Political Forum - United States

To tax Marijuana or not???

since1981 — Sun, 05 Sep 2010 15:29:09 GMT

To start off a new topic, I'd like to hear some opinions on this. Should we tax marijuana in the U.S. and take power away from the drug cartels? Or should we continue to fight against it? What do you think?

What in the World!?!?

alizabeth — Tue, 31 Aug 2010 17:50:36 GMT

On August 9th, Defense Secretary Robert Gates publically announced that they insourcing directive was not saving the government money. Even though Gates said this, other agencies have continued to insource. With as much as the government and Congress are complaining about the ammount of money they are spending and how they don't have money to spare, how is it possible for them to continue spending more money by insourcing? Better yet, how is it logical to spend money that you clearly DON'T have?!

Why do Mexicans multiply so fast?

usa_students123 — Tue, 31 Aug 2010 16:52:18 GMT

We white Americans are reducing in number in the same time as Mexico trippled its population in the past 30 years. Does anyone know a sudy why this is?

I could ask the same question about white Europeans vs. the muslim immigrants there. Why?

Please give a few ideas.

Dual identity and the need for an american Anglo-Saxon identity

lokki — Tue, 31 Aug 2010 14:27:42 GMT

Originally there was a single identity for Americans, that of the English (anglo-saxon ) settlers, here I include to simplify matters the Welsh( part of England since the middle ages the Tudors the real makers of Enland were Welsh), the Lowland Scots (nortern Northumbrians), Ulstermen and Highland Scots (honorary) and those Irish who feel they belong.
In the late 19th century with the rise of Big Business and their subsequent control of the media, a source of cheap labour was exploited by the granting of American citizenship to non English East/Southern European immigrants.
This was bitterly opposed by the original Americans cumultating in the Quota system protecting the Anglo-Saxon identity.
Since then three things have happend:
[1] After WWII (which we should not have been involved in) television has supplied a very powerful means of brainwashing and rewriting English American history and identity.
[2] The party of Big Business the Republicans destroyed the Quota system and what it stood for.
[3] The Anglo-Saxon birth rate due to moral decay has collapsed. Uncontrolled immigration (cheap labour) has taken place and a new phony National identity formed by Big Business media control has been imposed.
America is losing its identity and the term American its meaning.
The only way out is to establish our own separate ethnic identity independent of class (the term Redneck is a term of abuse) with a culture and dialect(s) divorced from that supplied by the media.
The tag Anglo-Saxon should be used, as English(and Irish and Italian) are starting to lose their meanings as EU Big Business copies the American model.

.

Kemalist-stalinist Koc Attacks The Jew!

prof. mes solzhenitsy — Thu, 26 Aug 2010 10:09:38 GMT

religion of peace...yeah sure

Needed: Ebonics speakers

Flyflicker — Tue, 24 Aug 2010 16:49:11 GMT

For Hire: Fluent Ebonics Speakers for DEA Jobs

Quote:

It may be raising some eyebrows, but the Drug Enforcement Administration insists it needs to hire at least nine people fluent in Ebonics.

The DEA's Atlanta office has been looking for Ebonics "linguists" since at least May, when job vacancies were posted online.

According to one posting, the linguist's duties would include "monitoring varying numbers of communications intercepts during any given shift" and then providing "reliable and accurate transcriptions."

Language and culture are intertwined, as language is the means by which culture is shared. Are we really dealing with a new culture/language right here, home grown, in the US? It seems there is a good reason to think so.

What do you think?

Are Americans a nation?

Autolycus — Mon, 23 Aug 2010 21:56:19 GMT

According to wikipedia, "A nation is a group of people who share culture, ethnic origin and language, often possessing or seeking its own independent government."
Do Americans share common culture? I think so, they have certainly some common traditions. On the other side, there is tremendous diversity between various groups in different parts of the US. It is said that there is strength in diversity and how great is the american melting pot, and I am surprised when i hear about all the racial tensions and problems connected to your cohabitation, i. e. black ghettos and crime.
So how can you call yourself a nation without common ethnic origin? American whites have been relatively homogenous group, in which every new immigrant could could comfortably integrate. In that sense, Americans existed thgoughout 18th, 19th and a part of 20th century. According to some estimates, whites will be minority by 2050, and what then?
Now there are "African Americans", "European Americans" etc., that in itself denies the very idea of american nation.
USA in fact dont even have any oficial language, (!), and with growing immigration from Mexico it can simply happen that Spanish will become dominant language in a hundred of years. You can object that Switzerland has 4 official languages, but thats different case. They share common identity, they have close ethnic ties. In your definition of citizenship, you admit anyone who was born in USA american citizenship - when someone decides to give birth here, the child is US citizen, be it Papuan or Indian - it doesnt matter. That is really malign implementation of ius soli.
I dont understand what do US marines in Iraq and Afganistan die for. Is it just for a flag with stars and stripes or for the idea of a nation that died long time ago?

The Ground Zero mosque is part of the worldwide jihad

Frogger — Mon, 23 Aug 2010 15:18:01 GMT

The planned mosque at Ground Zero is not as benign as its proponents would have people think. It is part of the long term planned take over of the United States as a piece in the eventual worldwide domination of Islam.

Racists, Xenophobes and bigots. Those are just a few terms used to describe the opponents of the Islamic center planned near Ground Zero. These characterizations could possibly be avoided, however, by more fact-based protest.

To date, defenders of the center seemed undeterred, despite all that is know about the project front man. Look just a bit deeper.

Among the golden nuggets of evidence produced during the trial of the United States vs. The Holy Land Foundation et al is a document that should end any ambiguity concerning the true intent of Feisal ABDUL-RAUF in his quest to construct an Islamic center at Park Place. In fact, it should be cause to reexamine all Islamic centers and mosques that fall within a certain criteria. Cataloged as �Exhibit 003-0085� by the U.S. federal government , a document translated from Arabic to English titled An Explanatory Memorandum, On the General Strategic Goal for the Group In North America details the objectives of the Muslim Brotherhood in America.

Feisal ABDUL RAUF is indeed an adherent and promoter of the Muslim Brotherhood�s goals and objectives. Any doubt to his Muslim Brotherhood connections are addressed by the excellent and timely report by Alyssa A. Lappen, which is required reading for factual insight into ABDUL RAUF�s link to the Muslim brotherhood.

Clearly, according to this document, the objective of the Muslim Brotherhood is to convert the U.S. into an Islamic nation through sabotage and subterfuge. It is a handbook to achieve that end. The author painstakingly describes the process of �settlement,� among others, and further described its meaning and the methods to be employed:

The process of settlement is a �Civilization-Jihadist Process� with all the word means. The Ikhwan* must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and �sabotaging� its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God�s religion is made victorious over all other religions. [Emphasis added].

The succinct analysis by Ms. Lappen of point 17 of the document clearly illustrates that �building Islamic centers equals building military �battalions,� points from which to later stage the planned destruction of the West.�
And what better place inside our front lines is there but within the perimeter of destruction at Ground Zero?

* Ikhwan (Arabic for brothers) was the Islamic religious militia which formed the main military force of the Arabian ruler Ibn Saud.
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/26849

I want a NEW PRESIDENT NOW! ()()()()

Political_BS — Sun, 22 Aug 2010 18:04:19 GMT

I want a NEW PRESIDENT NOW! One that has BALLS and does not use a teller prompter. SOMEONE like GEROGE WASHINGTON PLEASE.

Obama's Jihad

Frogger — Sun, 22 Aug 2010 17:13:45 GMT

The following article goes pretty far in explaining why so many Americans now believe Obama is a Muslim and prays to Allah. It speaks to his actions more than his words.

A new Time poll finds that one quarter of Americans believe Barack Obama is a Muslim. What�s most interesting about that fraction is that more Americans now believe Obama is a Muslim than believed it when he was running for President two years ago.

As Americans have gotten to know their President better, more have apparently come to believe he prays to Allah.

Big media predictably is interpreting the poll as exposing Americans� ignorance and xenophobia. But it is actually the best evidence yet that, whatever his faith, the first new President since 9/11 has exposed himself as the Islamophile-in-Chief.

Obama�s Islamophilia has manifested itself in ways big and small�in his unflinching antagonism toward Israel and his bowing to Muslim autocrats; in his 2007 comment that the Muslim call to prayer is �one of the prettiest sounds on earth,� in his hosting of a Ramadan dinner at the White House while cancelling National Day of Prayer events at the White House.

But it is perhaps most evident in what has become clear about Obama�s view of religious freedom: that God rarely has a place in the public square unless that god is called Allah.
Obama�s initial remarks about the Ground Zero mosque were illustrative. In defending the Cordoba Initiative�s right to build the mosque, the President said, �This is America, and our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakeable. The principle that people of all faiths are welcome in this country � is essential to who we are.�

Under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, freedom of religion is defined as the freedom of an individual or community, in public or private, to manifest religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

But Obama is very selective in his concern for religious liberty.

Under Obama�s definition of religious freedom, we have not just the right but the duty to erect a mosque mere blocks from the site of the greatest attack on America at the hands of radical Islamists.

And bureaucratic red tape seems to melt away as the mosque moves forward to construction. Meanwhile, the Greek Orthodox Church has continually met bureaucratic roadblocks in its attempts to rebuild a quiet church destroyed when the towers fell on 9/11 just steps from Ground Zero.

Under Obama�s definition of religious freedom, the obvious link between Islam and terrorism can never be acknowledged. Instead, his Department of Homeland Security has told law enforcement officials to be alert for terrorist acts by Christian Identity Groups.
Obama�s left has long been at war with public displays of Christianity. Most textbooks in our government-run schools downplay Christianity�s profound contributions to the West, while white-washing Islam�s troubling history.

The left�s judges ban prayer in schools and strip the Ten Commandments from public buildings. This week a federal appeals court ruled against a cross memorial erected along a highway in Utah to honor fallen state highway patrol troopers. The court ruled that the display was unconstitutional, even though it was paid for with private money and erected with the permission of the fallen troopers� families.

The left has no room for religious freedom or free speech rights when they collide with the so-called right to abortion. That�s why under �bubble zone� laws, pro-lifers who pray on public property at abortion centers risk arrest if they get within yards of someone walking to get an abortion. And it�s why Obama has refused to further protect the conscience rights of Christian doctors who wish not to perform abortions.

When same-sex marriage became legal in the District of Columbia in March, Catholic Charities, which contracts with the D.C. government to provide social services to the city�s poor residents, had to terminate health coverage for employees� spouses. That�s because the liberals in the D.C. government forced the church to choose between its core values and offering benefits to same-sex couples.

Obama calls America�s commitment to religious freedom �unshakable.� But under Obama, America has shown a conspicuous lack of concern for religious liberty abroad.
It took Obama 17 months to nominate an ambassador at large for international religious freedom. In April, the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) criticized Obama for softening his stand on protecting religious freedom.

As Thomas Farr, a former director of the State Department�s office of international religious freedom under Presidents Clinton and George W. Bush, wrote in June, �The Obama Administration seems to have decided that other policy initiatives�outreach to Muslim governments, obtaining China�s cooperation, advancing gay rights�would be compromised by vigorous advocacy for religious freedom. In fact, such a decision would harm the victims of religious persecution.�

We know where most of those victims reside. The USCIRF report showed that 10 of the 13 countries designated as �Countries of Particular Concern� are Muslim nations. They are exactly the countries with which Obama has been attempting to forge relationships based on �mutual respect.�

But only Obama could offer mutual respect to countries that refuse to respect even the most basic religious freedom rights of their non-Muslim citizens. No wonder, according to the Time poll, the share of Americans who believe Obama is a Christian has plunged to less than half. Even among blacks, the percentage that believes Obama prays to Jesus has dropped from 56% to 43% in just the last year.

Obama has even changed the language he uses when speaking to Muslims about religious liberty. Instead of invoking the �religious freedom� to which Obama appeals in defending the Ground Zero mosque, he now calls on others nations to protect �freedom of worship.� The latter term is narrower than the former and fails to capture the right to publicly live out one�s faith.

To most Americans, radical Islamists are the enemy. But to the American President, orthodox Christians are a greater nemesis because they present a larger threat to the advancement of his agenda.

That�s why Obama�s embrace of all things Islamic has been matched by his political jihad against the religious freedom of Christians.

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=38648

Islamic Center and Ground Zero...

ArabLeague — Fri, 20 Aug 2010 20:11:05 GMT

where do you stand! and why... now that 9 years have passed, a nearby Islamic Center is to be established less than 200m away from Ground Zero, majority of Americans refuse its establishment, while the rest supports it, since it stands for the US's most important value which is Freedom... what do you think...

Where do you disagree with your chosen party?

Mushroom — Thu, 19 Aug 2010 14:38:48 GMT

I am curious, and have posted this before in different areas. So I thought I would ask some of the members here.

What key issues to you disagree with your party? Are you a Democrat that opposes Abortion? Are you a Republican that believes in Government run health care? Are there any issues where you run against the mainstream of your party?

This is not to debate the individual issues, just to kind of guage how many are inclined to be kneejerk with those they normally follow.

The fight to end pet ownership continues

Dark Lion — Tue, 17 Aug 2010 05:49:03 GMT

In a move that will elate all animal and pet haters and their bedfellow allies like PETA and the ALF, San Francisco considered passing a ban on all pet sales in the city's boarders. The only pet adoptions allowed would be through shelters. Of course with the onset of age and euthanasia those populations won't last long. This is only one onerous step away from a total ban on all pet ownership period. And what happens on the left coast usually and quickly spreds eastward. Especially if that movement is "progressive" in nature like this one.

Quote:

Sell a guinea pig, go to jail.

That's the law under consideration by San Francisco's Commission of Animal Control and Welfare. If the commission approves the ordinance at its meeting tonight, San Francisco could soon have what is believed to be the country's first ban on the sale of all pets except fish.

That includes dogs, cats, hamsters, mice, rats, chinchillas, guinea pigs, birds, snakes, lizards and nearly every other critter, or, as the commission calls them, companion animals.

"People buy small animals all the time as an impulse buy, don't know what they're getting into, and the animals end up at the shelter and often are euthanized," said commission Chairwoman Sally Stephens. "That's what we'd like to stop."

http://articles.sfgate.com/2010-07-0...store-hamsters

The current form of this bill failed, but the fight to end your right to own a pet is under way. If you enjoy the company of your pets, I strongly urge you to contact your elected officials and defend your rights by condemning this disaster from ever coming to fruition. Don't wait until such a ban is on the table, protest this stuff before pet haters and PETA try to usurp the rights of animal owners near you.

American Revolution Part 2

cloakedaxiom — Mon, 16 Aug 2010 21:43:25 GMT

The word revolution is one that is thought by most, a word that represents gunfire, bloodshed, destruction and death. This is furthest from the truth. The word Revolution means, by definition, �an overthrow or repudiation and the thorough replacement of an established government or political system by the people governed� (dictionary.com). In simple terms, action taken by a majority to correct a situation that has turned in their favor.

There are always two sides to everything, in America we are one side as the government is the other. We as Americans do not want bloodshed to spill out across our lands, nor do we want to flood the streets with death of our own. We can control our actions on one side of the conflict and hope the other side has the same mind set. Would there be bloodshed if we were to go into a conflict�? Reality tells me yes, but it doesn�t have to be that way.

The choice we make to Revolt is not the crucial point, how we revolt is. If we were to form mobs and storm a government office, we invite conflict. Conflict is what will bring the bloodshed we do not desire. That is why we have to stand united and fight this with the tools we posses. Our tools are, freedom of speech, right to assemble, and most important the right to petition. The petition is the most important of all; this is how we control our elected officials. Freedom of speech is how we will spread the word to others. The right to assemble means on a united front, not a mob to become the controlling majority.

The controlling majority must be the people of your city, which can stand united for a common goal. The common goal for all should be parallel to and without dispute, the constitution of the United States of America. For the majority to rule and control the elected officials, we must keep an overwhelming watch on the elected officials. Almost to a point that we become a nuisance; to where the officials must think twice before deciding on anything for the city and its people.

If this can be accomplished, we will have a peaceful Revolution without bloodshed. It is ultimately up to us how we prevail as victors.-cloakedaxiom

One of the first of the campaign ad for the midterm elections

Frogger — Mon, 16 Aug 2010 20:19:24 GMT

Here is one of the first of what will probably be a spate of campaign ads as the 2010 mid-term elections get closer and closer.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=662R2awSwPQ

Fox News Whistle Blower video

Flyflicker — Sun, 15 Aug 2010 16:06:25 GMT

I got this video in a passed around email. How accurate it is, I'm not sure. I posted it here to see what comments it might get, and whether anyone has any knowledge about the matter.

YouTube- FOX News Whistle blowers. UNBELIEVABLE!!!

Democrat or Republican?

cloakedaxiom — Sat, 14 Aug 2010 23:46:34 GMT

Who cares!! It is time we started to look at the politicians as to where they stand with the constitution. Hell, you can have a democrat and a republican with the same views the only difference is the party. I feel Americans are too busy (to be polite) to research their candidates, so they go with their party.

10 Reaons Obama is a poor president

Frogger — Sat, 14 Aug 2010 14:42:23 GMT

1. The Obama presidency is out of touch with the American people

The president, his administration and his wife are elitists who send the wrong messages to the American people, especially during a time of economic hardship.

Instead of being seen as leading from Washington the president is seen playing golf and basketball. The first lady takes an expensive trip to Spain, mainly at taxpayer expense at a time when many Americans are struggling to place food on their tables and pay their mortgages.

2. Most Americans don�t have confidence in the president�s leadership

Obama is seen as incompetent to make the right decisions for the country. Almost 60% of the nation lacks trust in the president's decisions making. Thid view of the president as incompetent is not confined to those on the right but is also felt by independents and those on the left.

3. Obama fails to inspire

Obama can not give a speech or an inspiring message. All he seems capable of doing is reading, in a flat, overly professorial monotone, from a teleprompter. When the teleprompter fails he is left hemming and hawing, and looking altogether incompetent.

4. The United States is drowning in debt

At a time when European countries are tightening their belts, Obama keeps spending and spending and spending. He is increasing the national debt at an unprecidented rate and if it were to continue at this rate it would rise to 185% of GCP by 2035.

5. Obama�s Big Government message is falling flat

Americans do not want a big government nanny state and that is what Obama id forcing on them. The government, under Obama is becoming more and more intrusive in the daily life of the average American. Obama believes in taking people's money in ther form of taxes and then deciding how it will be applied to their individual lives.

6. Obama�s support for socialised health care is a huge political mistake

The majority of the American public said they did not want the national health care bill passed but the Obama government pushed it through in a rather underhanded way, not allowing any real discussion on the bill and not even allowing people to know what was in it. It is now quite obvious that the bill will increase taxe, expand the power of the government over private lives and drastically change the health care system in a way the people do not want.

7. Obama�s handling of the Gulf oil spill has been weak-kneed and indecisive

Rather than actually doing anything to help correct the situation in the Gulf Obama sat in the White House casting blame of a foreign oil company. The government, in fact, thwarted many of the clean up efforts. Obama's handling of the Gulf Oil Spill was so poor that a majority of people in Louisiana give George Bush higher marks for his handling of Hurricane Katrina than they do the president's handling of the Gulf Oil Crisis.

8. US foreign policy is an embarrassing mess under the Obama administration

Obama has been particularly inept when it comes to foreign policy, cozening up to America's enemies and insulting her allies. It went from little things like returning a bust of Winston Churchill to Great Britain and giving the British a set of CDs of his speeches to supporting the Marxists in Honduras and caving in to the Russians on missile defense. He has failed to act agressively in Iran and refused to back our traditional ally, Great Britain in the Falklands crisis.

Obama has not had a single foreign policy success.

9. President Obama is muddled and confused on national security

The president refuses to acknowledge the fact that there is a war on terror and instead talks about an Overseas Contingency Operation. He has announce a pullout date for U.S. troops in Afghanistan, thererby allowing the enemy to simply wait us out and is going to pull the troops from Iraq even though that country is becoming increasinglyt violent and has actually said a premature pullout of troops could be disasterous.

10. Obama doesn�t believe in American greatness

Obama is the first president to downgrade the importance of his own country. He does little but apologize about his country to foreign nations. If the president doesn't believe in the specialness of his own country how can he lead it.

You can read the UK Telegraph article here:
key-reasons-why-the-obama-presidency-is-in-meltdown/ http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/ni...rack-obama-10-

Obama closes curtain on transparency by abolishing the position dedicated to it.

Frogger — Fri, 13 Aug 2010 20:01:47 GMT

Obama has found a novel way of insuring that his promise of complete transparency in government does not get in the way of him trying to push things through on the American public that they wouldn't want if they knew about them. He has closed down the office dedicated to insuring transparency in government.

President Obama has abolished the position in his White House dedicated to transparency and shunted those duties into the portfolio of a partisan ex-lobbyist who is openly antagonistic to the notion of disclosure by government and politicians.
Obama transferred "ethics czar" Norm Eisen to the Czech Republic to serve as U.S. ambassador. Some of Eisen's duties will be handed to Domestic Policy Council member Steven Croley, but most of them, it appears, will shift over to the already-full docket of White House Counsel Bob Bauer.
Bauer is renowned as a "lawyer's lawyer" and a legal expert. His resume, however, reads more "partisan advocate" than "good-government crusader." Bauer came to the White House from the law firm Perkins Coie, where he represented John Kerry in 2004 and Obama during his campaign.
Bauer has served as the top lawyer for the Democratic National Committee, which is the most prolific fundraising entity in the country. Then-Rep. Rahm Emanuel, D-Ill., the caricature of a cutthroat Chicago political fixer, hired Bauer to represent the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. In the White House, Bauer is tight with Emanuel, having defended Emanuel's offer of a job to Rep. Joe Sestak, D-Pa., whom Emanuel wanted out of the Senate race.
Another Bauer client was New Jersey Sen. Robert "Torch" Torricelli back in 2001. When one Torricelli donor admitted he had reimbursed employees for their contributions to the Torch -- thus circumventing contribution limits -- Bauer explained, "All candidates ask their supporters to help raise money from friends, family members and professional associates."
Bauer's own words -- gathered by the diligent folks at the Sunlight Foundation -- show disdain for openness and far greater belief in the good intentions of those in power than of those trying to check the powerful. In December 2006, when the Federal Election Commission proposed more precise disclosure requirements for parties, Bauer took aim at the practice of muckraking enabled by such disclosure.
On his blog, Bauer derided the notion "that politicians and parties are pictured as forever trying to get away with something," saying this was an idea for which "there is a market, its product cheaply manufactured and cheaply sold." In other words -- we keep too close an eye on our leaders.
In August 2006 Bauer blogged, "disclosure is a mostly unquestioned virtue deserving to be questioned." This is the man the White House has put in charge of making this the most open White House ever.
Most telling might have been Bauer's statements about proposed regulations of 527 organizations: "If it's not done with 527 activity as we have seen, it will be done in other ways," he told the Senate rules committee.
"There are other directions, to be sure, that people are actively considering as we speak. Without tipping my hand or those of others who are professionally creative, the money will find an outlet."
This perfectly captures the Obama White House's attitude toward disclosure. Sure, the administration publish the names of all White House visitors, but, as the New York Times reported a few weeks back, White House folks just meet their lobbyists at Caribou Coffee across the street. Sure, they restrict the work of ex-lobbyists in the administration, but lobbyists who de-list aren't questioned.
And we've seen just a few of the e-mails former Google lobbyist, now Obama tech policy guru, Andrew McLaughlin traded with current Google lobbyists using his Gmail account, but who knows what else the White House whiz kids are doing to avoid the Presidential Records Act -- Facebook messages? Twitter direct messages?
Did I mention Bauer was a lobbyist? At Perkins Coie, Bauer lobbied on behalf of America Votes Inc., a Democratic 527 funded by the likes of the AFL-CIO and ACORN.
The Sunlight Foundation is also concerned about the fact the White House no longer has anyone whose job is transparency, as Eisen's job was. John Wonderlich, at SunglightFoundation.com, lists a few transparency promises on which the president hasn't followed through, including earmark transparency, a single Web site (Ethics.gov) with all ethics and accountability information, and better lobbying disclosure, among others.
As with his other reformer rhetoric, Obama's transparency is mostly smoke and mirrors.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/op...100595914.html

The issue of race in American politics

Frogger — Fri, 13 Aug 2010 16:06:41 GMT

There is a thread in which posters are discussing Dr. Laura Schlesinger and a black female caller. The discussion is about race in the United States. Here is an article by a black, conservative American giving his views on the issue of race in the U.S.

Years ago, I visited the home of a fellow black friend. He talked about the "white people" on his job. It struck me that despite years of working with these people, company picnics and sharing birthday cakes in the office, my friend did not relate to his coworkers as Bob, Joe, or Jane. They were monolithically "white people."

I'm sure some whites relate to blacks the same way, as a monolithic group rather than individual fellow human beings. Without question, America has zero tolerance for "white racism," while "black racism" is given a pass.

Some whites even believe blacks should be racist. White liberal activist Janeane Garofalo says blacks who do not resent America are suffering from Stockholm Syndrome. A white neighbor was stunned when I told him I was not voting for Barack Obama. He said, "You're black. He is black. I don't get it. What is wrong with you?"

Black and white associates, family, and friends were highly offended that I would consider the character, principles, and associations of the person requesting to be elected leader of my beloved country. It was weird enough that I, a black, openly express love for America, but I actually expected the first African-American presidential candidate to go through the usual vetting process. Clearly, in their minds, Obama's skin color trumped everything.

Eighteen months later, America is suffering the consequences of white guilt and black resentment-inspired racism. Bottom line: Racism is wrong and evil regardless of who does it.

The Obama administration and their liberal mainstream media minions are despicably exploiting race to further Obama's progressive/socialist agenda. Any and all criticism of America's first black president is attacked as racist. Consequently, Americans are more polarized and divided along racial lines than ever.

I stopped in a fast food restaurant recently. About fifteen white seniors were seated, having lunch. A few were passionately expressing their displeasure with Obama's policies. When I, a black man, sat at a table nearby, the group looked uncomfortable, and their passionate discussion abruptly ended. They obviously did not notice my "Tea Party Express" t-shirt. I was tempted to say, "Don't stop because of me -- I agree with you!"

Similar scenarios are happening across America. Criticizing the black president brands you a racist. Folks, there is something seriously wrong in our country when citizens are fearful of criticizing our president. Remarkably unpresidential, Obama uses his surrogates in the liberal mainstream media to recklessly wield their bloodstained sword of racism accusations to slash and terrorize all who dare criticize his socialist agenda.

The stakes are far too high to continue allowing Obama and company to play the should-have-been-retired-years-ago race card to shut people up, trumping logic, reason, and common sense. America and the future of our children are at risk.

Our Founding Fathers and patriots before us, such as the brave young men at Normandy, confirm that freedom is worth fighting for -- and yes, even worth paying the ultimate sacrifice for. In light of what these patriots gave for America, the sting of being called a "racist" is nothing.

Our Tea Party movement is badgered by liberal blacks and the liberal mainstream media: "What are you doing to attract blacks?"

Well, what the heck does that mean? Should tea parties serve fried chicken to attract blacks (or cannoli to attract Italians)?

The Tea Party movement will attract kindred-spirit, right-thinking Americans of all races by touting and standing up for conservative values and principles. Similar to the famous line in the movie, "If we say it, they will come."

For America to move forward, it is crucial that we cease falling prey to the divisive tactic of "pandering to groups." Identity politics must end in America. Characterless politicians such as Obama have been skillfully pitting groups against each other, dividing and conquering us, for years: blacks vs. whites, rich vs. poor, legal vs. illegal, and achievers vs. non-achievers.

Why do you think liberal politicians created hyphenated Americans, and why are they so vehemently outraged whenever anyone dares to challenge the politically correct practice? Hyphenating is crucial to dividing Americans into various, monolithic, victimized voting blocks.

My signature opening line on stage at tea parties has sparked over-the-top, angry, vitriolic responses from liberals. Their insane rage and anger comes from hearing me say, Hello my fellow patriots. I am not an African-American. I am Lloyd Marcus, AMERICAN!"

Meanwhile, this same proclamation has won me love, respect, and admiration from millions.

Thirty years ago, I attended an AA meeting. I have been sober over thirty years. At that meeting, an elderly white woman told the group about her fears and insecurities, which contributed to her alcohol abuse. I was shocked that an elderly white woman and I shared similar feelings. This incident taught me that certain feelings go beyond race, age, and gender. It is called being human.

And yet, while claiming to desire unity, shameless politicians continue to divide us by playing the old and tattered race card. I cannot relate to a black, Hispanic, or whoever agenda. We are all human beings desiring the best for our families, loved ones, and country. Brothers and sisters, that is the true American agenda.

- Lloyd Marcus, Proud Unhyphenated American
http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/...bout_race.html

Ben Quayle rents a family for his run for Congress

Flyflicker — Wed, 11 Aug 2010 02:36:25 GMT

Ben Quayle criticized for family mailer

Quote:

Arizona Republican congressional candidate Ben Quayle recently sent out two mailers with pictures of him playing with two girls who appear to be his daughters.

Only problem: Quayle, 33, and his wife Tiffany have no children.
One of the mailers shows Quayle, the son of former Vice President Dan Quayle, holding one of the girls in his right arm while facing the other girl, who is sitting at a table.
Under Quayle's name is the slogan "A New Generation," along with a quote from Quayle: "My roots in Arizona run deep. My grandparents and great grandparents lived in this district. My parents and all of my siblings live in this district. Tiffany and I live in this district and are going to raise our family here."

And the "liberal" media hasn't jumped all over this Republican deceit? Why would that be?

How the U.S. destroyed the crime in Cuba.

General Winter — Wed, 11 Aug 2010 01:59:34 GMT

16 years ago, on Aug. 11, 1994, Castro, commenting on the requirement of the U.S. administration to allow exit from Cuba opponents of the communist regime, said that "those who do not like our customs and laws are allowed to leave the country without the right to return if the United States concent to organize their departure. "
By the end of August, more than 20,000 people left the island, after which the crime rate in Cuba dropped either at 87 (data from Cuban Ministry of Interior), or 76 (data from international organizations) per cent. In September 19, according to the U.S. State Department,the experiment was "suspended", and in October 22 was "frozen for a period of three - six months for technical reasons", and since has been never renewed !

If you were the dictator of the US: A philosophical exercise

cptnwinky — Tue, 10 Aug 2010 22:46:20 GMT

If you suddenly became the dictator of the US today and you were the sole law of this land, what would be your short and long term agenda?

Finally Atack on Iran

Johntherepublican — Mon, 09 Aug 2010 04:33:07 GMT

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/06...an-nuke-sites/

Finally we get to sigh a sign of relief as Iran prepares to invade Iran.
After a couple of years of Obama doping the ball on this even with Sara Pailin begging him do so It seams that now we may rely in Israel to do It for us........Way to Go!!!!!

Naysayers keep saying, "Naahhh".

carlitosway — Sun, 08 Aug 2010 04:28:50 GMT

Last week, president Obama went to a car manufacturer shop to check how well the billions of dollars given to the car corporations are finally "working" as they should do.

I think that president Obama is shouting "victory" to early, and that this president misunderstands business. He claimed that "naysayers" were wrong saying that the given of billions of taxpayers dollars to the car corporations to save their business was the worst investment ever made by the government, and that the evidence in his behalf is the thousands of workers hired recently in Detroit.

First of all, everybody knows that the problem with the American car corporations was never the production of cars but selling them.

Remember the Oldsmobile corporation, an American car company which produced very good quality cars, but ceased to exist because people just didn't buy them.

We saw president Obama claiming victory when none of those new cars -made with taxpayers money- have been sold yet. The money given to the car corporations made the government to be an "investor". In business, the investor put some money to work in order to make profit, and we still don't know if those new cars will be sold like crazy in order to justify such a huge investment.

As an advice, I can suggest that president Obama must work with other government agencies to incentive the selling of those new cars from Detroit. Maybe giving a double tax deduction -of taxes paid when you buy the new car- at the time to fill up the 1040, maybe by decreasing tags and titles charges for selected American made cars, maybe by enforcing the several government agencies to go back to the old school of buying American made cars only. People like savings, and if American cars enjoy lesser charges in the long ride, many people may find them more attractive.

The point is, that using the billions of dollars to put people to work in factories which may won't sell their products, has the same risk to invest in a "white elephant". The cars from Detroit must be sold in great quantities in order to justify such an investment. President Obama's speech was practically a deceiver message full of an empty pride. :coffeecup:

Another OBAMAnation!

shadyscott999 — Sun, 08 Aug 2010 01:00:52 GMT

Obama's father served in WWII!

He said so in a speech. Is he a compulsive liar? Were there no reporters who double- checked these statements and called the party on this? They did for everyone else, why not him?

Barack Hussein Obama, Sr. (Obama's father): Born 4/4/36. Died 11/24/82 at the age of 46. He was 5 years old when WW 2 started, and less than 9-1/2 years old when it ended.

Lolo Sotero (Obama's step-father): Born 1935, died 3/2/87 at the age of 52. He was 6 years old when WW II started, and 10 years old when it ended.

One of these guys must have been the youngest veteran in the war - and the media doesn't say anything.

YouTube- ‪Obama says his father served in...

Political Forum - United States

To tax Marijuana or not???

What in the World!?!?

Why do Mexicans multiply so fast?

Dual identity and the need for an american Anglo-Saxon identity

Kemalist-stalinist Koc Attacks The Jew!

Needed: Ebonics speakers

Are Americans a nation?

The Ground Zero mosque is part of the worldwide jihad

I want a NEW PRESIDENT NOW! (*)(*)(*)(*)

Obama's Jihad

Islamic Center and Ground Zero...

Where do you disagree with your chosen party?

The fight to end pet ownership continues

American Revolution Part 2

One of the first of the campaign ad for the midterm elections

Fox News Whistle Blower video

Democrat or Republican?

10 Reaons Obama is a poor president

Obama closes curtain on transparency by abolishing the position dedicated to it.

The issue of race in American politics

Ben Quayle rents a family for his run for Congress

How the U.S. destroyed the crime in Cuba.

If you were the dictator of the US: A philosophical exercise

Finally Atack on Iran

Naysayers keep saying, "Naahhh".

Another OBAMAnation!

I want a NEW PRESIDENT NOW! ()()()()