Holder concluded his comments saying that the Department of Justice doesn’t let race figure into its decisions. Even though race figures into his thinking, I suppose.
But, perhaps he wasn’t lying. Perhaps he was telling the truth when he said race wasn’t a factor. That would mean that “my people” wasn’t referring to any particular race of people. Perhaps it referred to another group of people.
The circus was in the area this week. Oh, wait, it was just Al Sharpton. Different clown entirely.
How did Sharpton’s appearance work out? Great, as far as I’m concerned. His candidate lost.
Speaking of crazy racists calling other people racist…
The NAACP was visited by Michelle Obama, who said the group must “increase its intensity.” They did that by calling the TEA Party racist. They actually said “elements”were racist. And, of course, by elements, they mean “white people.”
Just who are these Colored People that National Association is looking to Advance? Of course, if they changed their name to the current “correct word/phrase” for blacks, they’d be the NAAAA. Which might not be a bad idea. Sounds like a bunch of sheep, mindlessly following their shepherd. Or Judas goat.
But maybe NAACP is right after all: National Association for the Advancement of Calumniation and Prevarication. Yeah, that fits.
Of course, all these lies and racism from the NAACP is beginning to confuse me. The NAACP is repeating lies about others and using race as a rallying point. Didn’t they also do that in the 1930s? Or was that NSDAP? It’s getting harder and harder to tell the difference.
Now, it seems that the TEA Party isn’t the only racist group. Al Qaeda is racist. This is after an attack in Africa. I suppose the blacks killed in the 9/11 attacks in the U.S. were simply killed because they were around a bunch of white people. Ditto for the blacks killed in the 7/7 attacks in the U.K.
Suddenly, Al Qaeda is racist. Does this mean that the administration will take the war on those terrorists seriously now? Or does it just mean that Eric Holder will sue Al Qaeda?
I’m hoping the former, since, in the left’s mind, this charge of Al Qaeda being racist makes them almost as dangerous as the TEA Party.
Now, not so much. First, there was his drunk driven arrest about four years back. Now, there’s the audio tapes (more than one) of his argument with his girlfriend. You usually have to attend a cabinet meeting featuring both Rahm Emanuel and Joe Biden to get that much crazy and profanity in one place.
Right now, if you read the news, Mel Gibson is seen at Satan incarnate. And, though he’s a talented actor, director and screenwriter, it seems that his career might be over. Unless he can be rehabilitated. But, is that possible? I think it might be.
It will be tough, though. Giving money to save the rain forest won’t work. He’s done that. Give millions to help sick children? Donethat. No, that’s not nearly enough.
So, what would it take to rehabilitate Mel Gibson?
The promise to not make Mad Max 4.
The promise to not make Lethal Weapon 5.
The promise to not make What Women Want II.
Claim an oil spill that occurred 457 days after George Bush left office is Bush’s fault.
Claim a terrorist attack that occurred 234 days after George Bush took office is Bush’s fault.
Last weekend, when those members of Congress spread those lies about the protesters, we had video of the incident.
They said that racial slurs were hurled, but the video showed otherwise.
I asked what excuse the left might use to explain why the truth doesn’t match the story. And, sure enough, they’ve come up with all kinds. Most of them saying that the videos were edited or incomplete. However, since Jesse Jackson, Jr., who was with the Congressmen, was videotaping the event, you’d figure there’d be proof of their claims. If they were true.
They aren’t.
Andrew Breitbart is not only saying the Congressmen’s claims are false, he’s offering a bounty to anyone that can back up those claims.
He’s offering $10,000 if Rep. John Lewis, a Georgia Democrat, can prove his claims:
Rep. Lewis, if you can’t do that, I’ll give him a backup plan: a lie detector test. If you provide verifiable video evidence showing that a single racist epithet was hurled as you walked among the tea partiers, or you pass a simple lie detector test, I will provide a $10K check to the United Negro College Fund.
Will Lewis collect for the UNCF? Nope. But you know what I think the left will do? Accuse Breitbart of being a racist, because his offer includes the word “Negro.”
Rep. Andre Carson, D-Ind., said that as he left the Cannon House Office Building with Rep. John Lewis, D-Ga., a leader of the 1960s civil rights movement, some among the crowd chanted “the N-word, the N-word, 15 times.” Both Carson and Lewis are black. Lewis spokeswoman Brenda Jones also said the incident occurred.
“It was like going into the time machine with John Lewis,” Carson said.
Rep. Andre Carson, D-Ind., told a reporter that as he left the Cannon House Office Building with Rep. John Lewis, D-Ga., a leader of the civil rights era, some among the crowd chanted “the N-word, the N-word, 15 times.” Both Carson and Lewis are black, and Lewis spokeswoman Brenda Jones also said that it occurred.
“It was like going into the time machine with John Lewis,” said Carson, a large former police officer who said he wasn’t frightened but worried about the 70-year-old Lewis, who is twice his age. “He said it reminded him of another time.”
African-American Congressman John Lewis (D-GA), a protege of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., who helped organize the March on Washington, went to the House floor today to tell Majority Whip Jim Clyburn (D-SC) that a Tea Party protester called him a “n—–.”
And while most of the invective was directed at the health care bill itself, several House members said there was an ugly tone to comments made by some demonstrators against three black lawmakers: Representatives André Carson of Indiana, Emanuel Cleaver II of Missouri and John Lewis of Georgia, all Democrats.
An aide to Mr. Lewis, a leader of the civil rights movement in the 1960s, said that as he walked to the Capitol, Mr. Lewis was called racial slurs.
Protesters outside the Capitol hurled epithets at Reps. John Lewis (D-Ga.) and Andre Carson (D-Ind.) as they left the building after President Obama delivered an 11th-hour speech on behalf of the health care bill. Carson told reporters that protesters yelled “kill the bill,” then used a racial epithet to describe Carson and Lewis, who is a revered figure on both sides of the aisle.
They all tell the same story.
And that’s the thing: it’s just a story. It’s not true.
I’m waiting for the excuses as to why video of the event doesn’t match reports of the event.
Perhaps they suffer the same thing Maureen Dowd suffers. She heard “boy” when it wasn’t said. The Congressional Black Caucus seems to hear even worse things that aren’t said.
I suppose if someone won’t make you a victim, you have to make yourself one.
Update: Sarah In Italy sent word that there are two other videos, neither of which contain evidence of any racial slurs:
Everybody’s favorite nutbag, Keith Olbermann — who was fired from ESPN in 1997 for being a dick — wants to know
Where are the people of color at the Tea parties?
The fact that an NBC person is asking this asking this is, well, ridiculous. Michelle Malkin has pointed out for some time just how White NBC is.
However, suppose someone else — someone honest and with integrity — were to ask the question. How would I answer it?
Well, I could point out the Black man — identified as “an unidentified man” — at the Tea Party rally in Arizona who was carrying an AR-15. You may recall that NBC’s Contessa Brewer showed a close-up of his weapon, but not showing any skin (so you couldn’t tell he is Black), as she narrated: “there are questions about whether this has racial overtones….white people showing up with guns.”
Of course, there were Blacks present at the Tea Party in Columbus, GA on Independence Day. Blacks were in the crowd, as well as leading the protest.
But, that was in Georgia, where Blacks make up 30% of the population, as opposed to New York’s 17%.
Maybe I shouldn’t bother to get into such a discussion on how many Blacks are involved in the Tea Party protests. Maybe NBC shouldn’t be the Peacock Network, but instead, be called the Pea-brain Network.
Our 39th president made the news again recently. Former president Jimmy Carter, already famous for having an unemployment rate almost as high as Barack Obama’s, blamed racism for opposition to Obama.
I’ve met Jimmy Carter. Sure, I’ve only met him twice, but that’s probably more than you’ve met him. I remember when he was governor of my state. I remember when he was president of my country — which many of you may not.
For what it’s worth, I do not think Jimmy Carter was lying.
Hold on there, conservatives. Hear me out…
I did not say Carter was right. I said he wasn’t lying. There’s a difference.
For instance, if Tweety Bird sees Sylvester and says “I tawt I taw a puddy tat,” he’d be wrong. Sylvester isn’t a “puddy” … he’s a “tom.” Tweety isn’t lying; he’s simply mistaken.
So, I don’t think Carter is lying. He’s projecting.
Politically, there’s not a lot of difference between Carter and Obama. Because they are so close on the issues, I believe Carter truly supports Obama’s initiatives.
And…
That means that if Carter opposed Obama, it could only be for one reason: racism.
So, he thinks that conservatives oppose Obama because of racism. Like some guy named Frank J. Fleming said, liberals can’t imagine any other reason for opposing Obama.
One other thing: Obama and Carter aren’t completely alike. Obama will stand in front of the United States Congress and lie to America about his health care plan. I really don’t think Carter is a liar, though. He’s simply wrong.
Being wrong doesn’t make someone bad. Tweety Bird, for instance, was mistaken about the type of “tat” that Sylverster was.
Of course, Tweety Bird is a cartoon. Jimmy Carter is merely cartoonish.
A hateful man made the news yesterday. You’ve read or heard about it, I’m sure.
This hateful old man — born prior to the U.S. entry into World War II — has, for years, spouted hate for others.
This hateful old man has a long history of criticizing Jews. If you search the Internet, you can find his rants.
This hateful old man is a racist, who has made statements that have inflamed relations between blacks and whites.
This hateful old man is a conspiracy nut. Despite serving in the U.S. Navy, this hateful old man now spouts anti-government rhetoric, and blames the U.S. for the events of 9/11.
This hateful old man was a strong critic of President George W. Bush and GOP presidential candidate John McCain. Admittedly, this doesn’t make him hateful, but it does show you something about his political leanings.
This hateful old man made the news recently. And my reaction was like many others that hear or read about him and people like him: “That darn Jeremiah Wright is at it again.”
Of course, his recent comments that made the news were pushed out of the forefront by the actions of another hateful old man: James Wenneker von Brunn, another pre-World War II anti-Semite, who served in the Navy, made inflammatory statements, opposed Bush and McCain, and is a conspiracy nut.
The difference between them is as stark as black and white. But no deeper than color. Beneath the color, there’s not a bit of difference.
Did you notice that the Obama administration did a couple of things recently that smacked of the Bush administration?
First, the decision by Obama to boycott the U.N. conference on racism. Back in August 2001, the Bush administration did the same thing, and was roundlycriticized. The left said that it showed just how much contempt Bush had toward the world community and how insensitive it was to issues of race.
But now, Obama did the same thing — for the same reason Bush gave: wording in the text for the conference were out of line:
The United States, under the Bush administration, and Israel walked out over attempts to liken Zionism — the movement to establish a Jewish state in the Holy Land — to racism. The reference was later dropped, but concerns about anti-Semitism remained in the final text.
Plans to reaffirm the 2001 document were of particular concern to the Obama administration.
“(It) singles out one particular conflict and prejudges key issues that can only be resolved in negotiations between the Israelis and Palestinians,” (State Department spokesman Robert Wood) said.
Follow that up with Obama’s decision to not pursue prosecution of CIA operatives that used interrogation methods that Obama sees as torture that Bush saw as reasonable.
The U.N.’s top torture investigator doesn’t like that:
Manfred Nowak first made the remarks to an Australian newspaper and later to the Associated Press.
According to Nowak, it’s illegal under International Law for the U.S. government to announce that it has no intention of prosecuting low-level CIA officers.
Bush was roundly criticized for not bowing to the U.N.
Obama might bow to the king of Saudi Arabia, but apparently is not yet ready to bow to the U.N.
Good for him.
And I’m looking forward to what’s next. That is, those on the left who won’t be able to get over Obama acting like Bush on two key issues. They love Obama. And they love the U.N. But what do they do now?
Do they applaud Obama? Or do they support the U.N.?
I’m going to watch the liberals’ heads explode as they try to figure out what to do.
The Chicago Sun-Times reports the First Lady is under fire by Amnau Eele, co-founder of the Black Artists Association, for her selection of designers. Or for who she didn’t choose:
In an interview with the Sun-Times, Eele said that she wants the First Lady to know there are other, lesser-known designers that the First Lady should take a look at.
“You know, I have an issue that every day I meet young black designers that are facing homelessness, they can’t buy fabric, they can’t get the things they need,” she said. “We have qualified designers in the community. A young man like Michael Knight (of Project Runway) — surely you could have worn a scarf by him, a Tshirt, a handbag.”
Heh. Apparently, to some, Michelle Obama isn’t black enough. She must wear “black” clothes, too.
Martin Luther King wanted people to just his children “(not) by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.” It seems that only applied to the late Yolanda, and only still applies to Martin III, Dexter, and Bernice. It seems it’s okay to judge others by their color. And by the color of their clothing designers.
It’s not enough to be black. You must shop black. Equality doesn’t mean … well, equality. Equality means favoritism.
In Russell County, Alabama, (just across the river from Columbus, Georgia, for the geographically impaired) there was a discussion last week about using county vehicles.
The Columbus Ledger-Enquirer has the story, but here’s a summary:
One county commissioner — one of the four white ones — brought up for a vote a policy saying that county commissioners could use the county-owned Ford Explorer only when traveling outside the local counties (Russell County, Alabama and Muscogee County, Georgia).
Commissioners would have to use their own personal vehicle when driving in the local counties, and could be reimbursed at the standard rate.
Another commissioner — one of the three black ones — called the proposed policy “racist.”
The vote was 3-3-1. That broke down to three whites voting “yes,” three blacks voting “no,” and one white abstaining.
They finally ended up agreeing to research what the policy has been, since nobody remembered.
Without knowing what the previous policy was, assuming there was one, it seems to me that a county vehicle could be used for county business, regardless of where the business is. A policy that says you can’t use a county vehicle for county business in the county is … stupid. Not racist, just stupid.
Calling it “racist” is … racist. And stupid.
At least it’s nice to know that stupidity is color-blind.
and Lethal Weapon 2 and Lethal Weapon 3 and …
… as well as some not so hit movies.
