racist sentiment, feeling that it’s OK, you don’t have to — you don’t have to bury it now, you can bring it out and talk about it fully. And so I guess we’ll probably have folks putting on white hoods and white uniforms again and riding through the countryside intimidating people.
=======
BLITZER: Wow! That’s a — that’s a pretty powerful statement he’s making.
STEELE: I think…
BLITZER: What do…
STEELE: …it’s an ignorant statement. I think it’s an ignorant statement, I’m sorry. That is just so — it is just beyond my comprehension that you jump from a — a member of Congress who blurted out in an emotional response to something the president said to all of a sudden people are going to be running through the neighborhoods wearing white sheets and hoods. I’m sorry. It just, to me, it’s beyond anyone’s comprehension that you can make that leap. But that again makes my point.
And so, you know, I’m where the president is on this. Now, the president of the United States said, on many occasions, that matters of race, whether we are having a discussion or we’re trying to solve a problem, is a teachable moment. I think that teachable moment — that classroom right now should have Carter and Clyburn and others in it, so they understand what the president and I understand. And that is there’s a very fine distinction between what we heard…
BLITZER: All right…
STEELE: …in that hall last week and what we’re hearing right now.
BLITZER: Congressman…
STEELE: And this, to me…
BLITZER: Congressman…
STEELE: …is the problem.
BLITZER: Congressman Johnson, I should correct, is from Georgia, not from South Carolina. But you have to admit, if you take a look at some of those rallies, there were some really racist pictures out there. And we’ll put a few of them up there on the screen — a video showing — or pictures of — of the president of the United States as an African witch doctor, if you will. There — there it is right there. There were — there were these kinds of racist images that were projected at some of those rallies.
STEELE: You know, look, that’s inappropriate and misplaced. That’s what that — how that person may have interpreted it. But that, for every one of those, Wolf, there were 70, 80, 100, 1,000 other signs that weren’t that. And so this is — this is the distinction I think we need to understand. Don’t hold up one person as an example of behavior by everyone, because that’s not what we’re talking about here.
And I think we need to be very careful and — and sensitive. If we want to stay serious about solving some of the issues on race, then we just can’t go around every corner claiming it exists there and it exists there when — when it doesn’t. And that’s — that’s where I have a real problem with a lot of these folks who are coming out here now,trying to play this card from beneath the deck in such a way to stifle debate, to have us focus on something other…
BLITZER: You…
STEELE: …than the president’s policies. Instead, now we’re having this discussion about race. And, finally, on this point, I’d like to have the president give his own view on this. Does he believe…
BLITZER: Well, the White House…
STEELE: …in what Clyburn…
BLITZER: The White House today…
STEELE: …and Maureen Dowd have said?
BLITZER: The White House press secretary today, Robert Gibbs, agreed with you. He doesn’t believe that racism is part of this angry debate that is out there. So he seems, at least on this narrow point, to agree with Michael Steele.
You have your hands cut out for you. You’re the chairman of the Republican Party. And you’ve — you have a largely white party. I want to put a picture up on the screen, Mr. Chairman, of the floor of the joint session of Congress, the Democrats and the Republicans.
Drew 3,600 grassroots activists from 32 states, including Gamaliel (founded by started by Saul Alinsky) and ACORN people, to question presidential candidates about the issues and values that are important to low-income people. barry said ACORN and friends, responsible for voting fraud and the subprime crisis, are going to be shaping policy for an obama presidency.
Deepak Bhargave lobbied for ACORN to force the Clinton administration to toughen the Community Reinvestment Act.
ACORN and barry then sued banks to force bad loans.
Deepak created the forum.
BHARGAVE:
That is why we have created the campaign for community organizers bringing together hundreds of grass roots organizations from a cross the United States to begin today to continue the elections till we win the elections justice in America for everyone!
Courtesy of Naked EmperorNews
INTERVIEWER:
If elected president would you agree in you first one hundred to agree to meet with a delegations of these various delegations from these various organizations – the campaign for community values – could they count on you in you first 100 days to sit down with them?
barry:
Before I even get inaugurated, (12-1-07 he’s saying this), during the transition we’re gonna be calling all of you in to help us shape the agenda.
We’re gonna be having meetings all across the country with community organizations so you have input into the agenda for the next presidency of the United States of America.
Jon Stewart’s take on the undercover ACORN videos where prostitution advice in reference to young (12-14 y/o) girls from El Salvadore was offered.
Stewart is shocked about their nonchalance but is outraged the media didn’t break the story. And how long is it doing to take for him to realize they knew but chose not to anything about it? Just like Van Jones and his birth certificate and Bill Ayers and Wright and Rezko.
After all this time Stewart can’t be that dumb. NY Times already admitted they killed a story about ACORN right before the election. They said it wouldn’t have mattered. Then why kill it?
Last week’s TV chat was with Steve Kroft. What kind of weird relationship do they have? barry grins like he’s flirting with him. Same as the previous interview.
This week’s is with John King. a tease. barry thinks major criticism is based on big government – not race. It doesn’t matter what he says – his minions prefer to blame everything on race. The polls are still asking people if they think barry is a Muslim.
Are there people out there who don’t like me because of race? I’m sure there are. That’s not the overriding issue here. I think there are people who are anti-government. I think there’s been a long-standing debate in this country that is usually that much more fierce during times of transition, or when presidents are trying to bring about big changes.
He compares FDR to himself. He’s been in office 8 months.
I mean, things that were said about FDR were pretty similar to things that were said about me. ‘He’s a communist, he’s a socialist.’ Things that were said about Ronald Reagan when he was trying to reverse some of the New Deal programs, you know, were pretty vicious as well.
Were said? He thinks folks are going to stop saying them because of Nanci’s “tears”?
CNN: John King this Sunday on State of the Union, starting at 9 am
Judge Carter Keyes/Barnett v Obama grants the defense a limited stay of discovery until the motion to dismiss is ruled on. Same old thing. No discovery means no chance of the case moving forward. No way around standing and it’s unclear what Judge Carter will rule as far as subject matter jurisdiction. Only true chance was to have some type of preliminary discovery, which is what got people so excited about this case. Today is the first dose of reality. I suppose Taitz might be able to find something in the Motion to Dismiss but I see no reason to read through that again. The court date isn’t going to matter.
Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss,except any discovery as to which Plaintiff’s can demonstrate to Magistrate Judge Nakazato, is necessary to oppose the Motion to Dismiss.
Ok short attention spanners. No more essays. Here are some videos.
This one features Ms Nanci Pelosi, who will never win an Emmy. She can’t say racist (she actually didn’t want anything to happen to Wilson) so she speaks about violence she witnessed in the 70′s as in the assassinations of SF Mayor George Moscone and Harvey Milk in 1978, which was done by a disgruntled coworker known to both of them not an anonymous townhall goer. Recall the “Twinkie Defense.”
This is getting out of control.
D0VVNT0VVN
I think we all have to take responsibility for our actions and our words.
We are a free country and this balance between freedom and safety is one that we have to carefully balance,
I have concerns about some of the language that is been used because I saw-I saw this myself in the late ’70s in San Francisco. This kind of rhetoric is just, was really frightening and it created a climate in which we-violence took place.
So I wish that we would all, again, curb our enthusiasm in some of the statements that are made. So the understanding that the ears that is falling on is not as balanced as the person making the statement might assume.
Our country is great because people can say what they thing and believe.
But I also think that they should take responsibility for whatever incitement they may cause.
Comcast Center University of Maryland College Park
The earlier breaking news! makes sense now. barry was heckled by a college age kid with long brown hair and a beret. He just stands there and says whatever. Not so surprisingly there is no sound. Watch the demographics who come to barry’s aid. barry pretends not to notice, but later complains and goes back to his stump ways.
This is what they always do. That’s why I need your help. When I was running for president, I never said change was going to be easy. It’s hard. It’s always hard.
itufanuf
Obama you’re a liar. Obama, your health care kills children. Abortion is murder.
Evidently some folks threw crumpled paper at him and as he was being led away somebody grabbed his beret and gave it a toss. He then promptly received his own escort to the exit
Disclaimer: I am not affiliated with any candidate, political party, organization, group, movement or anything else. I did not vote for or against anyone.
Rep Wilson uttered two racially neutral words – the interpretation of which, for some, is up for racial debate.
Rep Johnson interpreted those two racially neutral words as a racially motivated attack on the first president of color – all the while using unequivocally racist words that need absolutely no debate.
The House passed a Resolution of disapproval – the mildest form of sanction.
This in the face of the Transcender of Race! Grand Uniter! and Self-Proclaimed Man of Transparency’s oft talked about, never witnessed spirit of bipartisanship! and no old Washingtonism!
Change! you can believe – defined!
240 House Members said: Yes, we can!
170 said The American People have more important things, like health care, to worry about.
It was the first time in 220-year history, the House disciplined a member for shouting during a presidential speech in Joint Session of Congress.
REP WILSON (R-SC):
When we are done here today, we will not have taken any further steps toward helping the nation deal with urgent challenges. It is time that we move forward and get back to work for the American people.
In my view, by apologizing to the president, the most important person in the history of the world, that applied to everyone.
House Majority Leader STENY HOYER (D-MD):
Whereas the conduct of the Representative from South Carolina was a breach of decorum and degraded the proceedings of the joint session, to the discredit of the House: Now, therefore, be it resolved that the House of Representatives disapproves of the behavior of the Representative from South Carolina, Mr. Wilson, during the joint session of Congress held on Sept. 9, 2009,
They needed a resolution to say what they had been saying since he said it.
And, yes, Rep Wilson’s “You lie!” was nothing other than racist.
What else would it be?
Imagine if barry ever had to take responsibility for anything.
barry’s number’s are dropping because whiteys can’t accept a man of color even though they volunteered and voted for him to get his numbers that high in the first place.
And the 8 MILLION eligible voters of color who couldn’t be bothered to even register to vote for a candidate of color?
What have you heard Reps Johnson or Clyburn say about that?
Haven’t heard anything but the acceptable echo of the Double Standard by which barry rules.
Did not Rep Clyburn, a man of color, tell the former President, a whitey, to “CHILL A BIT”?
How is telling the former President to “CHILL A BIT” and referring to alleged “BIZARRE” conduct not anything but disrespectful and a breach of decorum?
And were those words considered racist?
Imagine Secretary Clinton publicly telling barry to “CHILL A BIT” and then mention in front of the world how “BIZARRE” his conduct has been?
Is there any doubt on this planet that she would be terrorized as nothing other than a RACIST – exactly like she was suddenly portrayed after 35 years in public service?
Would whiteys be allowed to be “incensed” over it?
And Mr Clyburn, what do you think about these fine words of yours:
Mr. Clyburn added that there appeared to be an almost “unanimous” view among African-Americansthat Mr. and Mrs. Clinton were “committed to doing everything they possibly can to damage Obama to a point that he could never win.”
Without Mr and Mrs Racists, barry would have never won.
Have you ever admitted that out loud?
Have you apologized for your clear lack of decorum?
Has anyone even brought it up?
Were you sanctioned in the House when your words needed no interpretation as to their context and were directed at a whitey president?
Which racist did something no other candidate has in the 220 year history of our nation and campaigned for his [note that the pronoun her cannot be used] former opponent before the convention?
Which racist committed to doing everything she possibly could so that barry could win and then carried it out even though you wrongly and maliciously said she was “committed to doing everything they possibly can to damage Obama to a point that he could never win”?
Which racist campaigned for her opponent when she had as much a mathematical chance of winning the nomination because he did not have enough delegates?
Which racist campaigned for barry when he was on vacation?
Which racist worked hard to convert her racist voters so that barry could win?
Which racist’s racist voters were the deciding factor in barry’s win?
Hint: not the 8 million black voters who couldn’t find the time to even register to vote.
So how “unanimous” were they?
And how is it you interviewed the entire black population to come to that conclusion?
What would have happened if Rep Wilson, a whitey, had said your exact words to the President, a man of color?
And how was your outburst sanctioned?
If a Member of color had yelled “You lie!” to President Bush, would it have been automatically been construed as racist?
If a Member of color had yelled: “Chill out!” to President Bush, would it have been automatically been construed as racist?
And the Democrats’ hissing when President Bush spoke?
Was that considered racist? A breach of decorum?
Rep HANK JOHNSON (D-GA):
It only happened when this country elected a president of color.
How long will this automatic response of racism be allowed, relied upon and accepted?
How long will people of any race, creed, color, religion, or sexual orientation continue to find this believable?
And why is it folks focus only on the colored half of barry’s DNA, when that half had absolutely nothing to do with him becoming a president of color?
Why is it the non-colored half of his DNA, who raised, loved, fed, bathed and schooled a child of color during the sixties gets written off as TYPICAL WHITE PERSONS and no one finds that racist?
How many TYPICAL WHITE PERSONS have a grandson who is the President to the United States because of the upbringing those TYPICAL WHITE PERSONS provided that the TYPICAL PERSON OF COLOR father chose to abandon?
What is a TYPICAL WHITE PERSON?
What was implicit in barry’s tone when he said TYPICAL WHITE PERSON?
Besides unconscionably ungrateful – how is it not racist?
How did the TYPICAL WHITE PERSON, who loved her grandson and raised him to where he could be President of the United States, feel when she was characterized as such and equated with a TYPICAL PERSON OF COLOR who thinks the country she and her husband fought to defend is the US of KKK A?
How did that TYPICAL WHITE PERSON feel inside when she was equated to a TYPICAL PERSON OF COLOR, who is so delusional and filled with hate for TYPICAL WHITE PERSONS (especially Jews) that he believes HIV was invented by TYPICAL WHITE PERSONS to kill TYPICAL PERSONS OF COLOR – when it originated because TYPICAL PERSONS OF COLOR ate (and are still eating) brains of chimpanzees on the continent from whence barry’s TYPICAL PERSON OF COLOR “father” arose?
How does one adjudge someone not of color to be a TYPICAL WHITE PERSON?
What percentage of non-colored DNA makes one a TYPICAL WHITE PERSON?
What percentage of colored DNA makes one a TYPICAL PERSON OF COLOR?
And if someone were to refer to barry as a TYPICAL WHITE PERSON vs a TYPICAL PERSON OF COLOR?
And if barry were as lightly pigmented as his TYPICAL WHITE PERSON family and he called the father who abandoned him a TYPICAL PERSON OF COLOR – what would he be saying about himself?
What did he reveal about himself when he denigrated the TYPICAL WHITE PERSON who sacrificed and subjugated her own needs for him so that he could one day be President of the United States?
How many presidents of color will there need to be before the built in excuse is no longer acceptable or believable?
When is this race baiting going to stop?
When will barry be judged by the content of his character instead of the color of his skin?
Any critique, any poster or sign, any dissent – whether spur of the moment or preconceived – is judged always in reference to his skin color – not because of the content of his words.
Why is it acceptable for Cynthia Tucker, a woman of color, to state out loud and without shame or sanction that 45-65% of townhall goers are racists?
And how did she make this determination?
Did she cite a poll or interview those racists?
No.
She judged them solely on the color of their skin.
She watched a two minute video clip of upset whiteys and concluded that:
45-65% of these people who appear at these groups, are people who will never be comfortable with the idea of a black president.
People she does not personally know, people she has never talked to, people she knows nothing about except the color of their skin she automatically assumed to be racist.
Who is racist?
Who is making judgments on people based only on the color of their skin?
But because she is a woman of color, she gets a pass.
A pass based solely on the color of her skin.
Just like barry.
And if he were a woman of any color?
In the 220 year history there has never been one of those either.
And what type of racial excuse covers that?
If barry was not a man first and a man of color second – he would not be president.
That is fact.
Imagine if Secretary Clinton had his resume?
Secy Clinton was sipping tea with ambassadors in 83 countries and barry’s 4 years from age 6-10 in a Muslim country (where he swears he did not experience Islam firsthand) and 33 days (less than 24 hours in all of Europe) made him “uniquely qualified” to be president.
And when he became president, suddenly that old tea-sipping gal, who happens to be the most intelligent and prepared politician on the planet, becomes uniquely qualified to be the top diplomat on the planet.
And this “superior judgment” barry was supposed to possess because he gave a speech but acted directly counter to his words when he actually had to act?
Imagine if barry were a woman with his resume – would he be president?
Of course not. Not even close.
The most qualified candidate for the presidency with a resume that puts barry’s to shame wasn’t allowed to be president.
Is there any doubt that if Secretary Clinton were a man of any color she would be president?
And if she were President – a job she is qualified and qualified to do – is there any belief she would have been able to appoint Mr 33 days and 57 States Secretary of State?
How exactly was race a detriment to him?
And how was gender a detriment to Secretary Clinton?
One was and one was not.
One ism is acceptable, one is not.
One ism is staunchly defended, while the other is heartily practiced.
One ism is undeniably unacceptable and the other felt not to exist.
And if it were President Hillary Clinton, would her ism be sanctioned or go unmentioned?
Rep GERRY CONNOLLY (D-VA):
No president has been subjected to that type of treatment on the floor of the House of Representatives, and if we go down that road, then it’s thelaw of the jungle, and I think that’s just wrong.
And if Rep Wilson were a man of color, could Rep Connolly have used “law of the jungle”?
Rep HANK JOHNSON (D-GA):
CNN: Johnson said Wilson’s comment amounted to a “wink” of approval to right-wing extremists who have brought highly charged language and imagery – such as posters depicting Obama with a Hitler mustache or as an African witch doctor — to the health care debate.
Look HERE for what mainstream Democrats were not so long ago doing to President Bush.
Was Rep Johnson winking along with them?
Rep HANK JOHNSON (D-GA):
He [Wilson] did not help the cause of diversity and tolerance with his remarks.
And how is Rep Johnson helping the cause of diversity by equating a spur of the moment “You lie!” to the KKK?
Rep HANK JOHNSON (D-GA):
If I were a betting man, I would say that it instigated more racist sentiment feeling that it’s OK — you don’t have to bury it now.
Clearly, Rep Johnson’s own racist sentiments are nowhere near dead or buried.
CNN
JOHNSON added that failing to rebuke Wilson would bring increased racism in the public discussion on health care, saying: “You can bring it out and talk about it fully, and so I guess we will probably have folks putting on white hoods and white uniforms again riding through the countryside intimidating people.
It is clear Rep Johnson has no difficulty talking about it freely when he free associates from two completely racially neutral words to the three most racially charged initials in the English language.
Are there any Members who feel these words of Rep Johnson’s need rebuking?
What is not racist about equating Rep Wilson with the KKK, white hoods and white uniforms simply because he’s a whitey?
How else did he arrive there from “You lie!”?
And if I were a betting man, I would say Rep Johnson’s thoughts, words and sentiments about Rep WIlson needed no instigation.
And I would lay down some serious cash that Rep Johnson did not read the 1000 page bill that Rep Wilson did that caused him to come to that conclusion.
Please listen to his next words very carefully. Yes, he says exactly what you think he says.
Rep HANK JOHNSON (D-GA):
That’s the logical conclusion if this kind of attitude is not rebuked, and Congressman Wilson represents it.
He is the face of it, and that’s why I support the resolution.
Please go to CNN and read the article for yourself – so you can see that there are no typos or quotes taken out of context. Or watch the video below.
The video leaves absolutely no doubt that Rep Johnson said Joe Wilson is the face of the KKK. Watch his body language and take careful not of when he looks at the camera.
And what will be his sanction?
And what is the logical conclusion – the one and only reason – why he will not be rebuked for his intentional and unequivocal racist words?
News1news
And here are the constituents who voted Rep Johnson into office and who, according to him, and because of two racially neutral words, will be donning those white hoods and white uniforms and riding around his district intimidating folks.
A woman working for Notre Dame in catering capacity was tipped $29,387.00…or so she thought.
On April 17, 2009, she received the payment and “thought finally something wonderful had happened”. But being a good citizen in touch with reality she allegedly called the ND catering office – not once, not twice, but thrice – and got no response….until June when they sent her a threatening letter.
Imagine the shock. Two months passed, bills paid off, a car bought and suddenly ND wants their money back because of a typing error. The tip was meant to be $29.87.
Between the windfall and the threatening letter, there was a commencement ceremony. A commencementceremony to which a man with the most radical view on abortion was invited.
A distinguished law professor and former Ambassador to the Holy See (for Bush) was also invited to the commencement – four months prior to barry. Professor Mary Ann Glendon was to receive the highest honor an American Catholic can receive: the ND Laetare Medal. But she could not in good conscience attend because of barry’s view on abortion, so barry got his award (an award that a non-Catholic Univesity – ASU said he didn’t deserve), Professor Glendon got nothing and the Laetare Medal was for the first time not awarded.
But Professor Glendon wasn’t the only casualty. A Catholic priest, Fr Weslin, who actually believes in the sanctity of life – the Catholic Church’s most basic Teaching, attempted to peacefully protest barry’s presence. But Fr Jenkins wouldn’t allow it. He ordered that any and all persons be arrested who trespassed on university property.
Surely a Catholic priest protesting aborting is welcome on a Catholic University run by a Catholic priest?
Nope.
Courtesy of Fr Jenkins, University of Notre Dame
Fr Weslin was arrested, handcuffed behind his back, manhandled and then laid out on a fabric stretcher while spectators and professional camera men and photographers took pix of him like he was zoo exhibit. (video)
made necessary by barry's ego
A full minute he laid there, his head unsupported, his hands cinched tightly behind his back, propped up on his side by an impersonal booted leg and the blue fabric held up to his mouth as he tried to sing to Our Lady aka Notre Dame. Partially through that minute, Fr Weslin, a 20 year military veteran, yelled “Land of Freedom!”, a spectator said “Wow, I can’t believe I am seeing this” and then cameras and cellphones stopped clicking.
Silence.
Not a single person spoke up – not even a pastor who was there. The coward waited until they were about to haul Fr Weslin off like an incontinent Saturday night drunk in need of restraint, knowing that it was his last chance to get on camera. He asked if he could say a prayer for Fr Weslin. He was to have protested as well but decided at the last minute not to.
So they hauled Fr Weslin off in the fabric stretcher, his head still unsupported, his hands still handcuffed behind his back being jostled and pinched by the handles on the stretcher, even though he never resisted and the police officer in charge knew that he had had both arms broken other police officers in the past.
The officer knew who Fr Weslin was, knew he was coming, knew he had injuries to his arms that would be made worse with behind the back handcuffs and yet he completely disrespected and humiliated a 78 y/o man who was singing Immaculate Mary, Your praise we sing…
Fr Jenkins also knew Fr Weslin would be there and made no provisions for a wheel chair or golf cart and did not tell the officers not to handcuff him. Fr Jenkins was hauled off to jail along with 18 other Catholics, charged and placed in the cell. Some were able to post bond, some were not, one asking that his bail be reduced from $250 to $200 because that was all he had in his bank acount and two refused, choosing instead to stay in jail until their court date – over two weeks later.
The police complained about the $66 it took to house and feed them but did not release the two men.
The following day, Fr Weslin was again arrested – though this time he was treated respectfully and was carried off in less than a minute. (video)
Meanwhile, the non-Catholic, who had spent 2 decades in a hate-filled church, who believes that medical treatment should be withheld from any and all fetuses who happened to survive his/her attempted murder and who has vowed never to make abortion illegal, joyfully received his honorary award.
The sequelae?
Everyone who was arrested was charged and are awaiting trial and sentencing even though none of them had been violent or resisted.
Did Fr Jenkins intercede on their behalf?
No. He said he was not interested in dialoguing (what he praised barry for and said was the reason he invited barry) and had no intention of dropping the charges.
So what does this have to do with the woman who thought she hit the jackpot?
It was about the time of the arrests that ND discovered their error.
Because Fr Jenkins wouldn’t let Fr Weslin peacefully protest in a faraway corner of the campus, extra police were needed to guard barry from the peaceful, singing protesters and to arrest the protesters and to transport the protesters and to process the protesters…
The grand total was estimated to be close to $50K a percentage of that ND was allegedly going to pay.
Most of the money not necessary…perhaps $29,870 of it?
And now they are trying to recoup their loss. There is no way they can make her pay it back after two months, especially if she can prove that she made those calls.
To me that is Cosmic Karma.
Perhaps Fr Jenkins might think about absolving his fellow Catholics of their “sins” and give them penance instead of costing the court more money.
A Catholic priest, who is President of a Catholic University is allowing his fellow Catholics be tried in court for taking one step on to a Catholic University’s campus with the intent of peacefully protesting abortion.
So much for turning the other cheek and doing unto others and being your brother’s keeper…
ND filed a lawsuit in the same court Fr Weslin was processed in, alleging that the woman did not notify the school about the error, and instead spent the money knowing it wasn’t hers. And how was she to know that?
She is accused of unjust enrichment, fraud and conversion – court date unknown.
I guess barry likes beer and so apparently does Mr West. His mother was highly respected here in Chicago and I find it shocking that he would so disrespect someone – especially a teenager. A teenager who writes her own music. Her moment was forever ruined. She was embarrassed. Beyonce although later did the right thing was smiling and seemingly enjoying it – he was talking about her video. She could have nipped it in the bud.
Was what West did racist?
If the “I lie” is considered racist – then this is beyond racist.
And if anyone is wondering: no, this is not a one time deal. It is something he has done before and something that has never been sanctioned.
Perhaps that’s why our fine leader with two young girls calls him a jackass?
Or was barry just pandering to the youth?
I thought that was really inappropriate…
He’s a jackass.
I’m assuming this is…
Cut the president some slack.
He sounded like he was going to say a different ja—- word.
Cut the president some slack?
The cover up wasn’t complete enough to erase this video.
