There are bad people in the world and we look forward to the day when they make their departure; actually, many of us lift a symbolic glass of wine to celebrate, when a convicted killer is finally executed. In America, a condemned killer has been tried in a court of law or by military tribunal and has been given his right to appeal. The condemned is then executed by lethal injection. The most humane and sterile method of death, yet devised in the history of man. A method that requires the state to swab the area of injection with alcohol before inserting the needle that will allow the poisons to be injected and course through the body, until death claims the killer’s life. Thus the possibility of infection of the wound is decreased; however, like many procedures, the alcohol is only for looks, since it takes several minutes for the alcohol to kill the bacteria. But remember, we are talking about a condemned person. Some ask why wait or why even waste the alcohol. This is the accepted method of execution, it allows us to feel good about killing someone and it helps to rid ourselves of those human beings who are deemed to no longer worthy of walking among us in the civilized world.

Lethal injection is accepted as the most humane method of execution by the most squeamish among us; however, many of the condemned would prefer the dignity of the firing squad or the hangman’s noose rather than the silliness of the current method, but this is what it takes to make death more palatable among the faint hearted, heavy breathers. It has been an ongoing Liberal cause, to make execution of the condemned a pain free and less traumatic experience.

There was no conjecture as to whether Timothy McVeigh may have had felt remorse at the moment of his death, somehow making the execution, of a killer of 168 innocent people cruel and unusual punishment. But McVeigh gave precious little for those opposed to executions to work with, maintaining his stoic demeanor to the end, he passed out this hand written statement before his execution.

Final written statement of Timothy McVeigh. Out of the night that covers me, Black is the Pit from pole to pole, I thank whatever gods may be for my unconquerable soul.”

PITTS: In the fell clutch of circumstance, I have not winced nor cried aloud. Under the bludgeoning of chance, my head is bloodied but unbowed. Beyond this place of wrath and tears looms but the horror of the shade and yet the menace of the years finds and shall find me unafraid. It matters not how straight the gate, how charged with punishment the scroll. I am the master of my fate. I am the captain of my soul.

Like it or not, this is who we have become. We are willing to forget the babies born brain damaged and addicted to drugs and alcohol, or the victims of senseless gang violence, or the depredations of illegal aliens driving while unlicensed, uninsured, and drunk, or the fact that one third of our prisons are filled with illegal aliens. All of these issues pale in comparison to the discomfort of a mass murderer and the anguish felt by some of us at the thought of taking the life of a mass murderer.

We as Americans have a right to feel smug in the knowledge that we are sanctimonious to a fault, concerning the execution of a mass murderer. Let no one in the world say, we don’t value human life. We have proven the supposition of our unending love for debauched and vicious killers.

Yet, how easily the tide of public sentiment changes, when we are given the slightest excuse to join in the symbolic blood lust of the mob; a mob we supported with the effort of our Commander in Chief and our military. After months of the most sophisticated bombing to depose a hopelessly outgunned and overmatched dictator to supposedly enforce a no-fly zone. Oh, how humanitarian and uplifting does the term ”no-fly” sound to the public; because, after all, we are protecting the lives of innocent civilians in another country; we can feel so noble, while we lie to ourselves, just in case those trucks and troops start to fly like Mary Poppins.

After spending billions in high tech munitions to defeat and depose a single low tech dictator, we can now watch as the Libyan people are overwhelmed by the Muslim Brotherhood’s right of self-imposition. We can now have the satisfaction of knowing we have helped bloodthirsty theocratic fundamentalists, who are our sworn enemies, to depose a neurotic dictator who had given up supporting terror and mayhem.

Yes, it’s true that we are asked to believe that some of those who support terror are good and some are bad. Arafat, Nobel Peace Prize winner was beloved by the media and blood thirsty Arabs throughout the Middle East, was described by the media as a benevolent and beloved grandfather type terrorist with scraggly whiskers. He was one of the few mass murdering terrorists to be admired by the United Nations and cast as a hero among freedom loving Socialists throughout the world.

For some reason, a reason obscured in the murky world of Obama logic, the crazy Colonel from Libya, who decades ago was once a darling of Leftist media, when they wrote glowing reports of the handsome sheikh in his tents with camels parked outside, a vision that tended to heat up the libido of many Leftist women; strangely, a few months ago, the crazy Colonel fell out of Obama’s favor. He was no longer handsome, but that was hardly a logical reason, some of us just don’t age well; no, it was deeper than that, for the Colonel supported the racist and bigoted friends of Obama, specifically the racist fundamentalists Farrakahn and Wright. Surely, no one thinks it is because Obama’s benefactor Goldman Sachs, squandered twenty-four billion dollars of the Colonel’s money. No, the reason must be far deeper and more complex than those simple reasons; unfortunately, no one seems to know why the wacky Colonel fell out of disfavor with his Highness Obama.

While it is popular to assume that Obama has a superior intellect and unquestioned motives when he unleashes his counter productive measures against the economy and those of us not involved in his crony circles of corruption; there are those who are beginning to have doubts as to the true intent of the man and his Helter Skelter type of governance.

Yet the inconsistencies of the Narcissist are forgotten as the country comes together to celebrate after Qadaffi was literally torn apart by his people in an orgy of blood lust. For just a few minutes, in this modern age of political correctness, we are allowed to let down our pretenses and celebrate the images of a bloody man begging for mercy, a man who had renounced terrorism and was no longer a threat; we can forget who we are as Americans and just be a symbolic part of the mob that is bludgeoning and cutting a defenseless man to death.

Despite the fact that he was not a threat, many of us hated him because of his part in the Lockerbie bombing; therefore, we are willing to overlook certain details. Trials no longer matter, when we have the insanity of the mob and the bizarre logic of the Narcissist to justify our blood vengeance.

Oh, how wondrous to feel the power and vindictive hatred of the mob. For we are not only celebrating the fall of a tyrant who was in control of some of the most valuable sweet crude on the face of the earth, but we are also celebrating the might of the American military exerted against one of the most pathetic armies of the world; thus the moral superiority of the American people is projected to the world with the strength of a flickering candle. A morality that is controlled and directed by President Obama; a man with the intellect and morality of a superior Elitist being, whose motives are not to be questioned; even though, some of us don’t really enjoy seeing the mob rip a man apart as the culmination of a multi-billion dollar offensive against one man.

It’s true, many of us love to party and act gregarious over the slightest pretext, but still, there are others who like to analyze the situation and ask whether it is the role of the president to take down leaders and install Islamic Fundamentalists in one of the richest oil countries in the world and delude Americans into thinking it is wonderful and a time to rejoice, because we have a chance to let down our guard and feel the ancient pulse of the crowd at the Coliseum in Rome, when people were butchered for a Roman Holiday. Now, we are expected to celebrate the Obama Myth as a dictator is butchered in our living rooms: in much the same manner as the mob hailed Caesar for hosting the games. The power and wisdom of Obama is prodigious, but to truly appreciate the man and his myth, you must become a symbolic member of the mob and enjoy the sight of a man being ripped apart as he pleads for mercy. You must become a senseless member of the mob that feels strength in ignoring the rule of law that America stands for and instead revel in senseless violence and death, for then you are no better than the members of that mob and you have become a true believer in the Myth that is Obama.

To believe is to idolize Obama and accept the actions of Obama without analyzing the data that is open to everyone. Obama is the ideology that allows Americans and even our military to undertake such a bizarre mission with unquestioning loyalty to Obama. For the stated purpose of this quasi-war was to prevent a dictator from killing innocent civilians, but the war was over when he was butchered on a public street just after intervention by our jets and drones.

Yet, even we Conservatives will overlook many of Obama’s inconsistencies; when we are provided a modern version of Roman blood lust and the killing of an impotent old fool. Oh, how easy it is for the wily Obama to make fawning lap dogs out of people who are so willingly pulled into the magic of the mob and its’ blood lust.

How quick we forget and overlook the fact that Obama can no longer be considered an ideologue: indeed, he is only involved in the Narcissistic journey of self-serving self-promotion and though he may hint at caring for the middle class and the poor, he only cares that you admire him and for those who can’t admire him, it is enough if you celebrate his bizarre victories and identify with barbarians from the Middle East. For there is nothing in our Constitution that says we should change leadership in foreign countries that pose no threat to the US. But because Obama wanted to take this man out, we launch a major portion of our military hardware. Obama accomplishes his goals as we celebrate the fall of a dictator and toast our own dictator in the same breath.

Are we so concerned with helping to maintain and reinforcing his Narcissistic personality, that we let him have free use of the most powerful military in the world to install Islamic Fundamentalists wherever he sees the need to intervene. We have elevated Obama to the position of a supreme Elite within the Socialist context. His words and actions are above the law and never to be doubted. He is superior, the media has promoted the concept and most of us have swallowed the swill. For while you declare the murder of a dictator as a great accomplishment, you play directly into the myth and game of Obama.

Through the looking glass of Obama, deep into the nonsense of Obamanation, you are the enemy. His allies are the dictators and thugs of the world and his friends are the Useful Idiots and Lemmings who follow him blindly into the morass of Marxism. Relying on the gullibility and naivete of Latino Americans and their supposed sympathies for Spanish speaking illegal aliens, he points the finger at us.

“If Latinos sit out the election instead of saying, ‘We’re gonna punish our enemies, and we’re gonna reward our friends who stand with us on issues that are important to us’ — if they don’t see that kind of upsurge in voting in this election — then I think it’s going to be harder. And that’s why I think it’s so important that people focus on voting on November 2nd.”

Using the Oxymoron of Obamathink we are now alienated from our own country, a country that we were taught to love and cherish as children, by a man who has been immersed in Marxism from birth, yet vehemently denies being a Socialist. As a Marxist and a Narcissist he desperately craves the adulation of a poverty stricken populace, for nearly every Communist dictator needs to keep his people mired in poverty to maintain control and a form of reverence or worship from his people in while they feel helpless in chains, yet oh so grateful to their omnipotent leader.

Barack Hussein Obama Sr. – Barack’s father was an African socialist. While he was not with his son for much of Barack Jr.’s childhood, they did keep in touch through routine correspondence according to the memoir, Dreams From My Father.

Stanley Ann Dunham – Barack’s mother was a 60′s liberal feminist and an atheist – all the makings of a rebellious, 60′s-era, left-wing radical. There is little written about Barack’s mother and her political views, but from what is known, she was certainly on the left of the political spectrum.

Frank Marshall Davis – “Frank,” as Barack Obama refers to him in his book, Dreams From My Father, was a member of the Communist Party (USA). He was also a former community organizer in Chicago. As a youth, Barack was treated to many of Davis’ rants about white supremacy, white Christianity, and undoubtedly was aware of Davis’ pro-Soviet writings. In his memoir, Barack merely says he was “intrigued” by Davis.

Saul Alinsky – Mr. Alinsky was an avid and open socialist and the king of social activism, commonly called the “father of community organizing.” He created many organizations that relied on street agitation tactics, such as the Industrial Areas Foundation, which trained Obama in organizing tactics. He wrote the book, Rules for Radicals, which outlined many of the tactics used today in community organizing campaigns. Barack Obama worked with the Developing Communities Project and the Gamaliel Foundation – both inspired by Saul Alinsky’s tactics and socialist philosophy. Barack even wrote a chapter on community organizing in the book, After Alinsky. Saul Alinsky’s son, Lee David Alinsky, recently praised Obama on his ability to perform Saul’s tactics, saying that Barack “learned his lesson well.”

Reverend Jeremiah Wright – “Uncle J” was Barack’s former pastor and mentor at Trinity United Church of Christ. The philosophy of the Church is based on the teachings of James Cone’s black liberation theology. Cone admits that his theology is a mix of “black religion and Marxist philosophy.” Wright’s fiery anti-white, anti-capitalist, and anti-United States sermons landed him in a media controversy that eventually led to Barack’s denouncement of him in the spring of 2008, after 20 years of friendship. Wright had married Barack and Michelle and had baptized their two children. The pastor has also worked with Nation of Islam leader, Louis Farrakhan, and his church’s magazine, Trumpet, has given Farrakhan a lifetime achievement award with praise coming from Wright.

The black liberation theology that is practiced at Trinity is based on James Cone’s version of the religion. He has stated that Trinity represents the most accurate interpretation of his theology. Among the ideas expressed by Cone is the notion that “black religion and Marxist philosophy may show us the way to build a completely new society.” He also believes that “to be black is to be committed to destroying everything this country loves and adores.” Recently, reports have stated that Cone believes nothing Barack Obama has said or written in his books and speeches contradicts Cone’s black liberation theology. Obama has simply blunted the more “radical edge.” On the other hand, Reverend Wright seems to have a firm grasp on what his theology represents – and he was able to influence Barack Obama with it for 20 years.

Father Michael Pfleger, who Wright claims was to have been “very educated” by the Black Panthers is a White priest in a Black neighborhood on Chicago’s South side who has received hundreds of thousands of dollars in ear marks and foundation grants from Obama. Specializing in fire and brimstone sermons with racist messages, Pfleger gives his support and admiration to Louis Farrakon

Bill Ayers an unrepentant domestic terrorist, who helped launch the presidential campaign of Obama, was one of the leaders of the Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) during the 1960′s and later the even more radical terrorist groups the Weather Underground organization. Ayers took pride in explaining that these groups were comprised of communist “small ‘c’” (to designate working Communist Revolutionaries) and anti-capitalist radicals. Ayers wanted to align with the Black Panther Party because they felt “white America” exploited black people; he felt they would be reliable allies in his Communist crusade, especially since they had a certain military discipline.

He managed to bomb police stations, the Capitol Building, and the Pentagon. In recent years, Ayers has publicly stated that he is not sorry for what he did and wishes that he had done more. He loves to be photographed stomping on the American flag and admits the idea of the United States being a just and fair nation “makes me want to puke.”

Adept at giving speeches in Venezuela the advances in education that the Chavez regime has made: advances that he continually tries to install in the Illinois Education System an effort that has been going forward for decades.

Ayers served for six years with Obama on the Chicago Annenberg Challenge (CAC); they directed separate branches of the CAC and coordinated project funding. They also served together on the board of the Woods Fund for three years. In 1995, Ayers hosted the kick off for Obama’s political career at his own home. During that “Meet The New Black Communist” evening, Alice Palmer bestowed her Illinois State Senate position to Obama.

Ayers authored a book on the juvenile justice system and Obama was anxious to endorse his work. The two were the placed on a panel by Michelle Obama to discuss the book and legislation on the subject. Obama was also a guest lecturer at the University of Illinois-Chicago, where Ayers is on the faculty.

The Black Radical Congress, in 2002, put on a panel discussion at the University of Illinois-Chicago termed “Intellectuals in Times of Crisis.” Obama and Ayers, were on this panel. Contrary to the imbecilic denial by Obama that Ayers is “just a guy” in the neighborhood, Ayers the domestic terrorist and Communist is a close friend and associate of Obama.

Bernardine Dohrn, wife of Bill Ayers and domestic terrorist herself. She was the head of the Revolutionary Youth Movement within the SDS and the Weather Underground, and a signatory of the Weather Underground’s “Declaration of War” against the United States. A communist (Marxist-Leninist) and convicted criminal for part in violence directed against the US during the 60′s and 70′the violent radical groups she was involved with throughout the 60′s and 70′s. Dohrn eventually acquired a position at the law firm of Sidley & Austin, Michelle Obama’s employer. Tom Ayers, father of Bill and has a company which has maintained a long running professional relationship of counsel from Sidley. Her position at Sidley & Austin was arranged through Howard Trienens, a senior partner; Trienens, Tom Ayers, and Sidley partner Newton Minow, all were on the board of trustees at Northwestern University, were Dohrn is now an adjunct professor.

Mike Klonsky, a Maoist, also a former SDS national chairman (1968), formed the October League wen the SDS splintered into different factions. The October League, was a Beijing-recognized official part of the U.S. Communist Party (Marxist-Leninist). Klonsky, a leader during the 70′s, traveled to China and praised Mao. The Small Schools Workshop, created by Ayers, while Ayers headed up the CAC in 1995, was handed to Klonsky. The CAC, with Obama and Ayers funded the Workshop until the CAC went broke. An official blogger for the Obama campaign website in 2008, Klonsky the Maoist was anxious to help Obama.

These are some the Third World Communist Dictators and Thugs that are Obama supporters as well as some prominent US Communists.

Hugo Chavez – Venezuelan dictator
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad – President of Iran
Fidel Castro – Cuban dictator
Party of European Socialists
Louis Farrakhan – Supreme Minister, Nation of Islam
Democratic Socialists of America
Communist Party USA (CPUSA)
Frank Chapman – Member of U.S. Peace Council Executive Committee (an FBI-identified communist front group)
Mark Solomon – National co-chair, Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism
Joel Wendland – Managing editor of CPUSA online magazine Political Affairs: Marxist Thought Online
Pepe Lozano – Leader in the Chicago Youth Communist League and editorial board member of CPUSA newspaper, People’s World Weekly

To believe that Obama is oblivious to his history of Communist connections, you must either be a Communist or a fool. The proof is far more extensive and damning than this humble post has room for, but it exists and will be brought to the surface as we approach 2012, that I can guarantee you. Americans have traditionally held the office of the President with reverence and respect; however, the office has now been degraded and demeaned to such a level that it will take a true statesman before America once again has respect for the Executive; unfortunately, a slick campaign directed by criminal elements like Ayers with a major assist from the media has unloaded this vile and corrupt presence upon the American people. Incompetence and the work ethic of a dilettante is something Americans can overlook, but the idea of a Marxist in the White House is inexcusable.

This tripe from Kathleen Parker is something. She bemoans the loss of privacy and kinship when the Journolist blew up in the faces of some 400+ reporters:

It should come as no surprise that self-identifying liberals have liberal thoughts and friends, so no foul there, as Carlson has said. And, indeed, some of the comments are, on their face, condemnable, not to mention banal. But some also have been presented out of context and, besides, were offered as part of an ongoing argument among colleagues who believed they were acting in good faith that theirs was a private conversation.

Were they naive to think so? In this world, yes. Was Carlson right to “out” the private comments of people who, for the most part, have no significant power? That, to me, is the more compelling issue.

No significant power?

They conspired amongst themselves to get the Wright story off of the air:

Others went further. According to records obtained by The Daily Caller, at several points during the 2008 presidential campaign a group of liberal journalists took radical steps to protect their favored candidate. Employees of news organizations including Time, Politico, the Huffington Post, the Baltimore Sun, the Guardian, Salon and the New Republic participated in outpourings of anger over how Obama had been treated in the media, and in some cases plotted to fix the damage.

In one instance, Spencer Ackerman of the Washington Independent urged his colleagues to deflect attention from Obama’s relationship with Wright by changing the subject. Pick one of Obama’s conservative critics, Ackerman wrote, “Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares — and call them racists.”

Michael Tomasky, a writer for the Guardian, also tried to rally his fellow members of Journolist: “Listen folks–in my opinion, we all have to do what we can to kill ABC and this idiocy in whatever venues we have. This isn’t about defending Obama. This is about how the [mainstream media] kills any chance of discourse that actually serves the people.”

“Richard Kim got this right above: ‘a horrible glimpse of general election press strategy.’ He’s dead on,” Tomasky continued. “We need to throw chairs now, try as hard as we can to get the call next time. Otherwise the questions in October will be exactly like this. This is just a disease.”

Thomas Schaller, a columnist for the Baltimore Sun as well as a political science professor, upped the ante from there. In a post with the subject header, “why don’t we use the power of this list to do something about the debate?” Schaller proposed coordinating a “smart statement expressing disgust” at the questions Gibson and Stephanopoulos had posed to Obama.

“It would create quite a stir, I bet, and be a warning against future behavior of the sort,” Schaller wrote.

Tomasky approved. “YES. A thousand times yes,” he exclaimed.

Then they conspired to find ways to defeat McCain/Palin via their professions:

In the hours after Sen. John McCain announced his choice of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin to be his running mate in the last presidential race, members of an online forum called Journolist struggled to make sense of the pick. Many of them were liberal reporters, and in some cases their comments reflected a journalist’s instinct to figure out the meaning of a story.

But in many other exchanges, the Journolisters clearly had another, more partisan goal in mind: to formulate the most effective talking points in order to defeat Palin and McCain and help elect Barack Obama president. The tone was more campaign headquarters than newsroom.

Examples?

Chris Hayes of the Nation wrote in with words of encouragement, and to ask for more talking points. “Keep the ideas coming! Have to go on TV to talk about this in a few min and need all the help I can get,” Hayes wrote.

Suzanne Nossel, chief of operations for Human Rights Watch, added a novel take: “I think it is and can be spun as a profoundly sexist pick. Women should feel umbrage at the idea that their votes can be attracted just by putting a woman, any woman, on the ticket no matter her qualifications or views.”

Mother Jones’s Stein loved the idea. “That’s excellent! If enough people – people on this list? – write that the pick is sexist, you’ll have the networks debating it for days. And that negates the SINGLE thing Palin brings to the ticket,” he wrote.

And TIME’s Joe Klein used the idea’s from the Journalist to write an article written in the first person, as if he came up with the idea’s himself:

Time’s Joe Klein then linked to his own piece, parts of which he acknowledged came from strategy sessions on Journolist. “Here’s my attempt to incorporate the accumulated wisdom of this august list-serve community,” he wrote. And indeed Klein’s article contained arguments developed by his fellow Journolisters. Klein praised Palin personally, calling her “fresh” and “delightful,” but questioned her “militant” ideology. He noted Palin had endorsed parts of Obama’s energy proposal.

Ed Morrissey:

While Klein is very clearly an opinion journalist at Time, he represented those opinions as his own — and one has to wonder how many other talking points from JournoList Klein passed off as his own over the years at Time.

These discussions centered on what message would harm the GOP the most. They asked for ideas for a GOP attack prior to going on TV. This Journalist helped them shape their anti-Republican message…

And Kathleen Parker wants to dismiss it as some kind of list of friends?

400 strangers getting together in a email list is not a bunch of friends just “shooting the s@#t,” and it’s certainly not a private discussion when they were colluding amongst each other to find ways to get a certain political party elected.

Dan Riehl:

Let’s see if I can succinctly break down her complaint.

Liberals can use a mass email list to frame the debate on politics in America. Kathleen Parker can use her position at the WaPo to frame the JournoList debate in a manner to marginalize the focus of the Right on line. But when said Right on line openly frames the debate in a manner she doesn’t care for, it’s time to consider drawing a line? That about it?

Yup, that pretty much sounds like her complaint.

What utter idiocy.

In this age of public awareness, thanks solely to the information available on the internet, only a fool or a liar tries to assert that the MSM isn’t a quasi- propaganda bureau for the Obama White House; however, if the MSM would have been objective journalists and investigated Obama’s ties with Reverend Jeremiah Wright, the racist Black Liberation preacher who was Obama’s spiritual mentor for twenty years, and the other unsavory characters whose true hatred of America was suppressed by a media that has boasted of its objectivity for decades, Obama would have never been elected.

Here we have the most frequent visitor to the White House, espousing his views on International Socialism:

Now that we realize that we have elected a man whose personal friends want to discard the Constitution and create an American form of Socialism, we are left feeling lost and bewildered;  wondering how long the fraud has been perpetrated against the public under the pretense of objectivity, while the majority if not all journalists put their personal political beliefs ahead of their personal obligations to honesty and integrity in being complicit in the election of America’s first Socialist. Liberals only scoff at the concept of an obligation to report news with honesty and integrity, they only owe loyalty to the “Party Line”; journalism is considered an extension of editorial opinion that includes the use of propaganda to report every nuance of news with the maximum political promotion, with no preconceptions or chivalric codes alluding to an honest reporting of the news.

In a rare reference to the Constitution, they cite the First Amendment and the enumerated freedom of the press and maintain that a journalist has the power to write freely as long as they avoid the most outrageous libels.  Therefore they answer to no one and have no fiduciary obligation to write the truth.  In their opinion, this is an obsolete concept that exists only in our minds, leaving us naively believing in the innate quality of goodness and honesty in our fellow man.

We often cite the silliness of the Utopian Obama Socialists and their willingness to believe any tripe that is passed through the Progressive Socialist Sausage Grinder; yet a slight majority of Americans were willing to drink the Obama swill drawn from his propaganda tap.  Unless we can overcome this radical infiltration of our country in November, we will lose this country to to the bizarre Dystopian Dreams of Obama and his radical associates that he barely knows, the guys who just live in his neighborhood.

Reverend Jeremiah Wright, while addressing the New York Society for Ethical Culture, in New York City on September 17, 2009, praised Socialism and No-Nonsense Marxism: once again he manages to denigrate the country that has allowed him to build a personal fortune while praising the political systems of slavery, repression and death.

Americans who are not Socialists continue to wonder at the bizarre and counter productive policies of Obama and become skeptical of his message that resembles Socialism; while he steadfastly denies being a Socialist.

There are those of us who plead that if we refer to Obama as a Socialist and offer incriminating evidence we will lose the support of wavering moderates who refuse to believe that the US could elect a Marxist to the Presidency: conversely, there are those among us that believe that every shred of evidence of Obama’s covert Marxism should be exposed along with those of his family and his associates, only the dim witted “Useful Idiots” will manage to cling to the pre-election ideology of the Obama mystique.

In the second audio recording, Obama reveals his vulnerability to the charges of Marxism. Should we worry that his self-conscious ego is fragile and that he can’t handle criticism; that he deserves special treatment because of his racial status and the rather obvious fact that he is an example of an Affirmative Action graduate who has been promoted well beyond his abilities or should we pull out all the stops and persecute this fraud as an enemy of freedom, whose main goal is to redesign this country into some dubious Socialist Dystopia?

So the US goes to China to discuss human rights violations:

The United States and China reported no major breakthroughs Friday after only their second round of talks about human rights since 2002.

The Obama administration wants to push Beijing to treat its citizens better, but it also needs Chinese support on Iranian and North Korean nuclear standoffs, climate change and other difficult issues.

A senior U.S. official said that the two-day meeting lays groundwork for more regular talks to soothe an irritant in relations between the two world powers.

And what does the blame America first crowd do first? Apologize for Arizona….to the Chinese!

QUESTION: Was there any areas in which China sort of turned the tables and raised its own complaints or concerns about U.S. practices around the globe or at home? Can you give some examples there -

ASSISTANT SECRETARY POSNER: Sure. You know, I think – again, this goes back to Ambassador Huntsman’s comment. Part of a mature relationship is that you have an open discussion where you not only raise the other guy’s problems, but you raise your own, and you have a discussion about it. We did plenty of that. We had experts from the U.S. side, for example, yesterday, talking about treatment of Muslim Americans in an immigration context. We had a discussion of racial discrimination. We had a back-and-forth about how each of our societies are dealing with those sorts of questions. …

QUESTION: Did the recently passed Arizona immigration law come up? And, if so, did they bring it up or did you bring it up?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY POSNER: We brought it up early and often. It was mentioned in the first session, and as a troubling trend in our society and an indication that we have to deal with issues of discrimination or potential discrimination, and that these are issues very much being debated in our own society.

So the US brought up the Arizona statute that enforces the federal laws already on the books…to the freakin Chinese. It wasn’t in response to a question from the Chinese, we brought it up first, and often, according to Posner.

Allah:

To have State bring the Chinese into this is actually much worse than having unhinged leftists scream about looming Nazism in Phoenix, because to some extent the Nazi crap is standard political discourse now. As disgusting as it is, it’s almost always empty rhetoric and everyone knows it. Not so here: Evidently there are elements at State that consider this law a transgression so ominous that they actually feel compelled to apologize to a totalitarian regime for it. And yet there’s been practically nothing said about it anywhere; even Ed’s post earlier barely cracked 100 comments. This should be a Category Five shinolastorm on the right, yet as far as I know, not a single reporter even raised it with Gibbs at today’s presser. As a wise man once said, where’s the outrage?

That imbecile Posner should be fired immediately and both Hillary and Huntsman should be asked to explain, in exquisite detail, why a law that’s not even being enforced yet should be offered as some sort of diplomatic sacrifice to the Orwellian heroes in Beijing

And Allah notes Sarah Palin isn’t letting partisan politics get in the way as she calls out Republican Jon Huntsman, ambassador to China:

AZ’s pro-border security law invokes apology to China(w/its human rights violations)by U.S. State Dept;Surely Ambassador Huntsman disagrees?

I’m guessing the ambassador won’t say a peep about this. Why should he? He works for a man who lives and breathes anything Anti-American. Every person brought into the administration knew what Obama was about, and the multiple apology tours have just reinforced the truth. Ayers, Wright, Meeks and so on, ooze their hatred for this country, and they were his teachers.

Which has finally led us to our State Department apologizing to one of the worst human rights violators on this planet about one of our States having the audacity to actually try to stop illegal immigration by enforcing the law already on the books.

Imagine that.

Originally posted June 10, 2008

Sophia A. Nelson:

As we all know by now, and as his remarks Friday indicate, President Obama is a cautious man, particularly when it comes to matters of race. But I was relieved to see that he did not “apologize” to the officer in question or the Cambridge police department.

~~~

The bottom line is that the president was right to speak out against racial injustice & racial profiling given this nation’s history with race and police brutality against black men.

President Obama should have calibrated his Friday remarks to offer a flatout apology to Crowley and the Cambridge police department for his earlier “ill-informed” presidential opinion. And then he should have apologized to the American public for exacerbating race relations in the United States.

The “trans-racial” president has been anything but “post-racial”. On the surface, he looks and sounds centrist, speaks of bipartisanship and reaching across the aisle, and pretends to be the American president, rather than “the black” president. But sitting in Reverend Wright’s Trinity United Church of Christ for 20 years, President Obama can’t help himself, but be who he is: black first, American second.

There is a kind of racism that America has yet to overcome. And it is exemplified by President Obama. It is not based on hatred, but based on an an “over-emphasis” of racial identification. Of seeing oneself primarily in terms of skin color before all else.

President Obama can’t escape the influence he subjected himself to and gravitated toward all his life, in spite of his attempts to distance himself from Reverend Wright and other radical associations during the 2008 presidential campaign.

When visiting a slave station in Ghana recently, Anderson Cooper asked the president how he explained the slave trade to Sasha and Malia. He used it as a teaching moment about how “people were willing to degrade others because they appeared differently“. Really?! Ghanaians at the slave station degraded their fellow Africans because “they appeared differently?”

President Obama also said the capacity of discrimination is “not just on the basis of race, but on the basis of religion, or the basis of sexual orientation or gender” rather than shedding light on the fact that it was Africans who captured and sold fellow Africans at slave stations like the one he was being interviewed at. He could have used it as a teaching moment to educate people that slavery was a universal crime, and one not strictly about racism.

Senator Obama has stated that he is against the notion of reparations:

“I have said in the past — and I’ll repeat again — that the best reparations we can provide are good schools in the inner city and jobs for people who are unemployed,”

The second half of that statement is important to note. Because although he knows the “30 acres and a mule” brand of reparations is unrealistic with a great deal of political opposition, what President Obama is trying to accomplish is a sort of “stealth reparations” through policies like his healthcare proposals, that will carry out “economic justice”, with minorities being the most affected. Glenn Beck:

More from Glenn Beck on Back Door Reparations.

President Obama didn’t have all the facts in; yet his instincts were to condemn the police of “acting stupidly” and give his friend Gates the benefit of the doubt (because he’s a friend, or because he’s a black man?).

Mona Charen:

President Obama was so ready to take sides. Why? Well, he answered that: “… What I think we know separate and apart from this incident is that there is a long history in this country of African-Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcing disproportionately. That’s just a fact.”

Not quite. It’s a contentious and emotional minefield. Yes, there has been harassment of blacks by white police departments. But that’s hardly the whole story. Blacks and Hispanics also commit a disproportionately high percentage of crimes.

It seems the Obama presidency means we’re mostly past white racism. As for reverse racism, it’s still in fashion.

Unfortunately, racism is alive and well in the United States; but it is being kept alive by both “traditional” victims and stereotypical “traditional” perpetrators.

And the problem is being exacerbated by a supposed “post-racial” president who can’t calibrate his words and rise above his own racist shortcomings.

Obama has learned well:

Take this bit of race baiting for example. He spoke out about the arrest of Henry Louis Gates, after admitting he didn’t know all the facts, and said that if it had happened to us “any of us would be pretty angry.”

Those racist cops don’t know when to quit eh? Responding to a 911 call about a couple men breaking into a house, described as two black men, and then having the gall to question the men…who coincidentally had jimmied their way into the house AND fit the description given in the 911 call…for ID.

How dare they!

Patterico hits the nail on the head:

According to the police report, which I find more credible than Gates’s account, Gates started screaming about racism right from the get-go. (If he didn’t, then why did he get arrested?) And why? Because a police officer was reasonably following up on a reasonable concern?

No, it’s because Gates assumed he was being profiled. And so does Obama, who gives us a long lecture about the history of racial profiling in this country — as if that had anything to do with this incident.

It didn’t. As Jack Dunphy said at the Corner:

The claim that Gates had been “profiled” is ludicrous. Police responded to a 911 call from a witness who described two black men she believed to be breaking into a home. If contacting a black man then found inside that very home is deemed to be “profiling” then the term itself has been stripped of its meaning.

Welcome to post-racial America — where race hustlers hold sway, and all their paranoid fantasies receive official stamps of approval.

But who can blame Obama….he learned from the best in Wright, Meeks and Pfleger.

Problem is, he is no longer Candidate Obama…he is President…and if you don’t know all the facts, as he so readily admitted, you don’t proclaim to the world that one side acted stupidly.

But hey, in the same press conference he inferred our nations doctors are just after a quick buck ready to do unnecessary surgery in their quest for riches.

Cops and Doc’s…..those eeeeeviiiillllll bastards!

More here.

UPDATE

Dan Friedman has some great advice in an email:

If you think, as I do, that the sergeant deserves our encouragement and support, here’s the non-emergency phone number of the Cambridge Police Dept.: 617-349-3300.

I called this a.m. and they were very friendly, and in a neutral way (wink, wink) thanked me for my comment. Try it yourself. Couldn’t hurt.

And this article is pretty good about the officer:

The Cambridge cop prominent Harvard University professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. claims is a racist gave a dying Reggie Lewis mouth-to-mouth resuscitation in a desperate bid to save the Celtics [team stats] superstar’s life 16 years ago Monday.

“I wasn’t working on Reggie Lewis the basketball star. I wasn’t working on a black man. I was working on another human being,” Sgt. James Crowley, in an exclusive interview with the Herald, said of the forward’s fatal heart attack July 27, 1993, at age 27 during an off-season practice at Brandeis University, where Crowley was a campus police officer.

It’s a date Crowley still can recite by rote – and he still recalls the pain he suffered when people back then questioned whether he had done enough to save the black athlete.

“Some people were saying ‘There’s the guy who killed Reggie Lewis’ afterward. I was broken-hearted. I cried for many nights,” he said.

Crowley, 42, said he’s not a racist, despite how some have cast his actions in the Gates case. “Those who know me know I’m not,” he said.

Yesterday, Lewis’ widow, Donna Lewis, was floored to learn the embattled father of three on the thin blue line of a national debate on racism in America was the same man so determined to rescue her husband.

“That’s incredible,” Lewis, 44, exclaimed. “It’s an unfortunate situation. Hopefully, it can resolve itself. The most important thing is peace.”

Gates, 58, an acclaimed scholar on black history and a PBS documentarian, went on the attack against Crowley on Tuesday, demanding he apologize for arresting him for disorderly conduct last Thursday while investigating a reported break-in at his home. Gates, returning from a trip, was seen by a Malden woman trying to force his front door open. Police alleged he initially refused to identify himself.

Though he harbors no “ill feelings toward the professor,” a calm, resolute Crowley said no mea culpa will be forthcoming.

“I just have nothing to apologize for,” he said. “It will never happen.”

Hey, it’s the dawn of a new age! That new age includes government sanctioned racism: (h/t Hot Air)

Robert Reich:

I am concerned, as I’m sure many of you are, that these jobs not simply go to high-skilled people who are already professionals or to white male construction workers. … I have nothing against white male construction workers. I’m just saying that there are a lot of other people who have needs as well. … Criteria can be set so that the money does go to others, the long term unemployed minorities, women, people who are not necessarily construction workers or high-skilled professionals.

Reich’s bio:

Robert Bernard Reich served as the twenty-second United States Secretary of Labor, serving under President Bill Clinton from 1993 to 1997.

A Dartmouth graduate, Reich is a former Harvard University professor and the former Maurice B. Hexter Professor of Social and Economic Policy at the Heller School for Social Policy and Management at Brandeis University. He is currently a professor at the University of California, Berkeley’s Goldman School of Public Policy. Reich is also on the board of directors of Tutor.com. He is a trustee of the Economists for Peace and Security.

He is also an occasional political commentator, notably on Hardball with Chris Matthews, This Week with George Stephanopoulos , CNBC’s Kudlow & Company, and National Public Radio.

In 2008, Time Magazine named him one of the Ten Most Successful Cabinet Members of the century, and the Wall Street Journal placed him among America’s Top Ten Business Thinkers. On November 7, 2008, he was selected by President-elect Barack Obama to be a member of the President-elect’s economic transition advisory board.

This top ten business thinker in America believes that there should be some sort of means test by setting up some criteria on who gets the funds and who doesn’t. The criteria? Anyone but a white guy.

Ed Morrissey:

This sounds a lot more like a paternalistic welfare program than a real effort to improve American infrastructure. We’re building roads and bridges for all Americans, using tax money from all Americans. Everyone should have equal access to the jobs created by this stimulus plan.

In the beautiful world of Obama we were supposed to all come together right? Change! Apparently the change means that race will become a important factor in who gets what opportunities.

It appears the words of Obama’s mentor, Rev. Wright, had a bit more meaning to him then we were told eh?