factbat.com

It appears that the New York Times' boisterously bombastic black bigot, Charles M. Blow, is huffing and puffing himself into a hyperventilated state of narrow-minded nepotism again. However, considering his apparent inability to focus, it is truly surprising that this slice of literary limburger can even see far enough past his own nose to find the keyboard he regularly victimizes.

On the other hand, myopic maladies of this sort may likely be of negligible concern to him, since he is obviously the dictating type.

At any rate, Mr. Blow recently decided it was high time he released yet another flatulent blast of half baked statistical gas into the data-sphere, which wreaks almost as bad as the racist rhetoric he attached to it.

In his article titled "Drug Bust", appearing Friday in the NYT Op Ed section, Blow blusters and bellows, rattles and rails about how drug enforcement in America is just another deleterious device of preposterous profiling that unjustly targets black people.

However, if one reads him correctly, it is obvious that Blow's primary insinuation is that "the man" is just looking for an excuse to take down anyone who isn't white.

Blow does actually make decent use of the first few paragraphs where he exposes a rather simplistic, but at least relevant, viewpoint which bears some paucity of precision, however niggardly nuanced in its attempts to exfoliate the chafing dermis that pervades this nation's underbelly - namely, the United States Government's derelict, yet dutiful, "War on Drugs".

Unfortunately, Blow is guilty of an extremely ignorant - or maybe just intentionally insolent - course of contemplation as he clearly attempts to adjudicate the matter from a dislocated and darkened disposition.

Blow points out that in the battle against drug abuse "no group has been more targeted, and suffered more damage, than the black community."

Now, while this may appear to be somewhat of a correct analysis when viewed from a slanted position, the lack of objectivity inherent within Blow's argument is indelible evidence that he has perorated the thesis prematurely.

Under further scrutiny, his allegations of racial discrimination actually begin to cave like a house of cards at the slightest gust of germaneness.

Blow's assertions are, of course, bolstered by the latest audaciously alarming apropos of admonition that members of the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) are famous for exacting on even the most benign arenas of social disbursement. The organization stated recently that "The racial disparities are staggering: despite the fact that whites engage in drug offenses at a higher rate than African-Americans, African-Americans are incarcerated for drug offenses at a rate that is 10--times greater than that of whites." (nytimes.com/ "Drug Bust" article)

However, Blow, and his ACLU cohorts in curmudgeonry, have neglected to mention some of the most adroitly alacritous statistics. Obviously intending to retard the 'process of elimination' that is the most crucial element of every investigation.

Any assertions of fact, hereinafter described, concerning the activities engaged in by criminal elements within society, are based on this author's own personal experiences.

For anyone who has lived in Chicago, Los Angeles, New York - or visited the likes of Compton and Miami Beach - there is no mistaking the fact that it is almost exclusively people of color whom choose to soak the scenery in rivers of pimps, drug dealers, thieves, con artists, muggers, robbers and any other kind of car-jacking, capricious cohort they can find to help them carve out some crevice to criminally copulate in.

Now, this is not to say that white people do not also engage in equal levels of criminal behavior. However, the average puckish peckerwood is not as prone to solicitously shoving it in everybody's face all day long, crowding street corners dressed in gang colors, drinking Cisco and shooting pistols at each other. Or scouring inky avenues and back alleys aboard lustrous low riders, in search of a dark hole where they can force themselves on some young lump of subdued sugar they have smoked a few obligatory rocks with.

Typically, the white trash that either abuses or deals elicit drugs in America also has the sense, and - as unapologetic as it may sound - the respect, to keep their dirty laundry indoors. They also generally despise the denigration and/or disrespect of women.

As for those who merely indulge in the largely benign practice of smoking weed, the racial lines are much less lucid. Although, blacks do often appear to enjoy engaging in an expressly more vexing and vindictive venality of this verdant violation.

Nearly every male in America has at one point - typically during adolescence - been involved in some illicit behavior or group activity (this author being no exception) wherein there always exists the choice of just where, or how far, to take it. And as a matter of some rather consistent fact, white people have rarely elected to openly act pugnaciously promiscuous and recalcitrant to the degree that both blacks and Latinos have in this nation.

This is not in any way meant as an indictment of African-Americans, or some display of self righteous sanctimony in favor of Caucasians. On the contrary, it is merely a statement of fact, as well as pertinent advice that if black people truly want to avoid being harassed by the vice squad so often, then they should do something about their brazen behavior and incessant "look at me, I'm a thug" fashion sense, that is almost always accompanied by a litany of low-life, loser "crack-head" linguistics.

Truly, if a majority of the big city, boulevard blacks would just pull up their pants, and display a little more self-serving humility, or even some deceptively crafted image that at least makes them appear to possess a palatable sense of self respect, instead of falling for the bogus, blowhard, bro-lifically bureaucratized bait and switch - hook, line, and sinker - every dog blamed time, then they may find that the "pity the fool," "it's a black thing," crack caddy, separatist mentality and tough guy, gangsta daddy, pooh bah pimp-crap performance is not nearly as effective an act of ascension as they would like to believe.

Of course they are targeted by the police at ten times the level of others. They literally taunt them day and night, and are famous for shooting the convenience store clerks they rob to get their drug money, so that there are no witnesses. Statistics don't lie, regardless of how easily they can be manipulated and spun into lies.

It really is time to grow up, folks, and shake off the harrowing history of Hellenistic hierarchy regardless of how troubling it may appear. The dramatic effect is wearing thin. And, with all due respect, was never much more than a redolently restrictive remuneration employed as a means of refusing to rise from the ruckus in finer fashion.

Furthermore, a significant portion of the alleged brutalities suffered by minorities in America were at the hands of less than 1% of the population. These were the exclusively rich and remorseless who possessed the power to fulminate excessive levels of pendulum swinging propaganda that sent the majority of Americans running for the shadows of segregation in an attempt to protect themselves from the alleged scourge of baby raping, wife defiling animals that were said to be lurking around every corner.

The very real truth is that no more than a small minority of private citizens in this country ever engaged in, or even condoned, the elitist class's incessant racial discrimination, or certainly ever sought to follow their example of enslaving people.

The history of the Unite States, and the majority of its citizens, has been maligned unjustly in more ways than its beautiful land has trees. And even some of the most upstanding and egalitarian citizens of the last millennium - several extremely pivotal ones being direct descendents of mine - were slandered by the aristocracy as some of the more unsavory individuals of their time, and simply for the fact that they rebelled against the Church and the British Crown in order to help create a legacy of freedom that eventually grew to support those who founded this country.

My family's history is deeply inured with egalitarian principles, peppered with dissenters who fought against the Church's denial of basic human rights, pervaded by courageous patriarchs who bequeathed entire estates to villages and towns so that people could secretly practice their own religion. Building schools for free, that were then donated to the poor and enslaved so that all people, regardless of their birth, could be afforded the opportunity to acquire an education.

Less than 1% of the United States’ southern population ever owned a large number of slaves. Even in the racist South, the approximately 25% of the slave-owning population were merely families that actually "employed" one or two blacks as house servants, and treated them with respect and dignity. It was a pervasively ignorant era in a fledgling country where many people simply did it to save appearances, and shield whomever they could from the more brutal environments of indentured service. (Digital History website)

Furthermore, the truly necrotic filth that routinely abused black people in those days, were not simply white. They were also snobbishly inept, brutally boorish and inhumane sociopaths that this nation has been tenaciously attempting to rid itself of since its inception.

However, as can be proven ad-infinitum, these seditious aristocrats - such as J.P. Morgan, Andrew Carnegie and John D. Rockefeller - eventually found a way to infiltrate the halls of the United States government through the back doors of big business, and have, ever since, been rubbing salt in the wounds they caused, and upsetting the social order with exclusionary edicts aimed at every individual or group they could readily target as the next victim in their rapacious ruse. (John D. Rockefeller/ wikipedia.org)

The power hungry political hacks, crackpots and carpetbaggers thus created, care not one iota whether it is a gender biased clash of wills they create, a class biased grasp for bills they emulate, or a racially biased past-that-kills they exacerbate, so long as there is trouble in the camp, and the people keep fighting, creating plenty of crime and hatred for the jack booted thugs to feed on, justifying the next kicked-in door or needless killing, where anybody and everybody is subject to search and seizure, day or night, white or black, by a government that claims to be fighting what it has caused. (Youtube.com/ Mo SWAT raids house. Warning: disturbing content. Viewer discretion strongly advised)

Want the minority vote? Hell, just call your opponent a racist. Want the women's vote? Simple, tell them they are oppressed and undeserved. Want the poor vote? No problem, promise to raise taxes on the rich. Looking to secure the LGBT vote? A mere triviality of creating some unconstitutional mandate that recognizes their personal desires above others, and you're golden. Need to appear as a man of the people? Piece of cake, just lie your fool head off, and keep on doing it until your very last breath - there's always some poor sucker who wants, more than anything, to believe that this is still a nation where you just might be telling the truth.

In stark contrast to Blow's allegations of racism, is the fact that the victim in the video above, who had his door kicked in and his house raided in the middle of the night, was both white, and innocent of any wrongdoing. However, he, his wife and his 7-year-old son were not only terrorized and brutalized, the family pets were needlessly murdered in their cages by the SWAT team.

Fortunately, however - as detailed in Blow's article - the 19 member Global Commission on Drug Policy declared this month that the global war on drugs "Has failed with devastating consequences for individuals and societies around the world. Fifty years after the initiation of the U.N. Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, and 40 years after President Nixon launched the U.S. government's war on drugs, fundamental reforms in national and global drug control policies are urgently needed." (nytimes.com/ "Drug Bust")

What is absent from Blow's analysis of this June event, is that the black member, Kofi Annan, highlighted in his article, is actually the only expressly black member on the commission. The other 18 members are almost all white, and hail from Spain, Norway, Switzerland, Greece, Germany and others, with two of them being Hispanic and one of them, Asma Jahangir, of Pakistani origin. Furthermore, all of the American members are white, such as Paul Volcker and George P. Schultz. (Wikipedia.org/ Global Commission on Drug Policy)

This kind of blows the lid off of Blow's canned attacks concerning the issue, where he attempts to scribble out the true portrait of this pedantically polarizing problem with polemic - and largely gratuitous - graffiti designed to ignore the excessive contribution to the fray by a great many African-Americans.

For Pete's sake, there is not a majority of white singers and performers glorifying pimps, crack dealers, gang bangers and the rape of underage girls, in diatribes called “cop killer”, it is a majority of black performers. However, Blow also never makes any mention of this. But then, he is a big fan of the hip-hop culture that is saturated with dramatic and duplicitous ramblings, disrespect and depravity; as he so graciously informed readers during his last racist rant. Therefore, this is to be expected.

While I can't help but applaud Mr. Blow for his ability to intellectually eviscerate the more compelling criminality of complicity and corruption coursing through the bowels of this nation's felonious federal fixation with illicit drugs, it is nonetheless discouraging to find him so easily blinded by his own personal position in the matter.

He appears to have had only one thing in mind when exposing the incongruent elements of alienation and punishment that have been routinely inflicted upon American citizens found guilty of the victimless act of illicit drug use: providing cover for his ironically racist attack on racism.

Thanks a lot Blow, for digging your heels into the smut and proving that you are just one more barnyard buffoon who will act like a jilted jackass for as long as you can bray and whine.

How unfortunate that you so enjoy playing lap dog for the limousine liberals, drama-queen democrats, corporative conservatives, and septic socialists, tugging at their leash as you pitch their snarling sophistry with sedentary and simplistic summations of script intended to balkanize the masses with acrimonious aspirations of alimony in a bid to assure the sanctimonious status quo another repugnant round of oblique, and obstinately obsequious, votes of "con"-fidence.

As stated previously, Blow: "you stink of recidivism and shame." Tell your malevolent masters it is time to give you a bath.

Appearing on the "Stop the Presses" page of the Associated Press (and on the Yahoo music website) is a story about a teenage girl who draws ire when she sings the National Anthem, in a non-traditional way, for an audience at a sporting event. And the flap is gaining attention for its alleged undertones of racial discrimination.

Shai Warfield-Cross, a student at Bloomington High School North who has been performing this nation's thought-provoking, patriotic 'ode-de-a-cappella' for most of this last year, is currently the focus of attention because she was politely asked by her athletics director, Jen Hollars, to modify her rendition of "The Star Spangled Banner" so that it more closely resembles its time-honored, and easily distinguishable, characteristics that most every American instantly recognizes.

Warfield, who is a young, attractive, black American sister (I no longer recognize the term "African-American"), sings the anthem with what has grown to be considered a moniker of Ebonics. This is where one places a particular emphasis on portions of a song, employing very distinct and recognizable "negro-melodic" gesticulations - mostly within the throat - and at times, unwittingly butcher what would otherwise be a popularly memorable tune, by also changing its basic nature with undulating tempos and alternate notes that are often considered excessive by most anyone who has grown to identify with the song's original artist, and rendition.

Even American Idol's star-studded panel has often expressed displeasure with this propensity, noting that the song the contestant selected did not require such complexity and expanse. And this vibrato style was used by a wide range of glittery-eyed hopefuls, of various ethnic backgrounds, who were quite obviously surprised to hear that it is not always as enjoyable for the audience to listen to, as it is for the performer to sing.

I, for one, do not actually care for this particular vocal style on many traditional songs. Although it can be extremely entertaining on others. Unfortunately, the national anthem just isn't one of them, and for several reasons.

However, given the response from Warfield's stepmother, Aurora Marin, who claimed the teen's "rights of individuality" have been denied, it appears that there is nothing a vengeful and prescient derelict-of-behavior can't find as a valid reason to call someone an intolerant racist these days. Mrs. Marin even went so far as to say that "Shai is being denied her right of artistic expression as a result of her natural voice and cultural heritage," concluding "this situation makes us really question the staff and leadership there."

Obviously, far too often, it is becoming nearly impossible to request that a black person in America assimilate respectfully within the confines of this nation's truly auspicious and magnanimous history without some form of vile, distempered attack being waged upon anyone who does so.

The fact is that Warfield was given the honor of representing this entire nation by gifting audiences with her obvious talent and presence as a spokesperson for each and every citizen who calls this fortuitous-land home. And for Mrs. Marin to have denigrated and defiled this honor with such misplaced acrimony, is nothing short of an utter disgrace.

Given her poor judgment in the matter how could any reasonable individual expect from Marin anything short of a public apology, to both the school staff, and her obviously much-more-mature stepdaughter.

Incidentally, Warfield complied with the request, and, to the delight of a later audience, has been allowed to continue singing the anthem at events.

However, further misguided and vile attacks have since been levied against the school staff by other near-sighted and obtuse bigots. Khalil Muhammad, who claims to be a History professor at Indiana University, had the nerve to enter the fray with bombastic acerbity that does not in any way jive with history, He is quoted as saying "African-Americans die in our wars like white Americans...and since Vietnam [they] have served disproportionately in our armed forces." (it's rather puzzling how racism can only be perpetrated by white people in the eyes of some extremist bigots). Yet, Muhammad say's nothing of the fact that there has not been a draft since Vietnam, and therefore the alleged disproportionate service of blacks would be entirely voluntary.

Furthermore, as a veteran, my experience in the U.S. Armed Forces does not in any way lend credence to his statement. But then, I spent very little time in the galley, and maybe that is where all of the allegedly disproportionate number of "minorities" were.

Far too much of what many people have come to believe is American History, has been irresponsibly gleaned from the droves of misinformation saturating a majority of the internet, and Muhammad appears to be one of the more avid, and gullible, scanners of this typically unsubstantiated, but conveniently one-sided, "social distortion."

Regardless of the fact that any individual, or group, has ever been the brunt of abuse or discrimination in the past, for this nation's pillars of society to keep nagging and needling a vast majority of the white population - who, quite frankly, have never been, nor ever will be, racist - is entirely egregious in its own right; and actually presents as a much more feral and maliciously-divisive, bias on the part of those who are so often pleased to be engaging in this behavior simply for the notoriety that it garners them.

Warfield's principal, Jeff Henderson, told The Herald-Times that there were people in the audience who had complained, informing him that although the lyrics were correct, the melody was nearly unrecognizable.

If one listens to her sing it, this fact is obvious, and one will note that the parts she changed, then completely alter the emotional high-points of the stanza, losing various crescendos which typically evoke an uplifting and spirited emotive that impacts - in an extremely rewarding way - those who have served under this nation's blazing standard of stars and stripes.

Must this nation's courageous heroes be flogged with racial hatreds after having given so much - many, the ultimate sacrifice - to preserve the freedoms and liberties of each and every individual who calls this beautiful nation home ... simply because there are so many people who cannot think outside of their group-mentality to somehow find the compunction that may cause them to decide it is better to forgo their pompous hatreds and dusty divisiveness, in search of a more mutually-equitable sentiment?

It is actually impossible to find anyone who is not a member of a group - or race of people which was, at some point in history, persecuted and/or brutalized unjustly. However, there are far too many indiscriminate haters today who refuse to ever let go of the animosities they have grown to rely upon for a crutch. And they incessantly brow-beat and accuse nearly anyone of perpetrating acts of intolerance, often in an effort to garner some unmitigated sympathy that they, many times, do not in any way deserve.

So many people currently claim various, and even multiple, ethnic heritage because it provides them with a list of angry accusations that are tolerated by a society which typically allows these people to wield them like weapons against those they have no intention of ever showing any degree of tolerance in return.

Many examples of this are found in Hawaii, where the average Micronesian, who can be anything from Tongan, to Pilipino, to Tahitian will claim to be Hawaiian in order to elicit a pro-bias where they are also protected by the locals who consistently show an open , and typically violent, disdain for anyone who appears to be of Caucasian descent

What is never noted by these people, however, is the fact that their racism is almost never reciprocated by "white people", regardless of how ignorantly or maniacally this despicable bigotry is perpetrated against them. Moreover, it generally originates from wild fables that have been passed down from generation to generation as a means of promoting solidarity in a people who rarely have the courage to admit the many mistakes and indiscretions of their past genocidal and despotic leaders who have caused so much problems for the indigenous peoples there. But I digress.

The majority of racially motivated attacks in America are actually being perpetrated against peaceable and honest citizens who have never in their life shown a propensity for racial animosities even remotely akin to those which are, so often, viciously meted-out upon them by their accusers. Furthermore, the prevailing bias that generally becomes most apparent is the one that is shown by the alleged victim who has basically brought discrimination upon their self, simply because they refuse to be an individual; or allow themselves to be judged as such. But instead, would rather demand special treatment based on their affiliation within their chosen group.

Regardless of the fact that everyone is born either black, white, brown, yellow or red, one must actually choose to be affiliated with a group, even those of their own race. One's skin, hair or eye color does not automatically force them into any group. It is always a choice that one makes when seeking the typically-pitiful and guarded animosities so many are offered by the average racially-protected group-mentality.

Furthermore, such a choice will always cause those who identify their self as a group, to be discriminated according to the group, and by everyone who comes into contact with them. Amazingly, these people never appear concerned when they are discriminated in this manner; they generally demand it. However, the only time they ever complain is when the discrimination is against them, rather than for them. And no matter what anyone wants to believe, this type of choice (to operate as a group) is not now, nor has it ever been, allowed, nor protected by the Constitution in the United States of America.

Just because this nation began with an infiltration of miscreant politicians and predatory leaders in the echelons of a largely-nascent American society - whom were incessant of manipulating the population with all manner of divisive engagements - does not in any way afford citizens some right to seek furtherance of these abusive and balkanizing edicts, especially not in deference to their own agenda.

Moreover, if immigrants to America were properly indoctrinated with the tenets of the Constitution, which are manifest in clear language outlining the expectations of allegiance to the primary ideology of freedom, and personal accountability, this nation would begin to return to its unmistakable pinnacle as this species' greatest establishment of evidentiary-liberties to have ever evolved upon the Earth.

I, being a light-skinned person of a tremendously portentous and laudable heritage, am generally believed to be one who would gain the most from seeking the auspices of my alleged group. And while this may be true, I have never, nor will I ever, stoop to such depravity. Furthermore, I utterly detest anyone who does.

The only distinguishing characteristics that I cherish and respect as discriminating-traits of my person, are the genetic dispositions that I was so graciously gifted by one of my most beloved, and honorable heroes...my father. His polish and poise in the face of even the most perniciously-intolerant bigotry, is renown, and it has actually been a defining feature of my family for many centuries.

I am honored to be who I am, and I will always seek to honor, to the very highest degree, anyone who displays such traits...regardless of race, heritage, gender, disability, nationality or social status.

One will always be required to make choices in life, and these are all that anyone can ever be judged by.

References:

Information from: The Herald Times, http://www.heraldtimesonline.com

Associated Press, In Stop The Presses. "Ind. Girl's National Anthem Rendition Stirs Flap," 28 JAN 2011

By: Dane Wilson

In an article on Investors.com called “Right Wing Is Using Race To Smear Obama”, written by Eugene Robinson, the author claims that Andrew Breitbart, the blogger who first broke the video of Shirley Sherrod addressing a crowd of NAACP members on racial issues, is nothing but a “smarmy provocateur who often speaks at Tea Party rallies”.

Once again the left finds a way to attack the Tea Party, insinuating, or outright claiming, that they are a bunch of racists, while ignoring that they themselves are the ones who are demonstrably plying the card of race, accusing anyone it doesn’t agree with, with acts of racism, all from behind a blanket of racial bias and separatist sentiment.

Robinson, himself a smarmy provocateur who appears to do little else than write ignorance and lies for somebody at Investors Business Daily, believes that there was absolutely no reason whatsoever for Breitbart to have posted the video of Sherrod on the internet, other than that he is an intemperate and deceptive person who was attempting to fool people into believing that there is racism in the NAACP. Robinson also believes it is just fine for Justice Sonia Sotomayor to have lauded her “wise Latina” heritage as a credible association for which to influence her decisions on the bench.

As far as the official bigotry is concerned however, all one needs to do is watch the entire video to see that there is most definitely racism alive and burgeoning within the NAACP. The people in the audience who were listening to Sherrod’s spiel were clearly showing their approval of her explanation of racial discrimination she showed toward a white couple.

What is remarkable is that Sherrod even stated that she “took him (the white man) to one of his own kind” as if this was some acceptable form of behavior. And the audience is heard clearly agreeing with this decision.

Furthermore, merely the name of the NAACP exudes a racial bias. It does not say the National Association for the Advancement of People. It only say’s “Colored People.” Regardless of who may have ever sought only the advancement of “White People”, it was audacious and bigoted in every way, and was never tolerated by a majority of white people. However, the majority of black people obviously do not share a like sentiment.

Just how do the members of the NAACP think this type of bigotry and racial bias looks to those who are not in any way racist, nor have ever been biased toward or against any race of peoples? Just how is it expected to affect those of us who live daily in close proximity to excessive racial bias and hatred displayed by blacks and Latinos against whites. Especially to those whites who know the true history of this nation?

The fact is that it was never “all”, or even a majority of whites who were racist against blacks, and in fact the majority of white people have always been against segregation and slavery. It was whites who fought other white people in this nation -- fought and died -- to emancipate blacks.

Actually, it was the Conservative Right which most demonstrably fought to emancipate black people in America.

What is astonishing is that Robinson goes on to make bombastic claims -- like most Democrats do -- about how those who are exposing the racist rants and violent actions of the New Black Panther Party are just race baiters.

He claims “These allegations of anti-white racism are being deliberately hyped and exaggerated because they are designed to make whites fearful. It won’t work with most people, of course” (damned right I say) “but it works with some -- enough, perhaps, to help erode Obama’s political standing and damage his party’s prospects at the polls.”

No, Robinson, Obama and his administration -- albeit with the help of morons like you -- are doing that all on their own.

Robinson goes on to claim “Before Sherrod, the cause celebre of the ‘You Must Fear Obama’ campaign involved something called the New Black Panther Party. Never heard of it? That’s because it’s a tiny group that exists mainly in the fevered imaginations of its few members…also in the alternate reality of Fox News: One of the networks hosts has devoted more than three hours of air time in recent weeks to the grave threat posed by the NBPP.”

However, the NBPP is becoming more well known as they spew racial hatred and are allowed to address large crowds at the NAACP. In fact there have been various interviews with prominent members of the NBPP who claim that “the only way to get rid of police brutality is to get rid of the police” and that it is time to start “killing cracker babies”, among other ignorant statements.

Robinsons say’s “the way to deal with bullies is to confront them, not run away.”

Hopefully Robinson remembers he said that when it comes to bear that the white people in this nation are not getting scared because of the racial hatred being perpetrated and parroted by the Left in this nation, but instead are getting pissed off.

With the way a majority of blacks in this nation appear to behave concerning the issue of racism, it becomes quite apparent that if the tables had been turned, and it had been whites who were being enslaved and abused, then at this point in time every household in America would consist of a black family with white servants.

What is remarkable is the fact that the Left, who’s members constantly claim to be against racism and racial discrimination, are the ones who create the most racial and social disparities in this nation.

Furthermore, it has been Obama and his administration whom have both consistently stirred up racial bias in this nation, and irresponsibly caused racial upheaval in among the citizenry. He claimed that those who disagreed with his 2008 campaign platform were just racists. He has incessantly accused those who are against his policies of the last year and a half, as racist.

Obama even wrote an extremely racist book called “Dreams of My Father” where he speaks of his constant dichotomy of racial bias even though he had a white mother. He exposes his class hatred and racial bias when speaking of “watching stupid rich white folks” picking up dog feces and how amusing he found it to be.

Not to mention the fact that Obama is little more than an egocentrically motivated, megalomaniacal ideologue who does not exude any actual sentiment toward humanity or basic human compunction. He is nothing but an elitist who will attempt to force his will upon this nation regardless of the obvious effects because he is not motivated by results or intuition based on compassion. He is only interested in accomplishing a set number of chosen goals that are compliant with his, and his Politbureau’s, authoritarian expectations as determined by the projected success of national hypnosis under the veiled utopia they are promising…but will never deliver.

Even more excoriating however, concerning the video of Sheri Sherrod, is the fact that at one point she is seen opining about how the government never fires anyone. She is seen bragging about “even in this economic recession, have anyone ever seen a federal employee lose their job?…uh huh, that’s all I've got say.” Essentially going on to explain that it is best to work for the government if one wants job security.

Sherrod also goes on to openly extol her belief that it is all about the “have’s and the have not’s” as if this is the deciding factor driving her behaviors. So just what will she do when she is faced with a person she believes to be too “rich looking” to help? What is the difference between looking too black, too white, too Latino or too rich? They are all discriminatory allegations based on a bias either for or against a person based on the perception that they belong to a particular group one believes to be “worthy” or “unworthy” regardless of their specific disposition. It exposes her belief that if one appears to be rich then they are the enemy. Rather than exhibiting a case by case variable sentiment that proves she is capable of determining eligibility based solely on need.

This irascible sentiment shown by Sherrod further paints her as even more of a despicable person who is in no way worthy of the American citizenship she now enjoys.

Hers, and many others’ obsequiousness to the government, often corroborated within the ranks of the NAACP and other Leftist national organizations, prove that these people are completely at odds with the Tea Party movement, not because the Tea Party is racist, but simply because their message of “limited government, constitutional values, balanced budget and liberated markets” will put them out of work as worshipful sycophants of their Statist masters, and instead require that they find a real job.

San Francisco Chronicle Staff Writer Lay's It On Extra Thick

In an article titled “Shooting in church should be a hate crime”, penned by Chip Johnson a writer for the San Francisco Chronicle, the East Bay newspaper intends to legitimize the act of further destabilizing the rule of law in the nation by once again demanding that the courts engage in realms of extra sensory perception (ESP) and Parapsychology, areas for which it has no jurisdiction.

Johnson makes statements which appear to demand that people be held criminally liable for what are nothing more than inferences of “thought crimes,” and furthermore, attempts to use sensationalism as a means of justifying what would be a disloyal and dangerous course for any legal system to embark upon.

The United States Constitution is an explicit and conciliatory document which engages the subject of criminal intent extensively throughout its many articles and amendments, and has made clear that there is no provision whatever for such questionable assertions as “thought crimes” under the law.

As reported by the Chronicle, there was an incident in a local church where a funeral was being held for a recently murdered 18 year old gang member who was shot dead shortly after his birthday. It alleges that rival gang members attended the funeral (possibly covertly) and discharged firearms in the church, but did not shoot anyone.

Regardless of what the motive was for the alleged rival gang members to be discharging loaded firearms in a local religious house of worship -- East Oakland’s Cosmopolitan Baptist Church -- the fact is that they did so within city limits and thus the act is a crime punishable under current law. There is no need for exacerbating the primary elements of the crime by adding excessive suppositions and baseless assertions, and as well, there is no truly legal precedence for expecting them to be justified in the courts, regardless of how drastically they are represented.

Far too many law enforcement officials and bureaucrats attempt to circumvent the legal process by claiming that they must “fight fire with fire” as an excuse for acting criminally against criminals. However, their employment of such methods are actually likened to fighting fire with gasoline, since the concept of “fighting fire with fire” is that which removes the fuel, not adds to it. Fighting crime with crime will always stoke the conflagrating effects of this social disease.

This nation’s public servants must begin to bite the bullet and truly prevent crime by engaging those things in the society which serve to promote it, rather than expecting to simply mitigate the events which transpire as many of the preposterously pragmatic edicts of the current system devolve into the logical realms of misfeasance they were intended for, and that most do not want to engage, or even admit.

The writer of the article, an Afro American, even goes so far as to make mention of the Ku Klux Klan in an effort to further add shock value to the piece. He states “As a black American, it’s unthinkable to me that our youngsters are terrorizing their own communities with the same methods employed by the Ku Klux Klan” as if to infer that this incident was as much an act of discrimination against an entire group of people as are genocidal or oppressive attacks by racists.

His is a preposterous statement that attempts to drag White Supremacists into the fray, and lend credence to his assertion that this was a hate crime because the shooting occurred at a church, or possesses some paralleling similarities, albeit extremely far removed, of past acts of brutality by the ignorant and terrified members of the Klan.

Illuminatingly, however, is the fact that the mere mention of the Klan in the article exposes Johnson to be somewhat of a bombastic and perfidious racist who himself has issues with hatred against white people in general. He appears to be purposely throwing the “race card” into an incident where people of the same race and ethnic background were engaging each other in an obvious state of militarized strategy known as “the element of surprise”, which is meant to demoralize the opposition by attacking them when they are most vulnerable.

Furthermore, this strategy was employed ad-nauseam by the Chicago gangsters of the prohibition era, criminals whom the current gangs worship and pattern themselves after. Thus the act itself falls perfectly into the category of classic gang activities which are turf related.

Many gangland attacks over the decades have occurred at weddings, bar mitzvahs, funerals, christenings and various other gatherings where only families and friends congregate, not because it is at a church, but simply because those perpetrating the attack are assured of only engaging those persons who are promoters and supporters of their rivals.

Astonishingly, Johnson also states that “Firing a weapon into or inside a house of worship packed with mourners is about as direct an assault on an individual’s religious beliefs as you can get.” This is like claiming that school shootings in America, and stabbings at nurseries in China, are a broad assault on education as a whole. Even the mass poisoning of school girls in Afghanistan, allegedly perpetrated by Taliban forces who oppose the education of women in society, are not themselves and assault on education. But rather, these acts are specific assaults by an extremist organization who believes that denying education to women will somehow prevent sedition or infidelity…an ignorant and nearsighted position to be sure, but not an open assault on knowledge itself, only its accessibility.

To digress for a moment, the mass stabbings of children in China are as varied in their specificity as they are general in nature, and these incidents appear to be criminal acts of frustration committed by mentally ill persons. However, the one child policy of the Communist Chinese government cannot be ruled out as a smoldering sub-factor. Therefore, they are not actually hate crimes per se.

The ulterior motives of Johnson are blatant on the face of the article. Time and again throughout the piece he exposes himself to be an embarrassingly feeble minded purveyor of propaganda who could use a few lessons in psychology if he truly intends to be the effective tool of the plutocracy’s protracted and tortuous attempts to destabilize the nation’s system of jurist prudence, which he appears to be aspiring to.

Johnson is, however, justified in tiptoeing along the fine line between retaliation and terrorism when he states “In the modern era, only two groups are commonly associated with an assault on a church or synagogue or a mosque: military troops and terrorists -- and the five people arrested outside the Cosmopolitan Baptist Church on Tuesday are not soldiers.”

Unfortunately, there are a few problems with his statement. First, is the fact that many gang members do actually consider themselves to be soldiers, or warriors. Second, this was not an attack “on” a church, only “at” a church. Third, terrorism is an irrelevant issue in the legal system, and typically presents as an irascible ghost who has many faces. Which exposes the fact that it has no place in the courtroom since it cannot be specifically defined, and is thus an corruptible and intemperate accusation at best.

In any case, the subject of motive is only necessary for implicating probability when attempting to prove one’s involvement in the perpetration of a criminal act, and this motive does not, in and of itself, warrant prosecution. The only legitimate indictment is of the act itself, whether tangible evidence of intent, or clear fulfillment of the event. No thought can ever be proven in a court of law, regardless of what sophistry and vengeance may propose, and therefore they must remain in the dynamic realms of investigation, and out of the inuring realms of indictment.

To further add fuel to the flame, Assemblyman Sandre Swanson, a Democrat from Alameda, in blatant disregard for the U.S. constitution -- and current laws which are perfectly capable of defining the crimes -- said he plans to meet with county prosecutors to determine if the discharge of the firearms at a church fall under existing hate-crime laws or whether new legislation should be introduced.

For elected officials to be constantly proposing legislation intended to address specific issues which have already been clearly outlined by the founding documents of this nation, and ignore the fact that they have no right to side-step the legal process simply because they claim there is no other way, is not only indicative of an authoritarian and despotically traitorous leadership, it is an exacerbating obstacle standing in the way of the progress this nation was meant to create and sustain.

Swanson even goes on to claim that “Crimes against churches have historically been considered hate-crimes” but of course say’s nothing about the crimes of the church against the people, of which were some of the most brutal and racially motivated of all time. He further opines “What makes this so horrific, particularly in communities of color, is the historical significance of the church and its role as a sanctuary…it is a crime that we have to label as hate or terrorist activity and we should have enhanced penalties for it.”

Swanson actually has the audacity to cite the alleged sanctuary principal of the church, as if the average funeral exists in some deformed or derange state of indemnity, crying for portent from the bell towers of Notre Dame, hunted and oppressed. This man is an obvious politician in the most miscreant of effects, and appears to have not the compunction of a normal human being. Of course, this first assumes he is not a mental deficient, and is therefore accountable for his assertions.

Consternation, whether public or private, will never be an acceptable instigator of state or national policy, regardless of the fact that it has been the mainstay of political power for far too long in this country. The United Sates Constitution is the guidepost for the nation, not the pernicious or slanted personal cries of socially lascivious leaders. Furthermore, neither punishment nor reward are a deterrent of immoral or illegal behavior; this is one reason why crime changes like the wind. But I digress.

To have ever directed the course of the judicial system in America on a trajectory of punishment and vengeance rather than education and rehabilitation -- of or for those who are deemed criminally liable -- was one of the most destructive and delusional libations of “mono-elective” aperitif to have ever been poured from the corroded and rusty urn of ancient religiosity, and summarily forced down the gullet of the collective social mind.

The ignorance and denial of the critical contributions by every individual, that has evolved amid this turbid environment, will become irrefutably apparent as the system progresses into more abusive and perverted mutations of pseudo-freedom, and there will eventually be no other choice to be considered but the real and present relativity of slamming on the brakes and yanking the wheel to one side before the combinative carriage of this society goes careening perilously off of the proverbial cliff of tyrannical despotism.

It is time to hold the news agencies’ fear-mongering proletarians of propaganda accountable for the detestable filth and mendacity they spew, and expose the fact that intentional lies and balkanizing treachery are not free speech. Free speech is a responsibility, not simply a right, because it is intended to expose the truth, and give a clear and resounding voice to even the most timid of creatures. To continue allowing only a select few to shout over the din with their acerbic vocal flatulence, and rancorous rhetoric, aided by trusted public journals, is a debasing moral crime, and far too often employed as a tool of mass social manipulation.

There is no reason to prohibit these people from openly displaying their ridiculous rants. However, it is beyond reason to afford them such a publicly revered pulpit to pound upon.

On a side note: many of the mourners that were attending the funeral at the church were also packing firearms, and a mass brawl of over 300 people broke out afterward.

In conclusion (I grow weary of this subject)…

Shoveling manure will always be an honorable profession, but only on the family farm, and those who perform this vital service are likely none too pleased to have their work denigrated and demoralized by sophists, such as Johnson, who are given the opportunity to cultivate ignorant and turbid authoritarianism in society by spreading a deceptive and pedantic version of this pungent fertilizer across the main stream media.