Half-White President Fails All-Black Americans

On June 9, 2009, while performing at the White House Correspondents' Dinner, comedienne Wanda Sykes quipped:  "The first black president! I’m proud to be able to say that. That’s unless you screw up. And then it’s going to be, 'What’s up with the half-white guy?'"  Upon which the audience exploded in uproarious laughter.  Why so intense a response?  What was so funny?

    

If you accept the explanation of the American Psychological Association's Sadie F. Dingfelder, "Research suggests that the critical ingredient for a chuckle is incongruity.  But if you can also point to some unspoken truth, you'll hit humor gold."   The rationale certainly seems to apply to the joke in question.  First, Sykes is female, black and openly-gay, a member of the three staunchest Obama support groups.  At the time of the White House Correspondents' Dinner, it literally was laughable to imagine such persons deriding the President.  Second, Wanda had tapped into the journalist audience's unconscious awareness that prior to his election Obama's black identity and capacity to represent blacks had been openly and vociferously debated in the African American community.  For instance, as early as March 17, 2000, Illinois Democratic Representative and former Black Panther, Bobby Rush mocked Barack's racial identity credentials saying, “Barack is a person who read about the civil rights protests and thinks he knows all about it. He went to Harvard and became an educated fool.”   And on October 17, 2007, CNN reported that "Among black registered Democrats overall, Clinton had a 57 percent to 33 percent lead over Obama" in the Democratic Presidential Primary.

January 28, 2013, the Washington Post ran a piece summarizing Obama's first term entitled “NAACP president: Black people worse off under Obama”   Ten months later, a similar opinion was proffered when on October 10, 2013, while appearing on Fox News's Hannity show, Tavis Smiley, a black talk show host, asserted that "The data is going to indicate sadly that when the Obama administration is over, black people will have lost ground in every single leading economic indicator category."

In a December 16, 2013 article, speaking of African American young adults, Tom Allison of Huff Post’s Black Voices writes:

The situation is actually getting worse for 25-to 34-year-olds. Black workers in that age group actually suffer a worse unemployment rate than they did a year ago. New data released today by the Bureau of Labor Statistics show that in November 2013 black workers aged 25 to 34 had an unemployment rate of 13.6 percent. In November 2012, the rate was 12.7 percent. This is more than double the rate of white workers in the same age group who face a 5.9 percent unemployment rate.

We see then that Barack Obama is not the black messiah.  As Wanda Sykes’s joke underscores, Barack Obama is not even authentically black.  Every cell in Barack’s body always was and always will be as white as they are black.  Black and white Americans know that the President is biracial, but they, like he, choose to play racial games in order to declare him the first black president.  He won the office because of his false racial identity.  Obama did not have and does not have either the personality or the leadership qualities to effectively lead our nation.  Having given Barack 92 percent of their vote in 2008 and 91 percent in 2012 and having received nothing in return, black America has learned that lesson the hard way. 

The reality is that Barack Obama is a half-white man and a half-black man.  Maybe we need to think of him merely as a human.  A half-white president is not black and being black or white is no relevant criterion from which to vote.  Being black or white does not qualify anyone for anything, leastwise the presidency.  Next time, let’s take Martin Luther King, Junior’s advice and judge our presidential candidates not by the color of their skin by the contents of his or her character.  Competency to serve, rather than race, seems like a good standard. 

Barack Obama: A Life of Lies

That everyone lies is a commonsense notion supported by psychological research.   But while everyone lies occasionally, few people lie chronically.  Most refrain from habitual lying due to moral sense and/or from fear that others will discover their lies and punish them.

To succeed as a professional liar then, one must develop two essential skills.  First, he needs to insulate his conscience from information that challenges his lies.   Second, he must be supremely confident that his audience is so naive as to accept the lies and that they are unwilling or incapable of retaliating should they discover his deceptions.

In his quasi-autobiographical book Dreams from My Father that he is admits is fabricated in parts, Barack Obama unwittingly describes some roots of his lying character.  Barack, then called "Barry," explains his lying ways and his fear of being caught in lies by his father's visit to his 5^th grade classroom.  Jon Meacham in an August 22 2008 Time article entitled “What Barack Obama Learned from His Father” summarizes the episode nicely:

Obama was not delighted by the visit. He dreaded it. He had boasted that he came from African royalty, and that his father was a prince. "My grandfather, see, he's a chief," Barry had told his classmates. "It's sort of like the king of the tribe, you know … like the Indians. So that makes my father a prince. He'll take over when my grandfather dies." The truth was more mundane—tragically mundane, in Barry's view. The Obamas were Luo, a nomadic tribe that, as Barry recalled, "raised cattle and lived in mud huts and ate corn meal and yams and something called millet. Their traditional costume was a leather thong across the crotch." Told that Miss Hefty had invited Obama Sr. to the class to talk about life in Kenya, Barry was crushed: his tale of princely blood would be exposed, he feared, by the harsh reality of mud huts. "I couldn't imagine worse news," Obama wrote of the invitation to his father. "I spent that night and all of the next day trying to suppress thoughts of the inevitable … all my lies exposed, the painful jokes afterward. Each time I remembered, my body squirmed as if it had received a jolt to the nerves."

Please note the content of young Barack’s lies.  At age ten, his deception does not concern age-consistent desire.  He is not lying to avoid punishment for some infraction and he is not lying to take possession of some material good.  No.  Barack Obama is lying to feed his fragile self-esteem and to enhance his identity.  The issue is one of tenuous, conflicted identity, a desperate attempt to prove first to himself and then to others that he is special and worthy of adulation.  The lie reveals both the fragile narcissism and nascent megalomania that comprise the foundation of Barack Hussein Obama’s personality.

So Obama has had the requisite character to be a successful liar.  But a successful liar demands a gullible audience.   

It was here that Barack Obama truly shined.  He realized intuitively that biracial persons are a true minority, one with a miniscule constituency.  Barack could not be successful as a biracial candidate.  He needed to be black in order to profit from black enthusiasm and white guilt.  No one would dare question a black man.  No one would dare call a black man a liar, for to do so would open them up to charges of vile racism.  And Obama was proved correct when in November 2009, during the President’s health care speech, Representative Joe Wilson from South Carolina shouted "You lie," was set upon as if by all the dogs from hell, and shamed into recanting his criticism.

Interesting that Wilson had chosen to focus on healthcare lies, since Obama’s healthcare lies now are center stage.  Interesting that Barry Barack Obama, the child, feared that the father who gave him physical life would be the one to expose his lies when for President Barack Hussein Obama, the adult, it is the media who gave him electoral life that has exposed his lies.  For in the December16, 2013 ultra-liberal Washington Post, Glenn Kessler described Obama as having uttered the first, third, and fifth most egregious political lies of the year:  (Number One) “If you like your health-care plan, you can keep it.”  (Number Three) “The Capitol Hill janitors just got a pay cut” and (Number Five) “The day after Benghazi happened, I acknowledged that this was an act of terrorism.”

The lying, identity-conflicted, narcissistic, megalomaniacal Barry Obama, then, continues to inhabit the body and mind of Barack Obama.   The President still is fully capable of professional shameless prevarication.  But maybe, just maybe, the previously lie-colluding press and ultra-liberal electorate are beginning to see Obama for the double-speaking demagogue that he always has been.      

Racial Absurdity in America: One More Chance to Divide the Nation by Color

I initially hesitated to comment on Aisha Harris’ December 10, 2013 article in Slate entitled "Santa Claus Should Not Be a White Man Anymore," since, on the surface, it is so inane.  But race in America is, in fact, inane and the ideas contained within the piece lie at the very heart of our racial dysfunction.   

Miss Harris’ language reveals how she uses Santa Claus as a foil to ventilate her anti-white racial animus.   In the essay, she refers to the “pale seasonal visitor” and the “melanin-deficient Santa.”  In so doing, she equates white with sickly and/or impaired.  The comments are especially telling because American high-profile authors and speakers regularly contrast and praise “people of color’ with white people and, in so doing, they consciously and/or unconsciously conspire to make Caucasians into deficient aliens.  Everyone on earth is a person of color except white people who are colorless. 

And Harris does not rest with merely denigrating white skin color; she is equally facile in promoting the stereotype that “old white men” should be ignored or ridiculed.   The image of Santa Claus permits her to mock the “fat-old-white-man” and to have a good laugh in the process. 

To appreciate the significance of the confluence of old, white, and male, one must understand that high profile media and political types regularly use the expression “old white” as if it were a slur.  There are thousands of examples of this usage but I will limit myself to one.

Oprah Winfrey, the black person who arguably has profited more financially from white support than any single person in world history, traveled to the United Kingdom in November, 2013 to promote her race-based film, The Butler.   Thus, from the start, her propaganda mission was to underscore race and to glorify blacks.  At a BBC interview with Will Gompertz, Winfrey asserted, "There are still generations of people, older people, who were born and bred and marinated in it, in that prejudice and racism, and they just have to die."  Of course, Oprah was referring to “old white” people as if “old black” people have nary a racist bone in their bodies.  And the inimitable, holier-than-thou Oprah prefers that whites "just die."

Within the still extant racially-divisive tradition, then, Aisha Harris uses Santa Claus to promote a racist agenda by using well-worn racist language and references.  But, since she is black, Harris is immune from accusations of racism.  She rationalizes her protest by suggesting, “Of course, since we created Santa, we can certainly change him however we’d like…”  Aisha, although not melanin-deficient, apparently has her own deficiencies.  I refer her to stnicholascenter.org, a site dedicated to “discovering the truth about Santa Claus.”  There, as in thousands of other sources, Ms. Harris will discover that she was not among those who created Santa, that Santa was created hundreds of years ago by white people who “discovered,” explored, and settled America.  The myth is not hers to change; it is a shared European fantasy.  Aisha Harris can embrace or reject Santa Claus as she chooses but she has no right change the version that Americans have enjoyed for generations. 

Regarding Ms. Harris' authority to dictate what we should and should not believe, I must conclude by noting that at the very end of her Slate article is the following:  “Correction, Dec. 10, 2013: This article originally misidentified penguins as mammals. They are birds.”  Apparently, the lady obsessed with the Santa Claus fantasy is not sufficiently well versed in reality to know that penguins are birds.  

Race Talk in America: Pathologically Biased to the Core

By now many Americans have heard of the “knock-out game” in which blacks coldcock unsuspecting white passersby whom they see on the street.  Given that black-on-white aggression usually is attributed to “random” acts of violence, as opposed to white-on-black aggression that always is dubbed “vicious racist attacks” maybe we can double speak the events to call them “random acts of black violence against white people.”  Noteworthy is that in New York City white victims mostly have been Jews, the whites with a sterling history of black advocacy, the whites who literally helped to establish the NAACP in the early 1900s.   

With the above in mind, let’s direct our attention to the On the Record show hosted by Greta Van Susteren during which she interviewed New York State Assemblyman Dov Hikind, a Jew, who expressed profound concern about the vicious black-on-white assaults.  He spoke personally about his new habit of repeatedly, nervously glancing around when he walks the streets of Brooklyn.

Van Susteren: This has been going on across the country. But I'm curious, is it -- is it targeting Jewish citizens in New York? Do you have there's a specific target? Is anything said as the attackers attack? I take it there's no robbery involved. Is there anything to suggest this is a specific target?

Hikind: In almost all the cases nothing is said. Nothing is taken. It so happens that literally almost every single victim in New York has been Jewish and almost every single perpetrator has been black. It's not my job to say is it racial or not. At this point, it hardly matters.

Is it not Mr. Hikind’s job to say whether it is racial or not, and does it hardly matter?   

Mr. Hikind is a Democrat and no doubt aware of the oft-quoted John F. Kennedy remark, “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing” (that Kennedy incorrectly attributed to British philosopher Edmund Burke).  To my way of thinking, all that is necessary for racial evil to triumph is for good men to censor their racially-oriented thoughts and comments to the extent that they are incapable of stating that which is racially obvious.  Or, to paraphrase George Orwell, “Freedom is the freedom to say that when ‘almost every single racial victim’ is white and ‘almost every single perpetrator has been black,’ black racists are to blame.”

In my book, Barry Barack Hussein Suitor Obama : Identity and Racial Hypocrisy in America, I asserted that it is racial double standards, double speak, and double binds that lie at the heart of our country’s racial torment.  If a Jewish assemblyman, renowned for his battles against antisemitism, cannot call racism racism, then who can?

To my way of thinking, racial excuse-making causes more problems that it attempts to heal.  Anyone with an ounce of common sense sees right through the racial hypocrisy promulgated by the government and the media.  The double speak kindles simmering racial resentment that broadens and deepens the racial divide. When citizens’ just issues are dismissed or minimized, they become more recalcitrant and more intense in their opposition to force-fed, politically-inspired racial propaganda.   

Barack Vladimir Putin Obama: To Change America

Recall the infamous March 26, 2012 “open-mike” clandestine muttering in Seoul, South Korea, between President Barack Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev as they meet to discuss critical, sensitive U.S.-Russian relations.

Obama: On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this, this can be solved but it’s important for him to give me space.

Medvedev: Yeah, I understand. I understand your message about space. Space for you…

Obama: This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility.

Medvedev: I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir.

Barack without a teleprompter.  Barack just being Barack, the real Barack, a man who, like Vladimir, regards elections as a hindrance to his unfettered power exploitation. 

Over and over again Obama reveals himself megalomaniacally determined not just to execute the laws but to “execute’ our system of governance.  He wants to change the system by fiat, now and forever by personally deciding just how America should operate.  Obama chooses, either directly or through his surrogates, to ignore laws objectionable to him.  For instance, he avoids enforcing laws regarding immigration and voter intimidation when the latter involved New Black Panther Party threats toward white voters in Philadelphia.

His actions are not limited to dealing with a given issue or issues but strike at the very heart of our systems of government.  Of all his dictatorial actions, however, none is more detrimental to our nation than his attacks on our electoral processes.  For instance, Obama is determined to have criminals and illegal aliens vote because they will be eternally grateful not only for the vote but also for the political handouts so “liberally” dispensed by “progressive Democrats.”

Obama values Machiavellian manipulations of the electoral process because he realized early on that his very election depended on manipulations: 

The Washington Post, June 20 2008:

In February 2007, Barack Obama challenged Republican presidential candidates to agree to public financing of the general election. John McCain responded positively, prompting Obama's campaign spokesman, Bill Burton, to call on other Republican candidates to follow suit. The headline in the New York Times: "McCain and Obama in Deal on Public Financing."

June 20, 2008, the New York Times:

With his decision, Mr. Obama became the first candidate of a major party to decline public financing — and the spending limits that go with it — since the system was created in 1976, after the Watergate scandals.

Why the change?  Because Barack Obama realized that he could buy the election through private “He will be our first African American President” pander donations, and buying the election was far more important to him than was supporting the electoral process. 

Now that Obama has had his “last election,” has “more flexibility” and need not worry about bothersome election finance laws, he is ready for “change we can believe in.”   More specifically, he has decided to work his imperial governmental manipulations by surrogate fiat, namely, through having the Treasury Department and IRS try to decide who can donate how much to whom.   The Washington Post (November 26, 2013) notes that “501(c)4 groups that were potentially engaging in too much election-related activity” and “The ability of such organizations to play in politics without revealing their donors has been decried by President Obama and other critics as a major loophole in the campaign finance system.”  

Even the super-liberal Mark Shields has been moved to comment on Barack Obama’s role in the demise of the electoral process.  On the November 29, 2013 PBS Newshour he said:

We had 32 years, from 1976 to 2008, in which we had elections.  As somebody who spent his early year in politics, before I turned to journalism, by default, I can tell you, they were clean. Ronald Reagan three times ran for president. He accepted the limits on contributions, the limits on what you could spend, and he ran on public financing in the fall elections, when he won 49 states one time and 44 the next, George H.W. Bush twice, Bill Clinton twice, George W. Bush.

And it changed in 2008. President Obama was the first president not to abide by the limits in the general election. And then along comes the Citizens United case decision at the Supreme Court, which took off all limits on spending.    

  

So Barack, you can call me Vladimir, Obama plays free and easy with the electoral system and gets elected twice.  Now he’s through with elections and wants to make them “clean.”   This is a man with no integrity, no shame, and no concern for anyone or anything other than what he wants.  If anyone has earned the epithet “dark triad personality” with Machiavellian, psychopathic, and narcissistic features it surely is Barack Hussein Obama. 

A Black Reporter Responds to the Knock Out Game

Shine a bright light on any given black-perpetrated racial atrocity, stand back, and observe the double standards and double talk.   The recent “knockout whitey game” provides just that opportunity.  Of the many doubles candidates, I choose one for your consideration.

On November 25, 2013, TheGrio.com commented about black-on-white attacks being reported in so-called legacy media.   (According to the website, “TheGrio.com is the first video-centric news community site devoted to providing African Americans with stories and perspectives that appeal to them but are underrepresented in existing national news outlets.”)  The piece by Will Wright was entitled, “How ‘knockout game’ hysteria hurts black America.”

Let’s start with the title.  Mr. Wright refers to white “hysteria."  By doing so, he implies that white people are overreacting, irrationally emotional in their excessive attention to the assaults, and in so doing he delegitimizes the white concerns.  Consider too that his title underscores that he wants the reader to focus on how white hysteria hurts black America.  Wright is not concerned with morality or lawfulness.  He expresses not one scintilla of empathy for the white victims of black crime.  He focuses on the color of offender’s skin, not on the content of the offender’s character.  In fact, the author begins the body of his paper by framing the knockout “game” in terms of the “Central Park Jogger” incident which he regards as an example of black “youth” being unjustly accused of a crime against a white girl—another attempt to discount white knock out game concerns. 

Repeatedly, Wright questions how serious the current assaults are.  The absurdity of his position is blatantly obvious in the following statement:

New York City police officials are struggling to determine whether they should advise the public to take precautions against the ‘knockout game’ — whether in fact it is a growing dangerous trend, or something that has been ongoing and just recently rose to the surface.

The above remarks are mystifying.  Is Mr. Wright suggesting that “the public,” that is, the white public, should be more or less concerned if the “game” is a “trend” versus “something that has been going on?”  Would the punch be less painful or less destructive in either case?  Wright’s Rorschach-like remarks might be read as: If black-on-white attacks have been ongoing, there’s no need to be worried and no need for preventive action.  One thing for sure: If the black-on-white attacks have been ongoing, then I agree with Wright—it is just race relations as usual. 

Will Wright seems to be saying that the knockout assaults are just hubbub, just “hysteria,” no big thing so long as white over-reaction does not hurt black America.  I suggest that if he wants to explore racial hysteria, Willy might imagine what the response would be if white thugs were attacking unsuspecting black men, women, and children on the streets of America.  He also might recall the random looting of businesses, burning of buildings and cars, white maiming, and white murder that accompanied events such as Rodney King’s arrest.  Then and only then would Mr.Wright clearly understand what racial hysteria really is. 

Knock Out Whitey

The latest black inner-city game challenges young thugs to knock-out “white folks” with one, and only one, sucker punch.  These upstanding adolescents and young adults, who (like Trayvon Martin) could have been Obama’s sons, sneak up on unsuspecting whites, coldcock them, and run away.  The attack often involves several accomplices, with one sometimes videoing the event for future scoring and uproarious entertainment.

Like so many trends, this one started in NYC, the world’s hip-hop center.   Originally the assault was directed mostly at Jews.  Brooklyn’s Rabbi Yaacov Behrman, in fact, referred to the game as, ‘Knock Out The Jew.’  And Ray Kelly, the city’s Police Commissioner said that he had known of at least eight such attacks since mid-September 2013.

Underscoring the racist element, the knock-out game often is called the polar bear game since whites exclusively are being hunted.  Not surprisingly, such fun did not remain limited to Jews or to the “Big Apple” either.  To date, similar attacks on Jewish and non-Jewish whites have been documented for St. Louis, Missouri, New Haven, Connecticut., Washington, D.C., and the suburbs of Philadelphia.  Among the many victims have been a 12 year-old boy and a 78 year-old woman.  If you are white, you are a moving target, regardless of your residence, age, or gender.

On November 21, 2013, Colleen Long of the Associated Press wrote “Attacks around US probed for link to knockout game,” a piece worth reading in its entirety (http://news.yahoo.com/attacks-around-us-probed-knockout-game-215216013.html).  Among her revelations is the following:

In late May in Syracuse, a group of teenagers attempting to knock Michael Daniels out with a single punch wound up beating and stomping him to death, according to police. A 16-year-old was found guilty of manslaughter, and his 13-year-old co-defendant pleaded guilty to assault, admitting he started the fatal beating by trying to knock out Daniels with a single punch. Both were sentenced to 18 months behind bars.

Punishment for the crime surely serves as a strong deterrent to anyone contemplating similar assaults.  Just think of it: The poor misguided attackers, probably innocent victims of the “legacy of anti-black institutionalized racism in America,” are to receive a bruising sentence of about 540 days in jail. When they are released, they will be provided a free cell phone, free internet service, food stamps, condoms, a Medicare card, a voter registration card, social security benefits, and be invited to attend a community college with one-on-one tutoring for their Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder/Learning Disability.  Mr. Daniels’ family no doubt already has been given someone’s condolences and a clean white handkerchief.

So there you have it.  More black on white viciousness.  I haven’t heard half-black President Barack Obama or all-black Attorney General Eric Holder speak out about the knock-out game as racial oppression.  Have you?   So I will be so bold as to speak for them.

The knock-out game is one more rendition of the BIMP (black inner-city male persona) subculture. 

As I wrote in my book, some high-profile adult black race mongers and some American media delight in promoting swaggering, crotch-grabbing, expletive-spewing hyper-masculine behavior of some city-saturated African American boys so long as race mongers and media make a fast buck from it.  Anything from music to sports, to fashion and beyond is glamorized and “gangstarized” by media conglomerates to increase attention and sales.  Most blacks, including inner city-black males, are not BIMPS.  Most inner-city blacks want no part of the crude, criminal BIMP subculture.  But BIMPS rule inner-city streets and BIMP behavior is exploited on radio, internet, television, and movies, spreading the filth throughout our culture and, therefore, throughout the world.

ObamaCare, Care Dispensed Only to His Cronies and Contributors

Sometimes there is just nothing more to say.  That is how I feel after finding an article suggesting that the Obamacare website fiasco is one more example of how Barack continues to use his position to reward  friends and supporters, regardless of the consequences to our nation.

With that I mind, I encourage you to read the brief beforeitsnews.com article, quoted below in its entirety, and hope that you will pass it along to all interested people in your email address book.    

No Bid Contract For ObamaCare Website Was Given To Michelle Obama's Pal And Sorority Sister

Wednesday, November 6, 2013 11:57

There's an interesting thing that's surfaced regarding the disastrous $678 million ObamaCare website.

The company that built it, CGI Federal received a no bid contract to build the site, even though four other companies submitted bids which were never reviewed. Only CGI’s bid was considered.

And wouldn't you know it, there are a couple of other interesting coincidences.

As the Daily Caller reported, Toni Townes-Whitley, Princeton class of ’85, is the senior vice president at CGI Federal…and not only a classmate and friend of the First Lady, who graduated from Princeton the same year, but a sister at the all black sorority Alpha Kappa Alpha and a fellow member of the Association of Black Princeton Alumni.

And to add to the mix, there's George Schindler, president of CGI, who became an Obama Campaign donor after CGI won the lucrative contract.

Even more interesting, there are rumors that CGI Technologies and Solutions, Inc. PAC – CGI Group’s political action group that donates to the campaigns – made a significant swing in donations to Democrats at around the same time.

Now, no bid contracts have come up before. Democrats threw a huge tantrum over no bid contracts awarded to Halliburton for services they performed in Iraq because of former Vice Presidnt Dick Cheney's past employment with them. Those services included saving Iraq's oil wells after Saddam Hussein set them on fire after we invaded.

The difference was that for most of the work Halliburton performed in Iraq, they were the only game in town and no other bids were submitted. Few companies had the expertise and/or the equipment to do what Halliburton contracted to do…observers who credited Halliburton with saving Iraq's oil wells while avoiding an ecological disaster characterized it as a miracle. Not only that, but few if any competitors were willing to send their equipment and employees into a war zone or pony up for the huge insurance costs involved.

What happened with CGI was very different, with four other companies submitting bids that were never even looked at.

It's the Chicago way…and always done using other people's money.

http://s7.addthis.com/static/btn/v2/lg-bookmark-en.gif

http://beforeitsnews.com/opinion-conservative/2013/11/no-bid-contract-for-obamacare-website-was-given-to-michelle-obamas-pal-and-sorority-sister-2-2748636.html

Another Black-on-White Racist Attack and More Black Media Double Speak

Last week a 62-year-old white man was murdered by a 31-year-old black man who prior to the crime was heard to yell, 'I’m going to punch the first white man I see!'   The victim, Jeffrey Babbitt, merely had been walking along in New York’s Union Square, initially oblivious to Lashawn Marten, the murderer,  whose punch caused Babbitt to fall, strike his head, and die.   When Marten was apprehended he boasted, “You think I’m afraid of these charges? … I punched a police officer in Newburgh in front of a crowd of people and all his colleagues and I was out of jail in 168 hours.”

On the The Five, a Fox News show, Greg Gutfeld, commented how blatantly racist the attack had been.   His black colleague, Juan Williams, however, could not find it in his hard heart or narrow mind to acknowledge the obvious, and proceeded to dance all around the issue.

In apparent frustration, Gutfeld then tried to support his contention that the event had been racist by noting the stark reality:  that inter-racial crime overwhelmingly finds whites to be the victims of black aggression. 

So, how could Williams continue to avoid admitting the racial truth? 

Juan used two tried and true double-standard and double-speak techniques.  First, he reminded Gutfeld of the HISTORY of white-on-black violence, choosing to live in the past rather than in the present.  As if that were not enough, he then asserted that black-on-white crime is not racially based, it is ECONOMIC, merely due to the fact that the black population includes more “poor folks” than does the white population.

Juan Williams, therefore, implies that blacks are prisoners of the past, unable to perceive current reality and unable to treat current whites by the contents of their characters—as though blacks are capable only of dealing in anachronistic racial stereotypes.  Williams’ comments also suggest that financial poverty is moral poverty:  that poor black people are so helpless and depraved that they cannot control their aggressive, antisocial impulses.

I reject both of the aforementioned implications.  I know that most black people, like most white people, have the integrity and personality to see current reality; that they are not puppets of the past.  I know that poor black people, and poor white people, are neither helpless nor depraved.   I also know that America will not become racially rational until media propagandists like Juan Williams learn to acknowledge blatantly negative actions taken by blacks.  

Obaman Reality

When a layperson uses the term “autistic” he usually refers to autistic children and associated issues.   But psychologists also speak of “autistic thinking”: thought characterized by inner preoccupation with private fantasy separate and distinct from external, objective reality.  Autistic thinking ordinarily is pathognomonic of psychosis when the autistic-thinking person believes his fanciful thoughts.  Most autistic thinking occurs in Schizophrenia, Alzheimer’s disease and other devastating disorders.

A certain 44^th president of the United States demonstrated his autistic thinking on international television during his September 4, 2013 Stockholm Press Conference when speaking of Syria he said, "First of all, I didn't set a red line. The world set a red line.”  Barack Obama implicitly denied his August 2012 comments to Chuck Todd of NBC News:

Obama:   …We have been very clear to the Assad regime, but also to other players on the ground, that a red line for us is we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilized.  That would change my calculus.  That would change my equation.

Todd:  So you’re confident it’s somehow under — it’s safe?

Obama:  In a situation this volatile, I wouldn’t say that I am absolutely confident.  What I’m saying is we’re monitoring that situation very carefully.  We have put together a range of contingency plans.  We have communicated in no uncertain terms with every player in the region that that’s a red line for us and that there would be enormous consequences if we start seeing movement on the chemical weapons front or the use of chemical weapons.  That would change my calculations significantly.

Like a Paranoid Schizophrenic, Obama-September-4-2013 denied the real, objectively documented statements that he repeatedly had spoken numerous times since August 2012.  Like a Paranoid Schizophrenic, he then projected “blame” for his red line comment, claiming that not he but “the world” set a red line. 

As I had said in my Barry Barack Hussein Soetoro Obama, Identity, and Racial Hypocrisy in America book, the problem with Obama is not his ideology per se.  The problem is his delusional personality.  Barack gets lost in his own autistic musing.  Worse, he truly believes and acts upon those musings.  His narcissism is such that he cannot admit to reality when reality challenges his fragile sense of personal identity.  His Machiavellianism causes him to say and do anything to reach his ends because he presumes that he and only he is smart and righteous enough to understand occult realities.  And Obama’s psychopathy enables him to lie through his teeth with nary a hint of hesitation, not a smidgeon of self-doubt. 

Why should the President doubt his abilities? Why should he question his thought processes?  Since adolescence, he has gotten away with calling himself a “black” rather than “biracial” man.  Most people accept him as the "first black United States president."  Like Sherwin Williams, Barry Barack Hussein Soetoro Obama has managed to “Cover the Earth” with that fantasy.  People from Australia to Zaire have accepted Barack Obama’s version of autistic racial reality.  Since the world has colluded with him in his autistic racial thinking, perhaps Obama has some justification for seeing the world, not he, as setting the Syria red line.

Real Racial Violence, Phony Racial Propaganda

Can’t you see the headlines?   89-Year-Old African American Wounded World War II Veteran of Battle of Okinawa Viciously Beaten to Death by Two White Youths.  'Bored' White Oklahoma Teens Randomly Kill 22-Year-Old Black College Student.

Can’t you hear the outrage?  Burn, baby burn.   America decried as a violent, racist society where African Americans are targeted for discrimination, degradation, and death.   Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton call for a Million Man March to make the streets safe for “black folks.”  ABC interviews Barack Hussein Obama who suggests that he could have been that student and the veteran could have been his father.

But, as usual, the victims were white.  Commenting on surveillance photos, Spokane, Washington television station KHQ reported on August 22, 2013 that the two black alleged murderers of eighty-nine-year old Delbert Belton “are believed to be between 16 to 19 years old and were wearing black clothes, while one suspect was seen wearing a black ‘do-rag’.”  The article explained that Belton's daughter-in-law said that the elderly gentleman “was hit with ‘big heavy flashlights’ and doctors told her he was bleeding from all parts of his face.”  The police called Belton’s murder, “a random attack.” 

Chris Lane, a 22-year-old Oklahoma college baseball player, was shot in the back as he jogged along the street.   In April, the alleged shooter, black 15-year-old James Edwards, had tweeted, "90% of white ppl (people) are nasty. #HATE THEM," and "With my niggers when it's time to start taken life's;" procuring the line from a rap song by Chief Keef called, I Don't Like: 

Fake Trues that's that shit I don't like

Fake shoes, that's that shit I don't like

Fake niggas, that's that shit I don't like

Stalking ass bitch, shit I don't like

I done got indicted selling all white

But I won't never snitch none in my life

I keep this shit 3hunna bitch, I'm going right

With my niggas when it's time to start taking lifes

Playing both sides, shit that I don't like

Wartime spark broad day, all night

Playing both sides, shit that I don't like

Wartime spark broad day, all night

“Entertainment” media is so accepting of black-on-white violence that Edwards could have gotten his inspiration from “visual arts” as well as from rap music.  For instance, Jamie Foxx played to a rousing, giggling, howling crowd as he hosted Saturday Night live when promoting his film, Django.  On the occasion, he boasted that his clothes were entirely black.  Repeatedly he incited the raucous crowd by making race-oriented comments then asking, “How black is that?”   Most outrageously, Foxx screeched that through his movie character, an escaped slave, Foxx was able to “…kill all the white people in the movie.  How GREAT is that and how black is that?” 

Was Chris Lane’s murder an example of socially-acceptable black-on-white racial hatred?  Of course not!  The LA Times heading rationalized that “Bored' Oklahoma teens randomly kill Australian student.”   Edwards and his two accomplices were simply “bored” so, naturally, they “randomly” killed Lane.

 

How does one randomly kill?  Since I never have been able to figure that one out, I listened to violence expert Dr. Chuck Williams, a Drexel University African American psychologist, who on August 23, 2013 discussed the Lane murder with Scott Brown, a stand-in host on “The O’Reilly Factor.”  At first, Williams proved mostly informed and informative.  He had “cred,” as they say on the street; cred that is until Brown quoted Williams’ aforementioned bigoted, murderous  remarks and then asked Williams if he believed that race played a significant role in Lane’s being gunned down.  InCREDibly, the good doctor said, “no.”

The Dr. Williams interview demonstrates once more that the conduct of racial discussions has little or nothing to do with the intelligence or academic credentials of participants.   In our country, racial discussions are not about objective facts; they are all about identity.   In matters of race, psychologists, other social scientists, media personnel and politicians are as conflicted; perhaps more conflicted, than the general population.  It is an identity-based white vs. black, us vs. them, concede nothing, win or lose irrational battle.  Especially when whites are racial victims and/or blacks are racial aggressors, racial double standards, double speak, and double binds take center stage. 

Until a violence expert/university professor readily can acknowledge on national television that 2 + 2 = 4, America never will be free from racial hatred and oppression, a two-sided hatred and oppression that are both white-on-black and black-on-white, one in which overt, physical violence against whites by blacks is a predominant feature.  Eighty-nine-year old Delbert Belton and 22-year-old Chris Lane soon will fade from the nation’s consciousness, only to be replaced by two more victims of unchallenged, pervasive, perverse anti-white racism.

Just More Black on White Violence. Nothing to Be Concerned About

In an August, 2013 preview of her interview on MSNBC, Oprah Winfrey commented about the George Zimmerman acquittal  saying, “It's so easy during this time: Trayvon Martin, Trayvon Martin parallel to Emmett Till, let me just tell you. In my mind, same thing.”   She, of course, was referring to the probable 1955 Mississippi murder of Till, a fourteen year old black boy, by the husband and half-brother of a twenty-one year old white woman.  According to a 1957 Look magazine article by William Bradford Huie:

Bobo Till, visiting his country cousins in the Delta in August, 1955, boasted of sexual relations with a Chicago white girl whose picture he carried. The local Negro youths, “just to show us how much you Chicago cats know about white girls,” dared Bobo to enter a crossroads store at night and ask Bryant’s young wife “for a date.” While the Delta Negroes peered, in delicious awe, through the front windows, Bobo took the dare; Carolyn Bryant chased him with a pistol and, in a gesture of adolescent bravado, Bobo “wolf-whistled” at her.

Early in the morning of August 28, 1955, Milam and Bryant abducted Bobo from his uncle’s farmhouse, intending to beat him and “chase him back to Chicago.” But instead of cowering, Bobo taunted them about his relations with a white girl, whereupon they took him to the Tallahatchie River, where Milam killed him with one bullet from an Army .45. They fastened a gin fan to his neck and threw him in.

Now I am no Oprah Winfrey, but to my feeble mind the Trayvon Martin case does not quite equate to the Bobo (Emmett) Till case. 

Whatever Till said to whomever, he did not deserve to be killed.  And his murder clearly was a racist atrocity by two depraved white men about 58 years ago: white on black violence.

Flash forward to 2013.  Where is the inter-racial violence today? FBI statistics indicate:

African -Americans commit 90% of the approximately 1,700,000 interracial crimes of violence that occur in the United States every year, and are more than 50 times more likely to commit violent crime against whites than vice versa.

You will never hear that statistic expressed in the American media or spoken by President Obama, Attorney General Eric Holder, Jesse (spit in your soup) Jackson, or Al (I got skinny) Sharpton.  No.  These and other anti-white raceketeers will avoid that discussion.  They will depend on media to obfuscate race as by referring to George Zimmerman as a “white Hispanic” to keep the racial pot boiling.  That same media would have referred to Zimmerman only as Hispanic had he won a Nobel Prize.  They might even have called him a Hispanic, Person-of-Color to promote non-white intellectual glory and to separate the non-white do-gooder from white America.

Interesting.  Does that mean that George Zimmerman is a “white Hispanic” because he has one white parent? Does that mean that Barack Obama is a “white black” president, since he too had one white parent?  No.  He is just “the first black president.”

The liberal press made a Barnum and Bailey Greatest Show on Earth production about the Trayvon Martin inter-racial case.  How about the vicious attack on a Florida white child by three black teens? When I Googled it, here is what I got from CBS news:

August 5, 2013 2:27 PM

Police in Gulfport, Fla. recently released surveillance video from a school bus that shows a 13-year-old student being attacked by three teens. The teens were charged with aggravated battery in the incident, and police announced Thursday the bus driver will not be charged for failing to intervene.

No mention of race here, only 47 matter-of-fact, coldly objective words.  When I dug further I found these statements in the August 5, 2013 Huffington Post : 

ABC Action News reports what, authorities said, lead to the fight:

Investigators determined that before the fight on the bus, the victim had encountered the one of the older boys inside a school restroom at Lealman Intermediate School.

The suspect tried to sell the victim drugs. The 13-year-old reported the suspect to school officials, but at the end of the day, the victim and the suspect ended up riding home on the same school bus.

Will the half-white President appear on television to say that the nameless 13-year-old white victim of inter-racial violence could have been Barack Obama’s half-son, and that the white victim was only doing what he has been told to do to resist the drug culture?   Will the President come out against the anti-snitching, black inner-city code of conduct that keeps law-abiding blacks huddled in their homes, knowing criminals have no fear of the police or the justice system?

In the following Christian Newswire report from April 27, 2007, Jesse Lee Peterson, a black reverend, spoke fearlessly about the roots of black inner-city violence:

 A CBS 60 Minutes segment aired this past Sunday reporting that the "stop snitchin'" campaign being promoted by some rappers in videos and on t-shirts is intimidating witnesses from coming forward to testify. According to law enforcement officials, this is causing crimes including murder to go unsolved in the inner cities. This epidemic has outraged social activist and author, Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson, who says that this twisted "code" has been passed down by criminals and by corrupt Black leaders who have been promoting an anti-police culture for the past 15-20 years.

"No one should be surprised that this 'stop snitchin'' campaign has a foothold in the Black community," said Rev. Peterson. "Black leaders like Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Rep. Maxine Waters, former NAACP head Ben Muhammad (formerly Ben Chavis), and Russell Simmons have encouraged anger and distrust towards police for years.

All of this leads me to conclude that a large American subculture suffers from a racial psychosis characterized by a total inability to acknowledge even the most obvious features of inter-racial violence when the features run counter to a “poor, oppressed black people” narrative.  Those so afflicted also exhibit an exquisitely paranoid, twisted reasoning process that enables them to project blame onto whites for any and all real or imagined inter-racial transgressions and to excuse any such transgressions by blacks.  In order to maintain their paranoid delusions, the racial psychotics direct their attention to past problems rather than to see current realities.  And they get away with and even are celebrated for their depravity.

Only in America.    

P. S.  Since I started with Ms. Winfrey, I can’t resist ending with her majesty who recently related a tale of personal racial victimization when being interviewed by Entertainment Tonight’s Nancy O'Dell. 

Allegedly, OW entered an ultra-chic Zurich boutique, Trois Pomme, where she inquired about a $38,000 handbag behind a counter.  When the salesperson, who did not recognize the sovereign, suggested that the bag was too expensive, Oprah left the store in a rapid “swagga.”  (I am sure that the salesperson never would have suggested to a white person that the bag might be too expensive.  I just wonder how many times a day someone insists on seeing the $38,000 bag.)   

Reflecting on the incident, Winfrey told O’Dell, "I could've had the whole blow-up thing and thrown down the black card, but why do that? But that clearly is, you know ... it (racism) still exists. Of course it does."   

Like Alice in Wonderland’s Red Queen, Oprah Winfrey also could have “turned crimson with fury, and, after glaring at her for a moment like a wild beast, screamed `Off with her head!  Off--'” but the queen of talk shows is too refined for such ranting.  Rather, Winfrey is just one more composed, garden variety race-obsessed American, and we can’t blame her for that.

Big Brother Obama and His “Progressive” Collaborators Are Not Just Watching Us

My friend, Clint, sent me the Fox news article partially reproduced below that I forwarded previously.

FoxNews.com

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/07/30/govt-knows-best-white-house-creates-nudge-squad-to-shape-behavior/#ixzz2aolrxkvd 

The federal government is hiring what it calls a "Behavioral Insights Team" that will look for ways to subtly influence people's behavior, according to a document describing the program obtained by FoxNews.com. Critics warn there could be unintended consequences to such policies, while supporters say the team could make government and society more efficient. While the program is still in its early stages, the document shows the White House is already working on such projects with almost a dozen federal departments and agencies including the Department of Health and Human Services and the Department of Agriculture. "Behavioral sciences can be used to help design public policies that work better, cost less, and help people to achieve their goals," reads the government document describing the program, which goes on to call for applicants to apply for positions on the team.

The Fox article is new but the governmental strategy is old.  In my book I talked about how Obama and his gang use psychologists and psychological research to manipulate media and people.  Notice that the above referenced “government document” mentions that policies will be designed to “help people achieve their goals;” it should read, “help the Obama coalition achieve its goals.”

We relentlessly are bombarded by both overt and covert messages that promote a so-called progressive (i.e., liberal) agenda.   Much of the agenda is racialized, directed toward raising up the favored ones by stepping on the disfavored ones.  And it is no secret that Obama and his progressive collaborators do all they can to promote propaganda that juxtaposes smart “people of color’ with bumbling, fumbling, mumbling “white folk.”  The propaganda works so well and has insinuated itself so fully into media that most of us never even notice.   For instance, advertisers regularly contrast dumb, inept whites with clever, capable blacks.  Consider the Pennsylvania Lottery’s current promotion ( Here is the video link if you want to view it for yourself http://www.palottery.state.pa.us/About-PA-Lottery/TV-Commercials.aspx ) that shows an African American couple comfortably and contentedly sitting on the shore scratching off a Gold Rush lottery card while a white couple splash helplessly in a paddle boat, not only unable to direct the boat but also in danger of sinking it.  If the black couple had been the one depicted so foolishly, you definitely would have heard about it.    

I have no problem with humor.  We can use all that we can get.  But why promote propaganda that dichotomizes races as one positive versus one negative?   If a given “joke” requires intellect contrast, why not run the brainy versus buffoon ad with two black or with two white couples.  When black and white couples are shown in the same advertisements present them equally, both brainy or both buffoon.  (For a fuller discussion and more examples of racially divisive advertising and media you can check out my book, Barry Barack Hussein Soetoro Obama, Identity, and Racial Hypocrisy in America.)  

By using psychological insights such as the one I have just suggested, maybe Barack Obama and his progressive collaborators can employ their "Behavioral Insights Team" that will look for ways to subtly influence people's behavior in a non-racist, pro-American, pro-inclusive, egalitarian direction.  But then, that approach would not personally benefit our narcissistic, Machiavellian, psychopathic, race-obsessed premier—I mean president—would it?

Obama Uses the Trayvon Martin tragedy to bolster his own racial identity

On July 20, 2013 at 10:10, I goggled “Obama Trayvon Martin me” and in .25 seconds received 718,000,000 citations, proving once more that Barack Hussein Obama is the premier Machiavellian mass communication manipulator. As he has his entire life, Obama, the narcissist, has managed to shift the current focus of attention and conversation into a self-serving Obama story.  The Martin tragedy has been transformed into a tool for the racially insecure and racially conflicted Barack Obama to remind us how very black he is.

In his July 19^th White House briefing, Obama told us:

You know, when Trayvon Martin was first shot, I said that this could have been my son. Another way of saying that is Trayvon Martin could have been me 35 years ago.

There are very few African-American men in this country who haven’t had the experience of being followed when they were shopping in a department store. That includes me.

And there are very few African-American men who haven’t had the experience of walking across the street and hearing the locks click on the doors of cars. That happens to me, at least before I was a senator

At the same briefing he also said, “There are very few African-Americans who haven’t had the experience of getting on an elevator and a woman clutching her purse nervously and holding her breath until she had a chance to get off. That happens often.”  As you see, he did not include himself in that example so, you might think, that he did not personalize that example.  

Think again.  In his autobiography, Dreams from My Father, Barack Obama referred to a discussion he had had with his white grandmother’s after she had been harassed by a black vagrant at a bus stop.  In those days, everyone called Barack, Barry.

Her lips pursed with irritation.  ‘He was very aggressive, Barry.  Very aggressive.  I gave him a dollar and he kept asking. If the bus hadn’t come, I think he might have hit me over the head.

No.  The White House briefing was not about Martin.  It was about Barack.  With the African American community clamoring for justice—vengeance— and threatening “burn baby burn,” just as he has had to do all his life, the half-white Barack Obama needed to defend his half-black identity.  The President sought to prove that former Black Panther Bobby Rush, who had defeated him during the 2000 Illinois congressional primary, was wrong when Rush told The Chicago Reader, “He [Obama] went to Harvard and became an educated fool… Barack is a person who read about the civil rights protests and thinks he knows all about it.”   Not coincidentally, in March 2012, it was also Bobby Rush who caused a stir when he appeared on the floor of the U.S. House of Representative wearing a hooded sweatshirt to protest how the Trayvon Martin case was being handled by Florida police.

Preoccupied with his own troubled racial history, Barack refers to racial history four times in his speech, always to rationalize current black shortcomings and to project their blame onto whites:

I think it’s important to recognize that the African- American community is looking at this issue through a set of experiences and a history that -- that doesn’t go away.

We understand that some of the violence that takes place in poor black neighborhoods around the country is born out of a very violent past in this country, and that the poverty and dysfunction that we see in those communities can be traced to a very difficult history.

It’s not to make excuses for that fact, although black folks do interpret the reasons for that in a historical context.

The African-American community is also knowledgeable that there is a history of racial disparities in the application of our criminal laws, everything from the death penalty to enforcement of our drug laws. And that ends up having an impact in terms of how people interpret the case.

So, what does our Great Leader conclude from the Trayvon Martin tragedy?  Once more, I quote:

Now, the question for me at least, and I think, for a lot of folks is, where do we take this?

… work with law enforcement about training at the state and local levels in order to reduce the kind of mistrust in the system that sometimes currently exists.

… examine some state and local laws to see if it -- if they are designed in such a way that they may encourage the kinds of altercations and confrontations and tragedies that we saw in the Florida case, rather than defuse potential altercations.

… spend some time in thinking about how do we bolster and reinforce our African-American boys? And this is something that Michelle and I talk a lot about. There are a lot of kids out there who need help who are getting a lot of negative reinforcement. And is there more that we can do to give them the sense that their country cares about them and values them and is willing to invest in them?

… do some soul-searching. You know, there have been talk about should we convene a conversation on race.

… have confidence that kids these days I think have more sense than we did back then, and certainly more than our parents did or our grandparents did…

What else would you expect from His Eminence?  Blame police, take over state and local laws, give more to African America boys (no mention of providing for black girls or children of other races), talk more about race—a truly novel and most neglected suggestion—and believe that kids these days have “more sense” than their racially perverse parents and grandparents.   Funny, I don’t remember the gun battles and slaughter in the streets of the black community during America’s racist past.

If, as is likely, Obama’s White House briefing accomplishes nothing substantial to improve the lives of inner-city black boys, it still will have served its primary purposes: to throw the black community a race-oriented bone and to enhance Barack’s black identity cred.  Our President said not word one about the abysmal state of the black urban family.  He should read yourblackworld.net that explains:

In 1950, 17 percent of African-American children lived in a home with their mother but not their father. By 2010 that had increased to 50 percent. In 1965, only eight percent of childbirths in the Black community occurred out-of-wedlock. In 2010 that figure was 41 percent; and today, the out-of-wedlock childbirth in the Black community sits at an astonishing 72 percent. The number of African-American women married and living with their spouse was recorded as 53 percent in 1950. By 2010, it had dropped to 25 percent.