Chris Rock - How Not to Get Your Ass Kicked by the Police!

So obviously there seems to be some unjustified police brutality out there, and it is an awful thing. But, no doubt, at least some of that can be avoided by people not breaking the law in the first place.
Right?

What are your thoughts?

Chris Rock - How Not to Get Your Ass Kicked by the Police!

The Black Panthers and Voter Intimidation

The Washington Post has an article about the Black Panthers using voter intimidation in the last Presidential election. It is absolutely ridiculous to me that these men aren't in jail.

The story has its origins on Election Day in 2008, when two members of the New Black Panther Party stood in front of a Philadelphia polling place. YouTube video of the men, now viewed nearly 1.5 million times, shows both wearing paramilitary clothing. One carried a nightstick.

Early last year, just before the Bush administration left office, the Justice Department filed a voter-intimidation lawsuit against the men, the New Black Panther Party and its chairman. But several months later, with the government poised to win by default because the defendants didn't contest the suit, the Obama Justice Department decided the case was over-charged and narrowed it to the man with the nightstick. It secured only a narrow injunction forbidding him from displaying a weapon within 100 feet of Philadelphia polling places through 2012.

Congressional Republicans pounced. For months they stalled the confirmation of Thomas E. Perez, President Obama's pick to head the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division, while seeking answers to why the case had been downgraded over the objections of some of the department's career lawyers. The Justice Department's Office of Professional Responsibility launched an investigation, which is pending. The independent, eight-member Commission on Civil Rights also began what has become a yearlong probe with multiple public hearings; its report is due soon. Rep. Frank R. Wolf (R-Va.), a prominent lawmaker in The Post's circulation area, has been a loud and leading critic of how the case was handled. His office has "aggressively" sought to interest The Post in coverage, a spokesman said.

The controversy was elevated last month when J. Christian Adams, a former Justice Department lawyer who had helped develop the case, wrote in the Washington Times that his superiors' decision to reduce its scope was "motivated by a lawless hostility toward equal enforcement of the law." Some in the department believe "the law should not be used against black wrongdoers because of the long history of slavery and segregation," he wrote. Adams recently repeated these charges in public testimony before the commission.

The New Black Panther Party - Disturbing Video

Don't You Call me a Professor, Racist!

As part of Chairman Zero's lifelong quest to avoid meaningful employment in the private sector, B. Hussein Obama taught a few law courses at the University of Chicago. One way to describe a person who teaches in a university setting is "professor." But according to Charles J. Ogletree, a Harvard professor, if you refer to PBO as "Professor Obama," that's racist.

Ogletree, founding and executive director of the Charles Hamilton Houston Institute for Race and Justice, says he sees the "professor" label as a thinly veiled attack on Obama's race. Calling Obama "the professor" walks dangerously close to labeling him "uppity," a term with racial overtones that has surfaced in the political arena before, Ogletree said.

Via

Harry Reid: "Negro-Gate"

From the new book, "Game Change" by journalists John Heilemann and Mark Halperin, Harry Reid was quoted as saying: Barack Obama could be elected president because he is “light skinned” and lacks “Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one.”

Of course Obama accepted his apology, as did the NAACP. NAACP: "The way he said it was quite awkward, but nonetheless, not offensive. That what he said was actually part of a calculus as to why he believed Barack Obama could be elected in this country today."

Had Harry Reid been a republican? Well, that would be quite different, wouldn't it?

Harry Reid: Obama ‘Light-Skinned’ ‘with No Negro Dialect’
'A POOR CHOICE OF WORDS'



Reid holds his ground
Wilder: Reid owes U.S. an apology
Norton defends Reid, warns GOP
Feinstein stands by the leader
And so does Al Sharpton
Cornyn doesn't expect Reid to resign
GOP: Lott-Reid double standard
Steele in 2002: Lott should keep his job
Steele rips Reid's '1950s mind-set'
Dems launch defense to save Reid
Coulter to Sharpton: 'Did He Ask You to Stop Using That Negro Dialect?'...
Blagojevich: 'I'm blacker than Barack Obama'...



RNC CHAIR CALLS ON HARRY REID TO STEP DOWN AFTER RACE COMMENTS...
Top Dem leader defends 'negro' remark...
Black leaders accept US senator's apology for race remark
Sen. Harry Reid and the 'double standard'
Should Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid step down as leader over 2008 remarks ...
Will: Not a 'Scintilla of Racism' in Reid Race Remarks
Bill Clinton to Ted Kennedy during '08 primary: Obama would have been serving us coffee few years ago
Georgetown Professor: ‘This President Runs From Race Like a Black Man Runs From a Cop’

Friction Between Black Caucus and Obama

THE BLACK CAUCUS WAR AGAINST OBAMA
By Dick Morris And Eileen McGann
12.4.2009

A civil war is breaking out within the left of the Democratic Party pitting the Congressional Black Caucus against the first African-American president.

The battle began when California Congresswoman Maxine Waters complained publicly about the Administration’s failure to do more to help minority-owned businesses in the current recession. (Translation: In the new Stimulus of “Jobs” Bill making its way through Congress, they want a larger take). It continued yesterday when ten members of the Black Caucus refused to participate in a meeting of the House Banking Committee which was considering the bill to restructure financial regulations forcing Chairman Barney Frank to push the bill through by the uncomfortable margin of only 31-27.

The latest shot in the battle was fired by Homeland Security Chairman Bennie Thompson (D-Miss) a card carrying regular of the Black Caucus. Faced with the need to investigate the gate crashing at the White House during the recent state dinner for India, he chose to embarrass the Administration by subpoenaing White House Social Secretary Desiree Rogers rather than quietly negotiating for her appearance.

Read the rest here.

Obama, The First Black President?

Let me start by saying I think that placing a large emphasis on the color of one's skin is dumb, just stupid. I'd like to think I am more than the pale epidermis I'm covered with. People are people, we all have differences, but we have way more in common.

Also, I'm not discounting the significance of the first President to have black heritage. In fact, even though I don't like the man, I think that it is fantastic that our country has come this far since the civil rights movement. If only such a milestone could have been reached with a conservative black man.

What baffles me is that everyone seems ignore the fact that Obama is also white. He isn't really black, he is half black and half white. What happened to the other half? Also, his skin may be dark, but as far as his ethnicity, he is more like Alfonso Ribeiro, AKA Carlton Banks from The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air.He is a whiter black dude than Michael Jackson. Remember, his Momma was white, and his Papa was black.


So let's get away from this whole skin color thing shall we? Obama could be known by so many other firsts. I have these suggestions:

-First socialist President. (I guess that's not true, if you count FDR)
-First President to throw like a girl. -First President to spend a gazillion dollars in 11 months.
-First President to spend ridiculous amounts of money and still accomplish absolutely nothing.
-First President to marry a woman capable of beating him in an arm wrestle. -First President to wear "mom jeans." -First President to make Narcissus look like a humble peasant.

I could go on at length here, but I think I got the ball rolling. Any other suggestions?

Also, don't get all righteous on me, calling me a racist. I honestly don't give a crap about the color of his skin, or anyone else's for that matter. What baffles me is other people discounting half his genetic code.

Politics as Usual

Hope and change; where is it? If you ask me, it's still just politics, and it's worse than ever. The Washington Times reported that Obama has been offering nice little perks and incentives to high rolling democrat donors. Pay a little green, get a free game of golf with the president. That would explain why he has played more golf in nine months than Bush played in 34 months. These perks also include things like personal movie screenings in the white house theater, and a game of bowling in the white house alley.

The war in Afghanistan is turning into a giant mess. Top officials are even resigning to get away from it. Matthew Hoh left, stating that he didn't know why were even there any more. Pansy. Even though our brave soldiers are dying, and October has been the deadliest month in the war, Obama doesn't seem interested in reaching a decision to send more troops.

His pet project, health care, is getting no where fast. "Blue Dogs" are fighting against the public option, giving Dirty Harry Reid conniption fits. Why can't the anointed one get things done? You'd think, since every one loves him, and they control both houses, this wouldn't be such a problem. Bravo "Blue Dogs."

Well, at least electing a black president has cured racism. Oh wait, maybe it made it worse. I don't remember. Typical white folks like me get confused sometimes.

Still, it's not all bad news. Obama has done wonders for the gun companies.

MSNBC Introduces Jesse Jackson as "Al Sharpton"

That's Racist!

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Jimmy Carter Calls Joe Wilson a Racist

Former President Jimmy Carter said Tuesday that U.S. Rep. Joe Wilson's outburst to President Barack Obama during a speech to Congress last week was an act "based on racism" and rooted in fears of a black president.

"I think it's based on racism," Carter said in response to an audience question at a town hall held at his presidential center in Atlanta. "There is an inherent feeling among many in this country that an African-American should not be president."

Oh dear. What dimwitted, half-witted, lamebrain dolt said that? Oh wait, it's former President Jimmy Carter. Listen Jimmy, go take your medicine and watch some TV, and quit opening your mouth, because you are tarnishing your legacy. Oh wait, you don't have a legacy capable of tarnishing, I forgot.

We should be allowed to speak our minds on important issues, without fear of being ostracised, name calling, and public defamation. This is a typical liberal strategy. Speak out against them, and they call you every name under the book, hoping one sticks. That way, you won't dare speak out again, or your political career will be ruined.

They also love to play the polarizing card. Call someone a racist, fire up the minorities, keep them angry, keep them down, and come election time, promise them a solution that they never intend on delivering.

(source)

Thoughts on Obama from Anne Wortham

Let me start by saying I got this in an email and as soon as I read it, I just HAD to share it with you. I don't know how old it is, or how widely circulated, but it is absolutely worth getting in front of as many people as possible, especially all these clowns who have recently surfaced saying that the reason we right-thinkers hate Obamoron is because he is black.

ANNE WORTHAM

Anne Wortham is Associate Professor of Sociology at Illinois State University and continuing Visiting Scholar at Stanford University's Hoover Institution. She is a member of the American Sociological Association and the American Philosophical Association.

She has been a John M. Olin Foundation Faculty Fellow, and honored as a Distinguished Alumni of the Year by the Nation al Association for Equal Opportunity in Higher Education.

In fall 1988 she was one of a select group of intellectuals who were featured in Bill Moyer's television series, "A World of Ideas." The transcript of her conversation with Moyers has been published in his book, A World of Ideas.

Dr. Wortham is author of "The Other Side of Racism: A Philosophical Study of Black Race Consciousness" which analyzes how race consciousness is transformed into political strategies and policy issues..

She has published numerous articles on the implications of individual rights for civil rights policy, and is currently writing a book on theories of social and cultural marginality.

Recently, she has published articles on the significance of multiculturalism and Afrocentricism in education, the politics of victimization and the social and political impact of political correctness. Shortly after an interview in 2004, she was awarded tenure.

This article by her is something.

Fellow Americans,

Please know: I am Black; I grew up in the segregated South.. I did not vote for Barack Obama; I wrote in Ron Paul's name as my choice for president. Most importantly, I am not race conscious. I do not require a Black president to know that I am a person of worth, and that life is worth living. I do not require a Black president to love the ideal of America.

I cannot join you in your celebration. I feel no elation. There is no smile on my face. I am not jumping with joy. There are no tears of triumph in my eyes. For such emotions and behavior to come from me, I would have to deny all that I know about the requirements of human flourishing and survival - all that I know about the history of the United States of America , all that I know about American race relations, and all that I know about Barack Obama as a politician. I would have to deny the nature of the "change" that Obama asserts has come to America .

Most importantly, I would have to abnegate my certain understanding that you have chosen to sprint down the road to serfdom that we have been on for over a century. I would have to pretend that individual liberty has no value for the success of a human life. I would have to evade your rejection of the slender reed of capitalism on which your success and mine depend. I would have to think it somehow rational that 94 percent of the 12 million Blacks in this country voted for a man because he looks like them (that Blacks are permitted to play the race card), and that they were joined by self-declared "progressive" whites who voted for him because he doesn't look like them.

I would have to wipe my mind clean of all that I know about the kind of people who have advised and taught Barack Obama and will fill posts in his administration - political intellectuals like my former colleagues at the Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government.

I would have to believe that "fairness" is equivalent of justice. I would have to believe that a man who asks me to "go forward in a new spirit of service, in a new service of sacrifice" is speaking in my interest. I would have to accept the premise of a man that economic prosperity comes from the "bottom up," and who arrogantly believes that he can will it into existence by the use of government force. I would have to admire a man who thinks the standard of living of the masses can be improved by destroying the most productive and the generators of wealth.

Finally, Americans, I would have to erase from my consciousness the scene of 125,000 screaming, crying, cheering people in Grant Park, Chicago irrationally chanting "Yes We Can!" Finally, I would have to wipe all memory of all the times I have heard politicians, pundits, journalists, editorialists, bloggers and intellectuals declare that capitalism is dead - and no one, including especially Alan Greenspan, objected to their assumption that the particular version of the anti-capitalistic mentality that they want to replace with their own version of anti-capitalism is anything remotely equivalent to capitalism.

So you have made history, Americans. You and your children have elected a Black man to the office of the president of the United States, the wounded giant of the world. The battle between John Wayne and Jane Fonda is over - and that Fonda won. Eugene McCarthy and George McGovern must be very happy men. Jimmie Carter, too. And the Kennedys have at last gotten their Kennedy look-a-like. The self-righteous welfare statists in the suburbs can feel warm moments of satisfaction for having elected a Black person.

So, toast yourselves: 60s countercultural radicals, 80s yuppies and 90s bourgeois bohemians. Toast yourselves, BlackAmerica. Shout your glee Harvard, Princeton, Yale, Duke, Stanford, and Berkeley. You have elected not an individual who is qualified to be president, but a Black man who, like the pragmatist Franklin Roosevelt, promises to - Do Something! You now have someone who has picked up the baton of Lyndon Johnson's Great Society. But you have also foolishly traded your freedom and mine - what little there is left - for the chance to feel good.

There is nothing in me that can share your happy obliviousness. God Help Us all...

Anne Wortham

Speaking Out Against the President Will Lead to Increased KKK Activity

The hell you say? Well it must be true, because nutso the clown, aka Congressman Hank Johnson says so. From Fox:

In an obvious reference to the Ku Klux Klan, Rep. Hank Johnson, D-Ga., says that people will put on "white hoods and ride through the countryside" if emerging racist attitudes, which he says were subtly supported by Rep. Joe Wilson, are not rebuked. He said Wilson must be disciplined as an example.

Oh dear, I better burn my white hood before I am unable to control myself. Mustn't speak point of view, must keep mouth shut, mustn't become a racist...

Oh Google, That's Racist!

Via

Obama is Keeping Whitey Down

Liberals just don't understand!

By The Silent Majority

Liberals just don’t understand.

For some unexplainable reason I frequently subject myself to the insane ramblings of the liberal bloggosphere. I guess it has something to do with maintaining and even keel, maybe just getting a little perspective. What puzzles me most is the inability of liberal elites to digest the concept of conservatism.

The left claims to have providence over everything that is fair and equitable; they claim to be the party of truth and justice while practicing prejudice and discrimination. When I read the writings of liberal bloggers and hear the speeches of liberal elites I can’t help but wonder how they can make such claims with impunity. It seems to me that they should lay claim to the realm of bitter diatribes and tyranny.

Before I go any further I would like to clarify this point: When I speak of liberals I do not speak of the average Democratic voter. I most certainly allow for the fact that the Democratic Party is a diverse organization with beliefs and goals as varied as the people who comprise the party. I fully understand that that the party is comprised of individuals who may or may not subscribe to the liberal dogma as stated by liberal elitists. If the generalizations I make do not apply to you as an individual then it is safe to assume I am not speaking of you.

Where conservatives have failed is in identifying themselves with the festering pustule that is the Republican Party. They have failed in conveying why conservatism is different, at a fundamental level, than liberalism. They have failed because they have allowed liberals to define conservatism.

Conservatives have allowed themselves to be cast as the party of the rich; the party of prejudice; the party of corporate corruption. These mischaracterizations have never been effectively addressed by conservative leaders. Conservatives have sat by and watched their beliefs cast in a light most unfavorable without so much as a whimper of opposition.

We have allowed the Republican Party to wither and die on the vine. It has become nothing more than a convenient symbol for liberals to rally against. The current incarnation of the Republican Party is worthy only of reproach. The stereotypes attributed to conservatives are mostly true of the Republican Party; they are absolutely true of the Democratic Party.

Liberalism seems to be defined as everything antithetical to conservatism. It is an ideology that ceases to exist in the absence of conservatism. Much as shadows ceases to exist in the absence of light.

What is conservatism?

Conservatives first and foremost believe in the undeniable force of individualism. The individual is the foundation upon which this great country was built.
Conservatives believe that the government is the antithesis of individualism. When government grows and prospers individual rights necessarily whither and die. We believe government has an important but very limited role; protector of our constitutional rights.

Liberalism sees the government as the arbiter of equity and dispenser of rights.

Conservatives see successful businesses large and small as the backbone of a strong economy and a strong nation. We see business as an extension of the rights guaranteed by the constitution and the government’s taxation and regulation of business as an impingement on those rights.

Liberals see successful businesses as malignant blights hoarding resources and attaining wealth at the expense of the proletariat. Liberals believe that the government should control and distribute wealth so as to insure fairness.

There will be winners and losers but when individuals are left to succeed or fail on their own there is true freedom; when the government is left to decide who succeeds and who fails there can be no success only parity.

Without the promise of success there is no impetus for innovation. Ideas are the fruit of dreams and dreams grow only in the fertile soil of freedom. You can only remove the specter of failure by denying a path to success. For with every opportunity to succeed there is necessarily the possibility of failure.

Liberals believe in parity over freedom. They see a world where everyone is the same where there are no losers because there are no winners. They see a utopia where the government provides for all of our needs. They aspire to create a perfect society where everyone is happy and equal.

This is a noble cause to be sure but fails to take into account human nature. When such power is wielded by a few elites there is the looming possibility of tyranny.

When the wealth of an entire nation is entrusted to a handful of men the temptation for corruption is all but irresistible. The founders understood this all too well as they revolted against that very thing.

Conservatives believe that in each and every one of us there is the ability to achieve our wildest dreams. In America there are no limits but those we impose upon ourselves. We believe that regardless of race, sex, national origin or sexual orientation there is the opportunity to realize success. We believe that if left to our own devices we can do anything, achieve anything and surpass every expectation.

Liberals believe that certain groups are incapable of success on their own and therefore must be protected through discriminatory legislation in order to succeed. Despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary this mindset persists. With the election of a black president it should be readily apparent that no goal is unattainable with hard work and persistence.

What has earned conservatives the dubious title of “racists” is the fact that we believe everyone is equal and therefore no one deserves to be given a leg up over another based on race, sex or sexual orientation. Everyone should be allowed to succeed or fail on their own merits. This is not the argument of a racist, simply a statement of common sense.

Conservatives are not anti-immigration we are anti-illegal immigration. We fully understand that this is a nation of immigrants and celebrate the diversity of this nation with great pride. It is not however a nation of illegal immigrants.

Everyone is welcome here but we ask that they abide by our laws, learn our language and contribute in an equitable fashion. Nothing worth having is free and that includes membership in this great nation.

Conservatives are not mind numbed robots who receive their marching orders from FOX News or conservative talk show hosts. We have arrived at our beliefs through diligent introspection and valuable life lessons.

Our beliefs are not subject to negotiation and polls do not determine where we stand on an issue. Compromise does not mean abandoning our core principles to make someone else happy. We will not go along to get along.

Liberals paint us as partisan and rigid. They are right. We refuse to submit to the theory that acting in a bipartisan manner means agreeing with them. Sorry.

Conservatives believe that we should be good stewards of this planet that God has given us. We believe in protecting the environment and using our resources wisely. We believe that Global Warming is at best unproven science and that no legislation should be passed based on unproven science.

Liberals believe that Man is a blight upon the earth and that all earth's ills would be cured if we just stop using oil. Liberals view Global warming as settled and are willing to destroy our economy and tax us into oblivion on nothing more substantial than a theory.

Conservatives believe that America is the greatest nation on earth and a beacon of freedom that other nations aspire to emulate.

Liberals believe that America is the cause of the world's problems and that if we were only more like Cuba everything would be alright.

Conservatives believe that doctors know best how to treat their patients and that healthcare should be the left to hospitals and private industry.

Liberals believe that the government knows best how to treat the sick and that healthcare is best left to Congress and the Senate.


Conservatives believe that this nation was founded under God and that God should be glorified. We are not ashamed of our beliefs and do not begrudge others if their beliefs differ.

Liberals believe that a moment of silence in a class room is a violation of the establishment clause but invoke the name of God on the campaign trail in the hopes of garnering votes.

They believe that God should be stripped from our government while paying to provide the Koran and prayer mats for terror suspects at taxpayer expense.

Liberal leaders deny the fact that we are a Christian nation while pandering to Islamic nations.

Liberals regularly refer to conservatives as the religious right as if it were an epithet. If they only understood us they would know we wear it as a badge of honor.

But the fact is they do not understand conservatives. They cannot understand us. We stand for something and that is a concept that is simply beyond the ability of a liberal to understand. They stand against, stand in the way, stand back and stand by but the do not stand for America.

The sins of the father...

The sins of the father…

When will America be rid of the specter of racism? We have elected the first black president, are about to appoint a Hispanic female Supreme Court justice and yet we are still apologizing for the sins of our fathers.

Black, Hispanic, Asian and every other ethnic minority enjoy unprecedented opportunities in this country. There is now no office that has not been held by a minority.

So why is our government apologizing for slavery over a 140 years after the fact? Is this just another attempt to distract the American public from the Marxist policies of Obama?

I found this diamond in the rough hiding on MSNBC (excerpts from article are in bold):

Senate apologizes for slavery, segregation
Nothing in measures supports or authorizes reparations by United States

Well that’s certainly good news. We, the morally reprehensible white folk, have finally come clean and admitted our wrong doing. Wait, none of us were alive during slavery, owned slaves, or oppressed anyone; so why is our government apologizing on our behalf?

WASHINGTON - The Senate has unanimously passed a resolution apologizing for slavery and racial segregation in the U.S. and sent the measure to the House.

Democrat Tom Harkin first introduced the measure years ago but wanted it passed Thursday on the eve of Juneteenth, June 19, a day of celebration commemorating the end of the Civil War in 1865 and the release of African Americans from slavery. He said the House is to take it up soon and that a formal celebration will be held next month.

Juneteenth Day events are held in communities around the U.S. to commemorate the day in 1865 when Union soldiers landed at Galveston, Texas, to announce the Civil War was over and that slaves were free.

I must have been living in a cave or something as this is the first time I have heard of the Juneteenth celebration. I certainly am glad that the slaves were freed of their bonds over 144 years ago but I still can’t escape the feeling that as a white male American I am still being held accountable for the sins of our founders.

I feel like I must defend the fact that I was born white. I feel as if I have to state that I never owned a slave; neither did my father, my grandfather, or his father and so on. I have never advocated slavery, racism or anything of the kind. As a white American I am presumed racists until proven otherwise.

It is this apologizing and pandering that perpetuates the myth that every white man and women were somehow unindicted coconspirators to the slavery business. This country will never progress until we stop creating such divides.

I have no doubt that I will be labeled as a racist for my views but I look at it this way: I am already assumed racist because I am white; what have I got to lose for speaking my mind?

The truth is this proclamation has nothing to do with slavery and everything to do with distraction. This diverts the attention of the people from the circus act that is Obama and his administration to ancillary issues.

Maybe our government should be apologizing for creating a whole new class of slaves, the ones now dependant on the government for their very existence.

Maybe they should apologize for enslaving our youth with crushing debt and taxes.

Maybe they should apologize for abandoning the constitution in favor of socialism.

But instead they choose to distract and mislead.

Make no mistake, slavery was terrible and I am ashamed that this country was a guilty of it in our past. We are past that, we are better than that. We need to move on and let the demons of our past lay. None who were guilty of that crime are alive to pay for it.

We cannot punish the innocent and call it justice; we cannot take from the blameless and call it reparations when it is clearly nothing less than a travesty. We cannot move past slavery when our own government seeks to enslave us all.

How to Handle White People

Obama’s racist, liberal Sotomayor, God help us.

By Robert The Silent Majority

From an MSNBC Article (Excerpts in bold):

GOP faces delicate task in fighting Latina pick
All-out assault on Sotomayor could alienate Hispanic and women voters

President Obama nominated federal judge Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court yesterday, putting her in line to become the nation's first Hispanic justice and creating a difficult political equation for Republicans as they weigh how aggressively to fight her appointment.

Let me help the “republicans” along a bit; fight her with every ounce of your being. This choice is one of those moments when the conservatives can set themselves apart from the moderates and give the voters a choice in the next election.

An all-out assault on Sotomayor by Republicans could alienate both Latino and women voters, deepening the GOP's problems after consecutive electoral setbacks. But sidestepping a court battle could be deflating to the party's base and hurt efforts to rally conservatives going forward.

This is not a “Latino” thing or a “woman” thing and where Republicans will get in trouble is by accepting this premise to begin with and going on the defensive. Obama has set the trap with his willing accomplices in the media. The Republicans need to avoid stepping in it with both feet. They need to attack this appointment on her merits and completely ignore the ancillary issues that will act as a distraction to the true issues.

In introducing Sotomayor at the White House yesterday morning, Obama hailed the 54-year-old appeals court judge as an accomplished and "inspiring" individual with a compelling life story. She would replace Justice David H. Souter, who was appointed by President George H.W. Bush but became a reliable member of the court's liberal wing.

Senate Republicans responded with restraint to the announcement yesterday and their largely muted statements stood in sharp contrast to the fractious partisanship that has defined court battles in recent decades. Leading conservatives outside the Senate, however, did not hold back, targeting a pair of speeches in which Sotomayor said appellate courts are where "policy is made" and another in which she said a Latina would often "reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life."

It is clear what kind of judicial activist Sotomayor is and what kind of Supreme Court justice she would make. These are the issues that the conservative Republicans need to be pointing out. She is clearly the racist and to point that out may not be politically correct but she cannot hide from her statements and voting history.

Critics also targeted her support for affirmative action, with Rush Limbaugh calling her a "reverse racist" in his syndicated radio program, citing a case in which she ruled against a group of white firefighters who claimed discrimination in hiring practices.

White House officials argued that the comments in the speeches were taken out of context, and they said that the firefighter’s case was an example of Sotomayor accepting established precedent, something they said conservatives should applaud. Senate Democrats, meanwhile, who are on the verge of controlling a filibuster-proof 60-vote majority in the Senate, warned Republicans of the dangers of pushing too hard against Obama's first court pick.

The only danger lies in allowing the press and the liberals to dictate what conservatives should be for or against. There are true philosophical differences her and an important opportunity to contrast the conservative agenda against the liberal agenda. I hope our conservative leaders take the opportunity to show that contrast.

Strong words
"They oppose her at their peril," Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) said of his GOP colleagues and conservative activists who are leading the court fight. "I think this process is going to be more a test of the Republican Party than of Sonia Sotomayor."

For the first time in memory I at least partly agree with Schumer. This is a test of the resolve of the conservatives. If Republicans allow Schumer and others to dictate their agenda then they are doomed to fail. It is as simple as this; if the liberals think we should be doing it, we need to do the exact opposite. I seriously doubt the liberal establishment has our best interests at heart.

Conservative interest groups have been warily preparing for the prospect of Sotomayor's nomination since word of Souter's retirement first circulated last month, viewing her as among the most liberal contenders for the appointment. But some Senate GOP officials privately conceded that, barring a major stumble, the judge will probably be confirmed with relative ease.

That does not mean that they should not object to her nomination with every available means. It may be a foregone conclusion that she will be nominated but it is also a great chance to point out the glaring differences between the conservatives plan for America and the liberal plan for advancing a socialist agenda.

"You don't have to be a rocket scientist to figure out that we need to tread very carefully," said John Weaver, a Republican political consultant who advised Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) for years. "The only way we'll find ourselves in a political predicament is if we don't treat her with the same respect that other nominees received."

"If she answers questions in a crazy way, then that's one thing," said one senior Republican aide who participated in strategy discussions. "But the immediate reaction is not to just try and bring her down."

This kind of conciliatory thinking is what has allowed liberals to ramrod through their agenda thus far. We have to take a stand on principle. Sotomayor represents everything that conservatives stand against and to stand around and allow her appointment without objection is to accept that our party is without principle. I hope they choose to stand on principle and let the chips fall where they may.

Sen. Jeff Sessions (Ala.), the ranking Republican on the Judiciary Committee, did not comment on Sotomayor's qualifications for the nation's highest court yesterday but indicated that he was not inclined to rush the confirmation process.

"We must remember that a Supreme Court justice sits for a lifetime appointment, and the Senate hearing is the only opportunity for the American people to engage in the nomination process," Sessions said in a statement. "Adequate preparation will take time."

Obama's plan
Senior White House officials said the key to what they hope will be a 72-day campaign to confirm Sotomayor by Aug. 7, the start of the Senate's month-long recess, is to ensure that they retain control over the story line of the judge's life and career. A senior White House official said the administration had mapped out four distinct phases of what officials hope will be the path to an easy confirmation: the first 24 to 72 hours of the rollout; the period between the rollout and the start of Sotomayor's Judiciary Committee hearing; the hearing process itself; and the period between the hearing and the Senate floor vote.

"We have to keep control of the narrative, to make sure that her story doesn't get told by someone else," the senior aide said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss strategy. Within hours of the announcement, White House officials and Senate Democrats circulated favorable quotes about Sotomayor from Republicans, including former senator Alphonse D'Amato of New York, who supported her 1992 appointment to the federal bench by President George H.W. Bush.

Every conservative should be outraged by that last paragraph. We are being told unequivocally that they intend to control the narrative. This is not being done in the interest of accuracy but in the interest of expediency. Conservatives are being effectively locked out of the debate. The only question is whether they intend to stand idly by while it happens or stand up and be heard.

Schumer, who is Sotomayor's senior home-state senator, will take the lead in introducing her to his colleagues, officials said. One Democratic aide who is helping to manage the nomination said that to minimize potential missteps, Sotomayor will pay courtesy visits to Judiciary members "and then disappear" until the confirmation hearings begin.

Senate Democratic aides said one factor working in Sotomayor's favor is her long public record as a federal judge. The confirmation of Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., for instance, was slowed while the committee sought to extract records from the nominee's executive branch service from the Reagan presidential library. But no such obstacles appear to threaten information gathering on Sotomayor, aides said. White House officials were scrambling to prepare materials to transmit to the Judiciary Committee yesterday. The nominee will submit an extensive committee questionnaire in the coming days, and a law enforcement background check is already underway, as is an effort to gather all of her judicial opinions. But if Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) and Sessions fail to reach agreement on a time frame for moving forward, and Republicans elect to exercise their right to procedural delays, the confirmation process could easily spill into September, giving Sotomayor's opponents four additional weeks to attempt to derail her nomination.

The playbook is being laid out for all to see and yet I predict that there will be not outrage at the political calculation and malicious exclusion of the conservatives by a president who promised “a new spirit of bipartisanship”.

If Republicans bend over and allow themselves to be raped by the process than they get exactly what they deserve. They will do well to remember that we are watching closely; we are keeping score and they will be held accountable to the voters.

Republicans have a chance to draw a clear contrast on an ideological basis. The liberals will most certainly fight hard for their principles the only question unanswered is whether conservatives will have an advocate in the process.

Biden Can't Keep His Mouth Shut - Obama's Youth Filled With "Drink and Drugs and Lazy Days" - White America Decent At the Core

President Obama is so "distracted by his vice president's indiscipline" that he has been forced to rebuke privately Vice President Joe Biden, according to a new book by Newsweek journalist Richard Wolffe, who interviewed Obama a dozen times.

"He can't keep his mouth shut," Wolffe quotes a "senior Obama aide" as saying of the gaffe-prone Biden in "Renegade: The Making of a President," set for release June 2.(...)

Well duh. They knew all along about Biden's tendency to stick his foot in his mouth, followed by his leg and part of his hip. Biden is a distraction, something to make Obama look better, more articulate.

Obama says something stupid? No problem, Biden will out do him. Obama passes something controversial? No problem, Biden will comment on the controversy, and the media will focus on Biden's comments, not on the actual controversy. Brilliant!

Wolffe describes Obama's youth as "filled with drink and drugs and lazy days in Hawaii." But he said that all changed when Obama attended Columbia University in New York.

"That's when I stopped drinking. I stopped partying," Obama said. "This was my ascetic phase. Everything was stripped down."(...)

What a role model this man is. You hear that kids? Go do Jello shots, snort coke, do some keg stands and be lazy. Somehow you will get into Columbia (seriously how did he get into Columbia?), and everything will fall into your lap until, whammo! President of the United States.

"The son of a white mother and black father, Obama said his election does not solve America's racial challenges.

Solving our racial problems in this country will require concrete steps, significant investment," he said. "We have a lot of work to do to overcome the long legacy of slavery and Jim Crow. It can't be purchased on the cheap.

"I am fundamentally optimistic about our capacity to do that," he added. "And I do assert that there is a core decency in the American people and in white Americans that makes me hopeful about our ability to deal with these issues. But these issues aren't just solved by electing a black president."

Sure he never would have told you that voting for him, wasn't a form of reparation, but now that he is elected, surprise, it wasn't, and you are all still racist SOB's. White America is decent at the core??? So the outer parts of white America are pure racist, backward hick trash, but the tiny little core sure is nice. The core? If you ask me the entire fruit of America is decent, except for a few bruises caused by criminals, racists, liberals, etc.

(Source: Fox News)

‘I Do Not Apologize’: Fox News Reporter Confronts Janeane Garofalo Over ‘Racist’ Slam