Friday, October 31, 2008
Steaming Load Award #2: Home Owners Association asshat nukes the welcome home signs for a returning warrior
Steaming Load #2: Home Owners Association asshat nukes the welcome home signs for a returning warrior.
After 15 months of putting her life on the line in Iraq, one of our warriors, SPC Lauren Boitet, was coming home to visit her family in their Pace Island (Flori-DUH) home. Eager to let Lauren know how happy they were over her safe return, her family deployed flags, balloons, and ‘welcome home’ signs. In a rational world, it would be ‘no harm, no foul’, but this Sunshine State blight is under the oppressive thumb of a homeowners association.
Instead of allowing the rules-bending display to stay up for a couple hours, the HOA assholes ripped them down, but their antics, as infurating as they are, weren’t enough to land them in the Steaming Load zone. Here's what made us reach critical mass: according to the America hating, goose-stepping, son of a bitch who presides over the Pace Island Homeowners Association, Alan Williams, the signs are an intolerable ‘political’ statement which ‘supports the war’. That’s right, Alan Williams is a terrorist loving turd, who needed to be flushed down the crapper YESTERDAY!
If you happen to meet this son-of-a-bitch in a dark alley, punt his nuts into the next block, then tell him that PIG says, "DIE IN A FIRE, YOU RAT BASTARD".
Parting shot: Everyone here in the Free State of PIG thanks Lauren Boitet for her service. You deserved better than this, soldier, and that’s a fact.
Steaming Load Award: Buckeye State Obamunists abuse their authority to dig up dirt on Joe the plumber
Steaming Load #1: Buckeye State Obamunists abuse their authority to dig up dirt on Joe the plumber.
Joe the Plumber’s life changed the instant he blundered into the public eye. ‘Blundered’ is the proper word, since, unannounced, Messiah Barry showed up in Samuel Joseph Wurzelbacher’s (Joe the Plumber) neighborhood. During this chance meeting, Joe asked the question which ripped the lid off Messiah Barry’s Stalinistic wealth redistribution scheme. Unfortunately, Joe’s question did more than expose Messiah Barry as a Marxist. It made Joe the target of Obamunist retribution.
The press did their best to make Joe public enemy number 1, and, they seemed amazingly well informed. We know, now, that Buckeye State Obamunist officials used the state’s computer database in a frantic search for dirt on Joe.
The biggest fish who swam into the ‘who did it and why’ net deployed by the Columbus Dispatch newspaper is Helen Jones-Kelley, director of the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services. She allowed some state employees to dig into Joe’s records. She insists it was a legit search for relevant child support info, but that won’t pass the smell test, since there aren’t any child-support cases involving Joe. I’m sure it’s just a coincidence that Ms. Kelly is a maxed out donor to Messiah Barry’s campaign.
‘...Public records requested by The Dispatch disclose that information on Wurzelbacher's driver's license or his sport-utility vehicle was pulled from the Ohio Bureau of Motor Vehicles database three times [later stories upgraded this to four separate searches] shortly after the debate.
Information on Wurzelbacher was accessed by accounts assigned to the office of Ohio Attorney General Nancy H. Rogers, the Cuyahoga County Child Support Enforcement Agency and the Toledo Police Department...’
‘...On Oct. 17, BMV information on Wurzelbacher was obtained through an account used by the Cuyahoga County Child Support Enforcement Agency in Cleveland, records show.
Mary Denihan, spokeswoman for the county agency, said the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services contacted the agency today and requested an investigation of the access to Wurzelbacher's information. Cuyahoga County court records do not show any child-support cases involving Wurzelbacher.
The State Highway Patrol, which administers the Law Enforcement Automated Data System in Ohio, asked Toledo police to explain why it pulled BMV information on Wurzelbacher within 48 hours of the debate, Hunter said...’ (Dispatch)
No matter how these Obamunists try to spin it, this is an intolerable abuse of power. Do we want an America where a man can’t ask a political candidate a question without the coercive power of the Nanny State coming down on him like a ton of bricks? Joe will probably shrug off this attempt to destroy him, but I won’t. If this is what’s headed our way under an Obamunist regime, the time to start the second American revolution is right now.
Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama was less than upfront in his half-hour commercial Wednesday night about the costs of his programs and the crushing budget pressures he would face in office.
Obama's assertion that "I've offered spending cuts above and beyond" the expense of his promises is accepted only by his partisans. His vow to save money by "eliminating programs that don't work" masks his failure throughout the campaign to specify what those programs are — beyond the withdrawal of troops from Iraq.
Then Woodward points out a few more doosies by Barack O-fibber....
THE SPIN: "That's why my health care plan includes improving information technology, requires coverage for preventive care and pre-existing conditions and lowers health care costs for the typical family by $2,500 a year."
THE FACTS: His plan does not lower premiums by $2,500, or any set amount. Obama hopes that by spending $50 billion over five years on electronic medical records and by improving access to proven disease management programs, among other steps, consumers will end up saving money. He uses an optimistic analysis to suggest cost reductions in national health care spending could amount to the equivalent of $2,500 for a family of four. Many economists are skeptical those savings can be achieved, but even if they are, it's not a certainty that every dollar would be passed on to consumers in the form of lower premiums.
THE SPIN: "I also believe every American has a right to affordable health care."
THE FACTS: That belief should not be confused with a guarantee of health coverage for all. He makes no such promise. Obama hinted as much in the ad when he said about the problem of the uninsured: "I want to start doing something about it." He would mandate coverage for children but not adults. His program is aimed at making insurance more affordable by offering the choice of government-subsidized coverage similar to that in a plan for federal employees and other steps, including requiring larger employers to share costs of insuring workers.
THE SPIN: "I've offered spending cuts above and beyond their cost."
THE FACTS: Independent analysts say both Obama and Republican John McCain would deepen the deficit. The nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget estimates Obama's policy proposals would add a net $428 billion to the deficit over four years — and that analysis accepts the savings he claims from spending cuts. The nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, whose other findings have been quoted approvingly by the Obama campaign, says: "Both John McCain and Barack Obama have proposed tax plans that would substantially increase the national debt over the next 10 years." The analysis goes on to say: "Neither candidate's plan would significantly increase economic growth unless offset by spending cuts or tax increases that the campaigns have not specified."
THE SPIN: "Here's what I'll do. Cut taxes for every working family making less than $200,000 a year. Give businesses a tax credit for every new employee that they hire right here in the U.S. over the next two years and eliminate tax breaks for companies that ship jobs overseas. Help homeowners who are making a good faith effort to pay their mortgages, by freezing foreclosures for 90 days. And just like after 9-11, we'll provide low-cost loans to help small businesses pay their workers and keep their doors open."
THE FACTS: His proposals — the tax cuts, the low-cost loans, the $15 billion a year he promises for alternative energy, and more — cost money, and the country could be facing a record $1 trillion deficit next year. Indeed, Obama recently acknowledged — although not in his commercial — that: "The next president will have to scale back his agenda and some of his proposals."
Thursday, October 30, 2008
They will tell you their programs are NOT socialist - they tell you hard work will be rewarded, they will bring jobs, your taxes will NOT be raised and how they care about the working man after he stops working.
But here is something they are not telling... their type "Change" will kill your hard earned 401(k) and cost tons of jobs.
From Work Force --
If this is not a - share the wealth, job killing, punish the working man, nanny-state, goose-stepping socialist CHANGE - please someone tell me what is!
Powerful House Democrats are eyeing proposals to overhaul the nation’s $3 trillion 401(k) system, including the elimination of most of the $80 billion in annual tax breaks that 401(k) investors receive.
House Education and Labor Committee Chairman George Miller, D-California, and Rep. Jim McDermott, D-Washington, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee’s Subcommittee on Income Security and Family Support, are looking at redirecting those tax breaks to a new system of guaranteed retirement accounts to which all workers would be obliged to contribute.
A plan by Teresa Ghilarducci, professor of economic-policy analysis at the New School for Social Research in New York, contains elements that are being considered. She testified last week before Miller’s Education and Labor Committee on her proposal.
At that hearing, the director of the Congressional Budget Office, Peter Orszag, testified that some $2 trillion in retirement savings has been lost over the past 15 months.
Under Ghilarducci’s plan, all workers would receive a $600 annual inflation-adjusted subsidy from the U.S. government but would be required to invest 5 percent of their pay into a guaranteed retirement account administered by the Social Security Administration. The money in turn would be invested in special government bonds that would pay 3 percent a year, adjusted for inflation.
The current system of providing tax breaks on 401(k) contributions and earnings would be eliminated.
“I want to stop the federal subsidy of 401(k)s,” Ghilarducci said in an interview. “401(k)s can continue to exist, but they won’t have the benefit of the subsidy of the tax break.”
Under the current 401(k) system, investors are charged relatively high retail fees, Ghilarducci said.
“I want to spend our nation’s dollar for retirement security better. Everybody would now be covered” if the plan were adopted, Ghilarducci said.
She has been in contact with Miller and McDermott about her plan, and they are interested in pursuing it, she said.
“This [plan] certainly is intriguing,” said Mike DeCesare, press secretary for McDermott.
“That is part of the discussion,” he said.
While Miller stopped short of calling for Ghilarducci’s plan at the hearing last week, he was clearly against continuing tax breaks as they currently exist.
“The savings rate isn’t going up for the investment of $80 billion,” he said. “We have to start to think about ... whether or not we want to continue to invest that $80 billion for a policy that’s not generating what we now say it should.”
“From where I sit that’s just crazy,” said John Belluardo, president of Stewardship Financial Services Inc. in Tarrytown, New York. “A lot of people contribute to their 401(k)s because of the match of the employer,” he said. Belluardo’s firm does not manage assets directly.
Higher-income employers provide matching funds to employee plans so that they can qualify for tax benefits for their own defined-contribution plans, he said.
“If the tax deferral goes away, the employers have no reason to do the matches, which primarily help people in the lower income brackets,” Belluardo said.
“This is a battle between liberalism and conservatism,” said Christopher Van Slyke, a partner in the La Jolla, California, advisory firm Trovena, which manages $400 million. “People are afraid because their accounts are seeing some volatility, so Democrats will seize on the opportunity to attack a program where investors control their own destiny,” he said.
The Profit Sharing/401(k) Council of America in Chicago, which represents employers that sponsor defined-contribution plans, is “staunchly committed to keeping the employee benefit system in America voluntary,” said Ed Ferrigno, vice president in the Washington office.
“Some of the tenor [of the hearing last week] that the entire system should be based on the activities of the markets in the last 90 days is not the way to judge the system,” he said. No legislative proposals have been introduced and Congress is out of session until next year.
However, most political observers believe that Democrats are poised to gain seats in both the House and the Senate, so comments made by the mostly Democratic members who attended the hearing could be a harbinger of things to come.
Advice at issue
In addition to tax breaks for 401(k)s, the issue of allowing investment advisors to provide advice for 401(k) plans was also addressed at the hearing. Rep. Robert Andrews, D-New Jersey, was critical of Department of Labor proposals made in August that would allow advisors to give individual advice if the advice was generated using a computer model.
Andrews characterized the proposals as “loopholes” and said that investment advice should not be given by advisors who have a direct interest in the sale of financial products.
The Pension Protection Act of 2006 contains provisions making it easier for investment advisors to give individualized counseling to 401(k) holders.
“In retrospect that doesn’t seem like such a good idea to me,” Andrews said. “This is an issue I think we have to revisit. I frankly think that the compromise we struck in 2006 is not terribly workable or wise,” he said.
On Thursday, October 9, the Department of Labor hastily scheduled a public hearing on the issue in Washington for Tuesday, October 21.
The agency does not frequently hold public hearings on its proposals.
The "Change" you THINK you are going to get with Barack - will leave only change in your pocket!
From Yahoo News --
Shawn Turschak of Chapel Hill was tired of someone stealing McCain-Palin campaign signs from his yard. Turschak, with a degree in electrical engineering, hooked up a third sign to a power source for an electric pet fence Monday and also put up a surveillance camera.
The News & Observer of Raleigh reported that a 9-year-old boy with an Obama-Biden sign grabbed the McCain-Palin sign and got a jolt on Tuesday.
The boy's father, Andrew Noble, upset that his son had been shocked, showed up at Turschak's door. Soon an Orange County sheriff's deputy also showed up at the Turschak's home.
Noble said his son just wanted to see how the sign was put together. Turschak said the boy intended to swap out the signs.
Sheriff Lindy Pendergrass said he doesn't plan to file charges.
I am glad the little snot-nosed brat is OK - but GOOD for him! That's what he gets for touching other peoples property without permission.
As for his father - Turschak should have jolted him with 220 volt! What the hell kind of idiot is he allowing his sign to steal yard signs? Then the moron states his kid was only trying to see how the McCain sign was put together and then he was going to swap ot out - BULLSHIT!
Why was his kid going to swap out a McCain sign with a Obama sign in someone's yard that they did not know and were not asked to switch?
If Obama is elected - you will see legislating from the bench like you have never seen before....
The courts are poised for a takeover by the judicial left.
By STEVEN G. CALABRESI
One of the great unappreciated stories of the past eight years is how thoroughly Senate Democrats thwarted efforts by President Bush to appoint judges to the lower federal courts.
Consider the most important lower federal court in the country: the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. In his two terms as president, Ronald Reagan appointed eight judges, an average of one a year, to this court. They included Robert Bork, Antonin Scalia, Kenneth Starr, Larry Silberman, Stephen Williams, James Buckley, Douglas Ginsburg and David Sentelle. In his two terms, George W. Bush was able to name only four: John Roberts, Janice Rogers Brown, Thomas Griffith and Brett Kavanaugh.
Although two seats on this court are vacant, Bush nominee Peter Keisler has been denied even a committee vote for two years. If Barack Obama wins the presidency, he will almost certainly fill those two vacant seats, the seats of two older Clinton appointees who will retire, and most likely the seats of four older Reagan and George H.W. Bush appointees who may retire as well.
The net result is that the legal left will once again have a majority on the nation's most important regulatory court of appeals.
The balance will shift as well on almost all of the 12 other federal appeals courts. Nine of the 13 will probably swing to the left if Mr. Obama is elected (not counting the Ninth Circuit, which the left solidly controls today). Circuit majorities are likely at stake in this presidential election for the First, Second, Third, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh and Eleventh Circuit Courts of Appeal. That includes the federal appeals courts for New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, Boston, Philadelphia and virtually every other major center of finance in the country.
On the Supreme Court, six of the current nine justices will be 70 years old or older on January 20, 2009. There is a widespread expectation that the next president could make four appointments in just his first term, with maybe two more in a second term. Here too we are poised for heavy change.
These numbers ought to raise serious concern because of Mr. Obama's extreme left-wing views about the role of judges. He believes -- and he is quite open about this -- that judges ought to decide cases in light of the empathy they ought to feel for the little guy in any lawsuit.
Speaking in July 2007 at a conference of Planned Parenthood, he said: "[W]e need somebody who's got the heart, the empathy, to recognize what it's like to be a young teenage mom. The empathy to understand what it's like to be poor, or African-American, or gay, or disabled, or old. And that's the criteria by which I'm going to be selecting my judges."
On this view, plaintiffs should usually win against defendants in civil cases; criminals in cases against the police; consumers, employees and stockholders in suits brought against corporations; and citizens in suits brought against the government. Empathy, not justice, ought to be the mission of the federal courts, and the redistribution of wealth should be their mantra.
In a Sept. 6, 2001, interview with Chicago Public Radio station WBEZ-FM, Mr. Obama noted that the Supreme Court under Chief Justice Earl Warren "never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth and sort of more basic issues of political and economic justice in this society," and "to that extent as radical as I think people tried to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn't that radical."
He also noted that the Court "didn't break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution, at least as it has been interpreted." That is to say, he noted that the U.S. Constitution as written is only a guarantee of negative liberties from government -- and not an entitlement to a right to welfare or economic justice.
This raises the question of whether Mr. Obama can in good faith take the presidential oath to "preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution" as he must do if he is to take office. Does Mr. Obama support the Constitution as it is written, or does he support amendments to guarantee welfare? Is his provision of a "tax cut" to millions of Americans who currently pay no taxes merely a foreshadowing of constitutional rights to welfare, health care, Social Security, vacation time and the redistribution of wealth? Perhaps the candidate ought to be asked to answer these questions before the election rather than after.
Every new federal judge has been required by federal law to take an oath of office in which he swears that he will "administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich." Mr. Obama's emphasis on empathy in essence requires the appointment of judges committed in advance to violating this oath. To the traditional view of justice as a blindfolded person weighing legal claims fairly on a scale, he wants to tear the blindfold off, so the judge can rule for the party he empathizes with most.
The legal left wants Americans to imagine that the federal courts are very right-wing now, and that Mr. Obama will merely stem some great right-wing federal judicial tide. The reality is completely different. The federal courts hang in the balance, and it is the left which is poised to capture them.
A whole generation of Americans has come of age since the nation experienced the bad judicial appointments and foolish economic and regulatory policy of the Johnson and Carter administrations. If Mr. Obama wins we could possibly see any or all of the following: a federal constitutional right to welfare; a federal constitutional mandate of affirmative action wherever there are racial disparities, without regard to proof of discriminatory intent; a right for government-financed abortions through the third trimester of pregnancy; the abolition of capital punishment and the mass freeing of criminal defendants; ruinous shareholder suits against corporate officers and directors; and approval of huge punitive damage awards, like those imposed against tobacco companies, against many legitimate businesses such as those selling fattening food.
Nothing less than the very idea of liberty and the rule of law are at stake in this election. We should not let Mr. Obama replace justice with empathy in our nation's courtrooms.
Mr. Calabresi is a co-founder of the Federalist Society and a professor of law at Northwestern University.
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
If the "Anointed One" is elected not only will he fashion his socialist healthcare plan along the lines of Canada's failed healthcare system - he will also use some of their other ideas.
The below sign will be placed on our borders. Instead of welcoming visitors to the United States - the signs will welcome terrorists to the United Socialist States of Obama.
From Politically Incorrect Gazette --
Rumor has it that Larry Craig & Barney Frank will do the ribbon-cutting & hold the pole when the first one is erected.
From The Columbus Dispatch --
A teenager was wounded in the arm by a man who said he wanted to stop the boy and another from taking his John McCain yard sign, authorities said.
Warren Township police Lt. Don Bishop said 50-year-old Kenneth Rowles told officers he got out a .22-caliber rifle Saturday afternoon to fire warning shots, not hurt anyone. The two shots hit the van the teens were in.
As all of us gun owners know - the blast of a .22 is deafening! Rowles should be beaten over the head with his own gun - I could fart louder than a .22!
If he wanted to "get their attention" a pellet gun would have sufficed. Or call Joe the Plumber and see if he knows Ed the Electrician - instead of spreading the wealth you could spread a low voltage charge through the metal frame.
Who are they kidding? The commissioners are only doing this to cover their collective asses and are thinking that hopefully they can off this site and still save face.
Hopefully for our sake this works out - or else we are still stuck with the property.
From the PD --
The K&D Group was given an eight-month extension, free of charge, to close the deal to buy the tower and surrounding buildings for $35 million. The firm previously agreed to pay $500,000 at the end of October if it needed more time.
On the same day the $522 million Flats East Bank project was put on ice in Cleveland, commissioners decided they were better off waiving K&D's fee than risk losing a buyer for the site at East Ninth Street and Euclid Avenue. (For more coverage of Cleveland development issues, go to cleveland.com/economy.)
"We don't have any choice," said Commissioner Tim Hagan. More...
Isn't that just like Hagan - never his fault! You DID have a choice you balloon-headed, lisping jackass! You did not have to buy the building you moron! At the time of the negotiations the $500,000 stipulation for an extension was nothing more than tough talk by Hagan.
I guess you didn't have a choice on your forced sales tax for the MedMart or the millions wasted on new voting machines by awarding more questionable contracts either - huh Tim?
Please shoot me or tell me why the HELL somebody is not running against this guy!
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
This was the same surge that was supported by Senator McCain & opposed by Barack Obama.
From Yahoo News --
The United States is considering taking part in talks with elements of the Taliban in a sharp change in tactics in Afghanistan, the Wall Street Journal reported Tuesday citing unnamed officials.
"Senior White House and military officials believe that engaging some levels of the Taliban -- while excluding top leaders -- could help reverse a pronounced downward spiral in Afghanistan and neighboring Pakistan," the paper said on its website.
The report said the new approach was contained in a draft recommendation in a classified White House assessment of US strategy in Afghanistan. Talks would be led by the Afghan government, "but with the active participation of the US," it said.
The final White House recommendation is expected next month after the US presidential elections, the report said. More...
With the final recommendation coming after the presidential election we can only hope Senator McCain is elected! McCain is seasoned and battle tested in handling the fragile intricacies such as this. Senator McCain will allow his military commanders the freedom to use their best judgment when crafting plans for defeating the Taliban and any other terrorist elements.
On the other hand - if Barack is elected, he will immediately handcuff our military leaders, will stifle their success and make this about himself. Barack, through his own words, would have no problem going to meet with Taliban "leaders" - thus giving their movement more credibility making them harder to defeat!
Monday, October 27, 2008
From Yahoo News --
U.S. military helicopters launched an extremely rare attack Sunday on Syrian territory close to the border with Iraq, killing eight people in a strike the government in Damascus condemned as "serious aggression."
A U.S. military official said the raid by special forces targeted the network of al-Qaida-linked foreign fighters moving through Syria into Iraq. The Americans have been unable to shut the network down in the area struck because Syria was out of the military's reach.
"We are taking matters into our own hands," the official told The Associated Press in Washington, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the political sensitivity of cross-border raids. More...
From Fox News --
Armed assailants attacked a man and gouged out his eyes in front of his family during a gruesome assault in southern Afghanistan, officials said Sunday.
Ghulam said three armed men knocked on his door in the Sangin district of Helmand province late Thursday. When he opened the door, they punched him in the face, put the barrel of a Kalashnikov rifle in his mouth and gouged out his eyes with a knife in the presence of his wife and seven children.
"I was crying, along with my children and wife, who was screaming for help, but they didn't listen," Ghulam told The Associated Press from his hospital room in Kandahar.
Ghulam, a farmer who said he raises wheat and popcorn, said he doesn't know why he was attacked. "I don't have any enemies. But they were not letting me talk. More...
From my Email...
0% on home sales up to $500,000 per home (couples) McCain does not propose any change in existing home sales income tax.
28% on profit from ALL home sales
How does this affect you? If you sell your home and make a profit, you will pay 28% of your gain on taxes. If you are heading toward retirement and would like to down-size your home or move into a retirement community, 28% of the money you make from your home will go to taxes. This proposal will adversely affect the elderly who are counting on the income from their homes as part of their retirement income.
McCAIN 15% (no change)
How will this affect you? If you have any money invested in stock market,IRA, mutual funds, college funds, life insurance, retirement accounts, or anything that pays or reinvests dividends, you will now be paying nearly 40% of the money earned on taxes if Obama become president. The experts predictthat higher tax rates on dividends and capital gains would crash the stockmarket yet do absolutely nothing to cut the deficit.
McCAIN (no changes)
Single making 30K - tax $4,500
Single making 50K - tax $12,500
Single making 75K - tax $18,750
Married making 60K- tax $9,000
Married making 75K - tax $18,750
Married making 125K - tax $31,250
(Reversion to pre-Bush tax cuts)
Single making 30K - tax $8,400
Single making 50K - tax $14,000
Single making 75K - tax $23,250
Married making 60K - tax $16,800
Married making 75K - tax $21,000
Married making 125K - tax $38,750
McCAIN 0% (No change, Bush repealed this tax)
OBAMA Restore the inheritance tax
How does this affect you? Many families have lost businesses, farms and ranches, and homes that have been in their families for generations becausethey could not afford the inheritance tax. Those willing their assets to loved ones will not only lose them to these taxes.
- New government taxes proposed on homes that are more than 2400 square feet
- New gasoline taxes (as if gas weren't high enough already)
- New taxes on natural resources consumption (heating gas, water, electricity)
- New taxes on retirement accounts and last but not least....
- New taxes to pay for socialized medicine so we can receive the same level of medical care as other third-world countries!!!
Sunday, October 26, 2008
After having his case dismissed by a Philadelphia Federal Court, Berg is taking his case to the U.S. Supreme Court...
From Obama Crimes --
Philip J. Berg, Esquire, the Attorney who filed suit against Barack H. Obama challenging Senator Obama’s lack of “qualifications” to serve as President of the United States, announced today that he is immediately appealing the dismissal of his case to the United States Supreme Court. The case is Berg v. Obama, No. 08-cv-04083.
Berg said, "I am totally disappointed by Judge Surrick's decision and, for all citizens of the United States, I am immediately appealing to the U.S. Supreme Court.
This is a question of who has standing to uphold our Constitution. If I don't have standing, if you don't have standing, if your neighbor doesn't have standing to question the eligibility of an individual to be President of the United States - the Commander-in-Chief, the most powerful person in the world - then who does?
So, anyone can just claim to be eligible for congress or the presidency without having their legal status, age or citizenship questioned.
According to Judge Surrick, we the people have no right to police the eligibility requirements under the U.S. Constitution.What happened to ‘...Government of the people, by the people, for the people,...’ Abraham Lincoln in his Gettysburg Address 1863.
We must legally prevent Obama, the unqualified candidate, from taking the Office of the Presidency of the United States,” Berg said.
Our website obamacrimes.com now has 71.8 + million hits. We are urging all to spread the word of our website – and forward to your local newspapers and radio and TV stations.
Berg again stressed his position regarding the urgency of this case as, “we” the people, are heading to a “Constitutional Crisis” if this case is not resolved forthwith.
For copies of all Court Pleadings, go to obamacrimes.com
The other day I posted about a campaign worker who claimed she was mugged, beaten and had the letter "B" carved in her face for displaying a "McCain" bumper sticker on her car. It turns out the physco lied about the whole incident.
From Time 4 Revolution --
Ashley Todd, 20, of College Station, Texas, will be charged with filing a false report, a misdemeanor, police said.
“She told lie after lie, and the situation compounded to where we are right now,” Lt. Kevin Kraus, head of major crimes for the Pittsburgh police, said Friday.
“After a while, she just simply stated that she wanted to tell the truth,” said Maurita Bryant, assistant chief for investigations.
Todd confessed to police that she was driving alone, looked in the mirror, saw her black eye and the “B” on her face, and didn’t know how they got there. She assumed she could have done it herself, she said, and then she made up the story about the attacker. More...
The reason this attack was SO believable is that -- there has been NUMEROUS attacks on McCain supporters by Obama supporters. This does nothing but minimize the legitimate attacks on McCain supporters by Obama's minions.
Police will most likely ask that a psychiatric evaluation be done on this crack pot - which we should be watching closely. Will the dems & libs show a double standard?
Obviously this girl has more than a few screws loose - I wonder if the democrats and liberals will ask for mercy on this girl like they do for murderers?
Friday, October 24, 2008
Girliemen of the Week
Date Awarded: October 24, 2008
Girliemen: FBI Punks Like Mark White
Antics: Cringing when CAIR frowns
Unhappily, it no longer shocks us to hear that a raving Jihadikaze lunatic murders female members of his family to preserve the family honor. It’s not even news when he hear that a murdering bastard named Yasser Abdel Said murdered his own daughters, Sarah (age 17), and Amina (age 18), because they were acting like - GASP - teenage girls. Sadly, it’s still not news when we learn that this Jihadikaze mayhem happened in Irving (Mexas) instead of Gaza, Indonesia, Pakistan, or some other Islamikaze-infested blight.
Since this murdering bastard butchered his daughters here in the USA, and we’d really, really, like to get him up close and personal with the Mexas execution chamber, Yasser hit the big time, when the FBI posted some ‘Wanted’ info on this steaming load. That’s when this sorry saga strayed into the Girlieman spotlight.
Initially, following the lead of the murdered teenage girls’ great aunt, the initial FBI ‘wanted’ blurb was thrillingly real:
“The 17- and 18-year-old girls were dating American boys, which was contrary to their father's rules of not dating non-Muslim boys,” The FBI "wanted" poster read early last week. “Reportedly, the girls were murdered due to an 'Honor Killing.'” (Fox News)
In record time, ‘some Muslims’ whined about the use of ‘honor killing’. These homegrown Jihadikazes are worried that rank and file American individuals will get the ‘wrong’ idea since ‘honor killing’ ‘attaches a religious motive’ to this crime. These murderer coddling traitors to everything we hold dear worry that "honor killing" might make a rational adult discriminate against Mecca Maniacs. If by ‘discriminate’ they mean someone, like me, wants to see this man, who killed his daughters to preserve the family honor, burn in the hell he deserves, then I am guilty as charged.
Going gutless and furtive, the FBI beat a hasty retreat, by rewriting the wanted blurb to make it okey dokey for traitorous, American hating, Sharia loving, scumbags like CAIR. That’s when a craven, Jihadikaze coddling, coward named Mark White, media coordinator in the bureau's Dallas office, left a lasting stench in our nostrils.
‘...[He whined to Fox] that the FBI changed the wording “because the statement was not meant to indicate that the FBI was ‘labeling’ anything.
"The person who wrote it up did not see the misunderstanding that [the original wording] would create,” White said.
White added that the FBI should not be in the business of calling cases anything that is not described in law.
“It’s our job to find the fugitive. It’s not our job to label this case anything other than what it is, what it is from a criminal perspective,” he said, noting that there was no legal definition of an “honor killing” and that such a motive had not yet been proven in court. That will come out in the trial, and the jury can decide that.” (Fox News)
When challenged about the FBI’s double standard - they, routinely, use the equally ‘discriminatory’ term ‘hate crime’ - this stinking stain on humanity’s butt spewed more weasel words. Blah, blah, blah.
The FBI in general, and this Mark White pile of shit in particular, turned into gutless wonders, the instant that our homegrown Islamikaze asshats whined. For their spineless groveling to punks like CAIR, the FBI asshats - especially that jellyfish Mark White - are the Politically Incorrect Gazette’s Girliemen of the Week.
Steaming Load Award: The Obamunist purge of free speech in America.
Free Speech is the cornerstone of our liberty. As concepts go, it seems straightforward enough, but there are some debates over the devilish details. The hard core sovereign individual, like this pagan scribbler, insists that our liberty birthright includes an unrestricted right to free speech. Elsewhere, Nanny State apologists on the political right, like Larry Elder and Michael Medved, insist, with equal fervor, that the First Amendment’s primary intent is to protect free POLITICAL speech. Devilish details? No argument, and the difference isn’t the focus of this rant.
No matter how you define Free Speech, it’s under unrelenting assault by out of control Obamunists, from sea to shining sea. More Hambo hyperbole? I don’t think so.
- If you point out Messiah Barry’s rogues gallery of friends, supporters and professional acquaintances, these Obamunist head breakers will try to cow you into silence by calling you a racist.
- If you bring up certain inconvenient truths about Messiah Barry’s thin resume and off the scale leftism, his Obamunist Truth Squad will use their coercive, Nanny State, authority to silence you.
- If you, like Joe the Plumber, ask one of the questions the MSM should be asking...if, like Joe the Plumber, you expose Messiah Barry’s real agenda on camera, they will try to silence you by destroying your livelihood and spewing every detail of your life over the airwaves.
- If you show your support for John McCain, on the streets of one of America’s biggest cities, you will be pummeled into silence with a vicious physical assault.
- If you put a McCain-Palin bumper sticker on your car, you will be intimidated into silence when your car is vandalized.
- If you put a McCain-Palin sign in your yard, you will be intimidated into silence when the sign is stolen and your home is vandalized.
- If you like to share your views concerning the burning, political, issues of the day on talk radio, you will be muzzled and have your free speech obliterate, when the Obamunists boot talk radio off the airwaves with the Fairness Doctrine.
- If you have a small space of cyberspace, where you share your belief in utterly anti-Obamunist tenets like ‘life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness’, you will be under unrelenting Obamunist assault. They will hammer you with poisoned prose. They will subject you to unrelenting electronic attacks. Ultimately, the Obamunists will repeal your free cyberspace speech completely, when the Obamunists in Washington D.C. extend the Fairness Doctrine to the Internet.
It’s time to stop mincing words. It’s time to stop pussyfooting around the bitter truth. We’ve seen this before...we’ve seen tyrants around the world use intimidation, physical assaults, and the full coercive power of the Nanny State to suffocate free speech. It’s straight out of Joe Stalin’s Russia. It’s straight out of Kim Jong-Il’s North Korea. It’s the kind of thuggery which kept Mao in power. It’s unrelenting, gulag-spewing Marxism and it has no place in America.
If you value your liberty...if you don’t want to spend some quality time in Messiah Barry’s gulag, it’s time to get boiling mad. It’s time to fight back. How? Flush out your local free speech hating Obamunist by deploying a McCain-Palin sign or bumper sticker. Do your best to catch the Obamunist rat bastard in the act then, uh, ‘teach’ them the errors of their ways. That’s right, I’m telling you to fight back. They’re the ones who made this personal by trying to muzzle us. In other words, they asked for it, so it’s only fair that we give it to them, with both barrels.
According to an interview on KDKA the victim is a college student from Texas here to volunteer services to the McCain/Palin campaign - when the attacker saw her bumper sticker, he said quote “I’m going to teach you a lesson” and proceded to beat her and hold her down on the ground while he ‘cut’ her face. More...
Thursday, October 23, 2008
I believe tampons should be outlawed! If not outlawed, women should have to take a training course on the safe use of them, should be certified and have to apply for a permit to lawfully carry them, and when loaded - they can become a deadly weapon.
From TC Palm --
A 27-year-old woman accused of shoplifting cologne and trying to touch an officer with a “well-used and bloody female sanitary napkin” Tuesday is facing charges, according to an arrest affidavit released Wednesday.
Ermith Emonfils, of the 400 block of North 14th Street, was stopped after allegedly walking out of a Walgreens on Orange Avenue without paying for a $29.99 box of Elizabeth Arden Mediterranean cologne. Emonfils also had a bottle of bright green Sinful Colors nail polish and a package of “extra long” black fake eyelashes.
She pulled what appeared to be a dollar bill from her overalls and tried handing it to an officer, but the officer didn’t take it.
“The woman began speaking strangely and trying to get close to me,” the affidavit states.
Emonfils said, “Sex? Sex?” while walking toward an officer before she was handcuffed.
As officers put her in a patrol car, she “grabbed behind her and pointed a well-used and bloody female sanitary napkin” at two officers.
“Both officers told her to drop the well-used and bloody female sanitary napkin, but the suspect refused,” the affidavit states. “I delivered a firm, lawful command to the suspect to drop the object and told her it was gross.”
A female officer eventually put the “offensive and potentially dangerous biohazard item” in a plastic bag.
Emonfils faces three misdemeanor charges in connection with the incident.
At the very least - they should have to register them.
If elected, Obama, most likely, will a democrat majority in the House & Senate - so we will pretty much have our country run by the ideals of Nancy Pelosi, Harry Ried and Dennis Kucinich.
That being said, here is a glimpse of what you will get...
From WND --
Some parents are shocked to find their children are learning to be homosexual allies and will participate in "Coming Out Day" at a public elementary school tomorrow – and they claim the school failed to notify parents.
One mother of a kindergartner who attends Faith Ringgold School of Art and Science, a K-8 charter school in Hayward, Calif., said she asked her 5-year-old daughter what she was learning at school.
The little girl replied, "We're learning to be allies."
The mother also said a Gay Straight Alliance club regularly meets in the kindergarten classroom during lunch.
According to a Pacific Justice Institute report, Faith Ringgold opted not to inform the parents of its pro-homosexual activities beforehand. The school is celebrating "Gay and Lesbian History Month" and is in the process of observing "Ally Week," a pro-"gay" occasion usually geared toward high school students.
The school is scheduled to host discussions about families and has posted fliers on school grounds portraying only homosexuals. According to the report, a "TransAction Gender-Bender Read-Aloud" will take place Nov. 20. Students will listen to traditional stories with "gay" or transgender twists, to include "Jane and the Beanstalk."
Concerned individuals may contact Faith Ringgold School of Art and Science by calling (510) 889-7399 or e-mailing Principal Gurbakhash Bittikofer. The Hayward Unified School District can be reached at (510)784-2600 or by filling out the district contact form.
Some parents are shocked to find their children are learning to be homosexual allies and will participate in "Coming Out Day" at a public elementary school tomorrow – and they claim the school failed to notify parents.
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
From Yahoo News --
An anti-war protester confronted former Bush administration aide Karl Rove while he spoke at a San Francisco mortgage bankers' meeting.
A statement by the group Code Pink identified the woman as 58-year-old Janine
Boneparth, who tried to handcuff Rove in what she called a citizen's arrest for
Rove, who was speaking Tuesday at the Mortgage Bankers Association's annual convention, elbowed Boneparth away as she was escorted off the stage.
In total, five Code Pink members were removed from the hall during Rove's appearance. The organization says none of the five women were charged.
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
From CW 30 Eyewitness News --
Police say a Michigan man has been arrested after "receiving sexual favors from a vacuum" at a car wash.
The Saginaw News reports the 29-year-old Swan Creek Township man was arrested Thursday in Saginaw County's Thomas Township, about 90 miles northwest of Detroit.
Police Sgt. Gary Breidinger says a resident called to report suspicious activity at the car wash about 6:45 a.m. An officer approached on foot and caught the man in the act.
Could you imagine this guy on a double date with this Ohio man?
U.S. Rep. John Murtha is calling many of the people who put him in office "rednecks."
The news comes one week after Murtha claimed the area is racist, then apologized for that comment.
In explaining his comments about racism, Murtha told WTAE it's difficult for many in the area to change. Murtha said that just five to 10 years ago the entire area was "redneck." More...
It looks like Obama's east coast liberal Ivy Leaguers are invading Ohio. Many pundits are dismissing Ohio as being the front line of the battle for this years election - I'd bet these following people would disagree.
I wonder why Rev. Strickland isn't upset about these obvious violations of election law?
From the NY Post --
Four well-heeled New York Democrats are under investigation by an Ohio prosecutor for setting up a temporary home in the swing state - where two have already cast their ballots - just so that their votes will be counted there, The Post has learned.
The targets of the probe - including the daughter and son-in-law of a New York City real-estate titan, a former New York Sun reporter and a Bank of New York Mellon executive - are connected to Vote From Home, a Manhattan-based political action committee set up to get voters to the polls in Ohio, where residents are allowed to cast ballots 29 days before Election Day, investigators said.
The New Yorkers and nine other members from across the country are accused of packing themselves into a modest three-bedroom house in Columbus, waiting 30 days - and then registering, even though the Buckeye State is not their permanent residence.
Adele Shank, a lawyer who represents all in the group except Hemel, said she has "no reason to believe" that her clients registered in Ohio in order to vote in a swing state. More...
Can you believe Shank's statement? ..."no reason to believe" that her clients registered in Ohio in order to vote in a swing state.
Of course not Mrs. Shank - they came here for the "Fuel Perks" from Giant Eagle!
Americans for Legal Immigration PAC has offered their endorsement to US Senator Elizabeth Dole for her strong support for border security and her opposition to legislation in 2006 and 2007 that most Americans considered to be Amnesty for illegal aliens.
"When Americans called out in such numbers that the capital phone system crashed, they were asking Senator Dole to vote NO on the Cloture votes for the amnesty bills, and she stood with the people against amnesty," said William Gheen.
Elizabeth Dole has also received a career grade of 'A' from BetterImmigration.com which gives her high marks for opposing Amnesties, supporting border security, and interior immigration enforcement. Senator Dole has also been highly active promoting the 287(g) program in North Carolina, which allows local police to determine if those they arrest are illegal aliens.
Senator Dole's opponent, State Senator Kay Hagan, has opposed immigration enforcement legislation on the state level. In the 2008 Session, the Democratic leadership which she is a part of, blocked all immigration enforcement bills as they have consistently done over the last several years.
"Kay Hagan and the Democratic leadership in Raleigh have blocked almost all enforcement bills, while supporting benefits for illegal aliens," said William Gheen who is a past NC Senate Assistant Sgt-At-Arms, Legislative Assistant, and lobbyist. "While Hagan and her allies have made NC a welcoming top destination for illegal aliens in America, Senator Dole has been working for more immigration enforcement."
ALIPAC will be launching a statewide effort to remind voters of Senator Dole's popular pro-enforcement positions on the illegal immigration issue, which ranks as an issue of top concern among NC voters. The group will also launch radio ads on several stations promoting Senator Dole's record and reminding voters of Kay Hagan's inaction on this issue. The group will make a donation, encourage others to do the same, and may launch robotic calls to carry the message.
Americans for Legal Immigration PAC is one of the largest grassroots organizations in America focusing on reversing illegal immigration. ALIPAC is a multi-ethnic, non-partisan, NC based national organization dedicated to nonviolent and non-racist political solutions to America's illegal immigration crisis. For more information visit www.alipac.us
Paid for by Americans for Legal Immigration PAC Post Office Box 30966, Raleigh, NC 27622-0966 Tel: (919) 787-6009 Toll Free: (866) 703-0864 FEC ID: C00405878
Monday, October 20, 2008
Because some whites in western PA may vote against Obama - their big mouth Congressman John Murtha says they are racist. Murtha is wrong about this, just as he was proven wrong when he called a few of our Marines serving in Iraq - "cold-blooded murderers."
But of course any scrutiny of Obama's remarks is out of bounds...
From Dreams of My Father: 'I ceased to advertise my mother's race at the age of 12 or 13, when I began to suspect that by doing so I was ingratiating myself to whites.'
From Dreams of My Father: 'I found a solace in nursing a pervasive sense of grievance and animosity against my mother's race.'
From Dreams of My Father: 'There was something about him that made me wary, a little too sure of himself, maybe. And white.'
From Dreams of My Father: 'It remained necessary to prove which side you were on, to show your loyalty to the black masses, to strike out and name names.'
From Dreams of My Father: 'I never emulate white men and brown men whose fates didn't speak to my own. It was into my father's image, the black man, son of Africa , that I'd packed all the attributes I sought in myself , the attributes of Martin and Malcolm, DuBois and Mandela.'
From Audacity of Hope: 'I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.'
I guess writing racist, Anti-American stuff doesn't count if you are Obama!
Sunday, October 19, 2008
It has been sold for years that the Democrats are the saviors of the black race - they cloaked the civil-rights movement around their party to hide thier sins of being the biggest obstacle in overcoming slavery. Many blacks have had this thought indoctrinated into their minds over the years and will blindly vote for a Democrat. For many of the younger ones - this is all they know.
All too often, facts - mean nothing. Maybe some of the blacks in Cuyahoga County that blindly support the area Democrats will be hit hard by these facts...
But there is no denying the key role prosecutors play in charging people with felonies -- or bargaining a felony charge down to a misdemeanor, a much less serious blight on a person's record.
Offering plea deals, even though they can ultimately be rejected by judges, is the sole prerogative of prosecutors.
Among all defendants indicted in Cuyahoga County on a single, low-level drug-possession charge over the last four years who were convicted after pleading guilty, white people were 55 percent more likely than black people to have their charges reduced to a misdemeanor. In most cases, it was to something called "attempted" possession of drugs, even when records indicate the defendant had the drugs and there was nothing "attempted" about it.
Even among those making their first appearance in Common Pleas Court in at least 15 years, white people were 40 percent more likely than black people to get a misdemeanor. Among those with no prior convictions here, whites were 27 percent more likely. More...
And since 2000, a black person has been 12.7 times more likely than a white person to be sent to a state prison from Cuyahoga County on drug charges.
....defense attorneys said prosecutors frequently offer or withhold EIP as a possible option in plea discussions. And several judges said in interviews that they believe themselves bound by the prosecutor's judgment on whether to allow a defendant into EIP.
"The determination of whether they get in there or not is up to the prosecutor's office," said Judge Judith Kilbane-Koch, echoing a frequently expressed view from the bench. "That's the way it's always been done."
But public defender Walter Camino, repeating a view common among defense attorneys, said that courtroom prosecutors routinely maintain that they run EIP and that they "are the ones that allow you to enter."
Black EIP applicants in the Plain Dealer sample were denied at four times the rate of those seeking "intervention in lieu." And they were 72 percent more likely than white applicants to be rejected for EIP. More...
From The New Republic --
On The Content of His Character
by John McWhorter
If Obama loses, let's please not assume that racism was the cause.
In the increasingly unlikely event that Barack Obama does not become president, Martin Luther King's dream would reveal itself as tragically unrealized 40 years after his death. Not, however, because whites were standing in that dream's way, but because of the black people standing alongside them.
Yes, black people. I find myself unable to trust that more than a sliver of black America would be able, if Obama lost, to assess that outcome according to--of all things--the content of his character.
For 40 years, black America has been misled by a claim that we can only be our best with the total eclipse of racist bias. Few put it in so many words, but the obsession with things like tabulating ever-finer shades of racism and calling for a "national conversation" on race in which whites would listen to blacks talk about racism are based on an assumption: that the descendants of African slaves in the United States are the only group of humans in history whose problems will vanish with a "level playing field," something no other group has ever supposed could be a reality.
The general conversation is drifting slowly away from this Utopianist canard, but nothing could help hustle it into obsolescence more than an Obama presidency, especially for the generation who grew up watching a black man and his family in the White House and had little memory of a time when it would have been considered an impossibility. At the same time, nothing could breathe new life into this gestural pessimism like an Obama loss. It would be the perfect enabler for a good ten years of aggrieved mulling over "the persistence of racism," which, for all of its cathartic seduction, would make no one less poor, more gainfully employed, or better educated.
The prevailing sentiment would be expressed in tart declarations, considered the height of black authenticity, that bigotry did in the Obama campaign. Even now, the idea that white swing voters might pass on him because of his positions or campaign performance is considered a peculiar notion, likely from someone unhip to the gospel that America remains all about racism despite Colin Powell and Oprah. The money question is considered to be why our Great Black Hope isn't polling tens of points ahead of John McCain and his discredited party. But Obama has been a sure shot only with Blue America college-town sorts, animated not only by Obama's intellect, but also by his "diverseness" and its symbolic import for showing that our nasty past is truly past.
Obama, in fact, has limitations as a communicator beyond black people and the "Stuff White People Like" set. In his first debate with John McCain, when McCain assailed him as a big spender, Obama was almost strangely uninterested in pointing up the things he wants to spend money on--i.e., exactly the things needed by the struggling working class people he has trouble making inroads with. Luckily, he's gotten past this some recently (see his calling health care a "right" during the second debate and his brass-tacks speech in Toledo on Monday). However, overall, professorial Obama still seems oblivious to the power of slogans. Reagan had "Morning in America"; Bill Clinton had "The End of Welfare As We Know It." Obama has had the likes of the gauzy "Yes, We Can," stirring as an opening gambit and good on T-shirts, but offering little to the folks facing layoffs while trying to pay their mortgage. To struggling black folks, ethnic identification pushes Obama over the edge regardless. But all folks aren't black.
The Wisconsin chairman of the Republican Party notes, then, that for lunch pail whites, "I don't think race is an issue at all. A bigger problem is that Barack Obama has a sort of show pony style. The speeches and the classic double speak and being a great orator, that kind of thing doesn't play well in Wisconsin." That is, there are plenty of non-racist whites who need a candidate to show them something more than I.Q. and a poignant multicultural provenance. In not finding Obama's dreams of his father worthy of a vote, they are evaluating him as Dr. King would have counseled.
These are transitional times. In a recent Bloggingheads dialogue, Ta-Nehisi Coates admitted to me that Iowa had forced him to "reassess" his pessimism as to how far America has come on race. If Obama loses, people like Coates will desist in their reassessments, and settle back into their cognitive comfort zone. Whites will cheer on the sidelines: Nothing would establish a Good White Person's bona fides on the race thing more than assenting that the racism "out there" is "still around" and has vanquished the audacity of hope.
The grievous result of this fetishization of racism would be that it would put a kibosh on the upsurge in black voters' political engagement amidst the Obamenon. Newspaper articles would quote blacks disillusioned from getting excited about any future black candidate--e.g. "I thought maybe America was finally getting past racism but it turned out not to be true." 2009 would be a year of countless panel discussions, quickie books, and celebrated rap couplets wallowing in the notion that the white man wouldn't let Obama into the Oval Office where he belonged, urgently reminding us that to be black is still to be a victim.
Promising black politicians like Cory Booker, Deval Patrick, Adrian Fenty, and Harold Ford would find it harder than Obama did to attract support for presidential runs: No matter how stirring their speeches, the good word would be, "Look what happened to Obama!" And for years to come, professors would teach the 2008 election as a lesson about racism rather than about a heartening near-victory that no one could have imagined as recently as 15 years ago.
In August the hot news was The New York Times/CBS poll noting that one in 20 whites said they would not vote for a black man. Even those most self-appointedly vigilant about the depth of America's racist roots had a hard time pretending that one in 20 was exactly threatening--but then the poll also showed that one in five whites thought most of their friends would not vote for a black presidential candidate. But imagine a poll asking people about their friends that revealed, say, that they thought most of them weren't racists--something not hard to imagine. Social scientists would likely laugh it out of the room--"anecdotal," and so on--because it would be telling them something they didn't want to hear.
In September it was the AP/Yahoo poll making the inbox rounds, showing that a third of white Democrats agreed with the pairing of at least one negative adjective with blacks. But how hard is it to imagine that someone who says black people are more likely to, for example, be angry than whites might nevertheless be an Obama fan? After all, it wasn't so long ago that the wise cocktail party comment on Obama was that he is "the kind of black person white people are okay with." In line with that, the same poll shows that three out of five whites who pair a negative adjective with blacks intend to vote for Obama anyway.
And so it goes: All evidence is that the role of racism in Obama's reception has been and will be blissfully marginal. Yet it is hardly unlikely that the race will be close. And as such, because there surely are backwards people out there who will not vote for Obama because he is black, it will not be impossible to fashion an argument that acism decided a McCain victory.
Of course, the best case will only be that racism tipped the election by a few points. But besides the fact that there will be equally coherent arguments that it did not, the proper analogy would be that pneumonia is often what kills AIDS patients. No one would claim that this means that pneumonia, as opposed to lung cancer, heart disease, or AIDS itself, is a grievously urgent medical crisis in America. Yet black America's shorthand consensus will be founded upon just such a logical fallacy: that "Obama lost because America remains a deeply racist country."
Why would such an athletically pessimistic conclusion be so attractive to black people? Partly because of insecurity, as Shelby Steele artfully framed it in his signature book titled, as it happens, The Content of Our Character. Unsure of our worth after 350 years of abuse and just 40 years blinking in the light of an America past Jim Crow, we too easily seek the crutch of noble victimhood as a substitute for a true inner pride it can still be hard to feel deep down.
Another reason is that for blacks who are not poor--i.e. most black people, as quiet as it's kept--this Cassandra tendency is a gesture of solidarity with our less fortunate fellow blacks. Black America is poised awkwardly between a private commitment to keeping our heads up despite the obstacles and a sense that our public face should be one of tribalist plangency. Tyler Perry's plays and movies are runaway hits with black audiences featuring Perry's drag grandmother character Madea counseling Bill Cosby-esque "deal with it" wisdom. Yet, as Peggy Noonan nailed it on blacks' reception of Reverend Jeremiah Wright's victimologist rantings, we are also committed to Walt Whitman's "barbaric yawp," asserting "I'm still loyal to our bitterness.
"This bone-deep antipathic sentiment is processed as a key element in informed black identity. To let it go is to risk, for one, seeming unfeeling about the innocent black 17-year-old slammed against a police car by cops trawling a neighborhood on a drug bust. Then also, to let it go would mean imagining that Barack Obama missed the prize simply because he wasn't up to it. Many black people aren't ready to face something like that squarely just yet: Black America, understandably given its history, is nursing an inner-wound.
That Obama's loss in the general election may have more to do with his performance than his melanin will be treated as something to acknowledge parenthetically at best. And that will be a dismissal of the very lesson Dr. King tried to teach us. Two decades ago, when Jesse Jackson ran for president and Time magazine did a cover with his picture and the headline "The Jackson Factor", it was just to sell copies: We all knew America wasn't ready for a black President. Perhaps the reaction was partly due to certain things about Jackson himself, but who knew that not so long later, a black man would be within a hair's breadth of the White House in part because of his race? Yet, if we truly understand that King's lesson was that black people are whites' equals and not eternal poster children, then we must confront the fact that race is not the only reason Obama could lose.
King's next birthday celebration will be, as it happens, the day before Inauguration Day, and I dread the prospect of black America treating King Day as an opportunity to rue how McCain's swearing in will show "far we have to go" 40 years after King's death, rather than celebrating that how close Obama came to the prize showed how magnificently far we have come.
John McWhorter is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute and the author of Our Magnificent Bastard Tongue: The Untold History of English.