Kill All The White Christian Conservatives

Historical lessons on where the Progressive/Marxist/Fascist Left  is taking America

The handwriting is on the proverbial wall in regards to what is coming at us – but most of you reading this will not believe it, or want to hear it.  Your liberal-leftist friends will laugh and declare this to be delusional.  Your other friends will think it ridiculous or impossible.

Yet history is screaming the warnings at us with an almost daily occurrence of parallels that make anyone who has properly read history realize something far worse than what happened last century is unfolding upon us.  An understanding that most willfully ignore – because they will not allow their minds to contemplate that such things are possible here, even though history teaches us they are playing out like a blueprint before you.

This is because in 6,000 years of recorded human history – human nature does not change.  Neither do the Principalities and Powers in High places that many in our “enlightened” society do not believe exist.

Henry Dampier.com has posted one of the most succinctly intelligent and historically urgent essays I have recently read regarding where this nation is headed.  It’s a hard read.  The writing is above your average sophistication, and I would assume he is doing so for reasons that I find familiar; proper English usage goes over the heads of most in our digital media culture today and the subject-matter is razor sharp, shredding sanguine notions that accompany Normalcy Bias.

Before you get started, I want to add to the prescient timing of Dampier’s essay – these headlines and news posts are all road signs leading to the destination Dampier illustrates with subtle aplomb:

Praise, from those of us excited to see any club of all-white all-men rendered extinct,

The end of white Christian America is nigh Common Core written for the purpose of ending “White Privilege” in the nation.

“Just being White is racist because your existential state of Living While White constitutes a form of racism in itself”.

Being Christian is automatically discriminatory, and therefore biblical Christianity must be banned.

Progressives respond to survey: “The only good Christian is a dead Christian.” ‘

Kill all the Whites’ was once unthinkable in places like Rhodesia and South Africa at one time not too long ago.  What happened to whites in those nations reveals that the current zeitgeist of vitriol in America towards Conservative Christians makes it clear that the Leftists are moving towards a similar goal .

The wholesale demonization of Christians and white Conservatives over the Restoring Religious Freedom Acts the past week is your canary in the mine.

Demonization programs always rapidly descend from boycotts, to empowering government seizures of wealth and property, followed by criminalizing existence and then, pograms of extermination. The goal is to eliminate the cited ‘problem’ to the planned utopia, and the Left is telling us daily whom they hate and whom must be considered a threat to the country.

This is how millions are wiped out in genocides, and the seeds being sown right now – are already germinating and will bloom sometime in the not-too-distant future.  ‘Kill Whitey’ will become just more than a slogan for ghetto blacks and race pimps.

It will become government policy.

Kill the Kulaks

Why have America’s leading organs of influence decided to demonize white, Christian men as the most uniquely evil group in the history of the world? Why is it necessary for students, especially of that ethnic group, to unpack their invisible knapsacks?

The answer is that these men are routinely targeted for politically-empowered looting, usually by their own wives, with the assistance of the state. This looting would not be morally palatable without a pervasive myth of uniquely white male evil. It would otherwise trip the moral alarms that might otherwise come up when dissolving a family for personal gain.

When the left says that they want to expropriate you (and later kill you) in increasingly less subtle terms, they are being entirely serious, and the dumbest mistake to make is to treat it as idle talk. They mean what they say. They will do what they say as soon as they have the political will and the numbers to execute it.

The growth in anti-white-male op-eds in influential magazines makes more sense when you look at the real lives of middle class men, which are often marked by either divorce or threatened divorce, which typically involves an enormous transfer of valuable assets from the man to his ex-wife. This expropriation would have been regarded as execrable even just 50 years ago, but with the assistance of a powerful guilt-myth, it goes down much easier.

The pre-existing myth can be used by lawyers and others to sway judges to the favor of their clients. If white men are assumed to be uniquely wicked, it becomes easier to weave their reported actions (whether true or false) into a legal case against that man, and then to use that case to deprive him of his children, assets, and honor.

The irony here is that men like Teddy Roosevelt, the founder of the Progressive party, were imperialistic white supremacists. However, this was within the framework of the ‘white man’s burden’ of uplifting the other races of the world. This part has stayed within the Progressive platform, and arguably the supremacy plank has stayed also, but in the form of creating a uniquely flagellating class, trained into self-loathing. The tragicomic part of this is that the successful uplift of African-Americans that TR brags about as a unique American success has been reversed by future more aggressively progressive policies.

The flagellating guilt complex is seen as furthering the international-uplift mission, but the Christian aspect has, in large part, been bumped off. The humility before God has become humility before the diversity instructor. The Fall from Eden has become the fall from a murky fall from racial grace. The space in life that would have been allocated towards the worship of God has instead been allocated to the hatred of the White race, although this co-exists simultaneously with a proclamation that race is a social construct that has no bearing on anything temporal.

Without Satan and the demons as scapegoats, White men and their pallor do a great job as stand-ins as the source of the world’s great historical and contemporary evils. The narratives catalog all the purportedly unique historical crimes of the White devil, and then close with some argument to seize the assets of that class, often combined with a demand for the denigration of that entire category of person.

It is not entirely useful to make the comparison to Nazis and their assignment of anti-Jewish math problems and the like in schools, because this program of retaliation is seen as a corrective for those sorts of things, in the same way that the Nuremberg trials were one-sided against the Axis, while ignoring the pervasive and open attacks on civilians by the Allies, in which civilian body counts were seen as success indicators.

It might be funny to bring up the Turks and how they got rid of the Armenians, but most people are unfamiliar with that, and in any case, unlike in the 16th and 17th century, ‘Turk’ is not a byword for ‘bad person’ — ‘White’ is. That is the cultural context in which the educated American classes are operating in. Reforming the image of the Kulak is not easy when every day, all the educated people learn that to hate the Kulak is to get in good with the authorities.

So, what is a Kulak to do? For one, you should take the language denigrating your ethnic group seriously, because calls for asset seizures are always presages to calls of physical liquidation. Once your liquid assets are seized, it is necessary to take your tough-to-move assets, and when you have nothing left to give, you are useful either as a slave or as a dead body.

If the moral trend can be reversed, by openly contradicting the story of [insert group here]’s perfidy, then good on you, but typically, once a state has begun the scapegoating process, it finds itself unable to back down from it — it has to see it to its logical conclusion. Physical resistance usually never occurs, because actors within states only begin these sorts of widespread demonization programs if there is unlikely to be any real physical resistance to it.

Similarly, whining slogans about ‘white genocide’ are meaningless when that sounds like a great idea to the people who want to expropriate you. The guilt-narrative is that White Christians are uniquely responsible for the post-1945 crime of genocide, and that retaliation is more than fair play. That chatter only works if they are actually amenable to that moral argument, and in fact, they think it would be a great thing, and have indeed cheered on such operations in countries like Rhodesia and South Africa.

Memorializing the Communist leader Mandela is practically mandatory in the US, just as veneration of various Communist revolutionaries was mandatory in the USSR.

No one cares — that, in fact, only enhances the support for the policy on the opposing side. In the same way that telling Turks that they are naughty for getting rid of the Armenians, the left just grins and laughs when you tell them that they are doing what they want to do, what they plan to do, what they are openly proud of talking about doing.

The cheeky proposal is to make like previously successful mass-exiles and to negotiate deportation between the state that wishes to get rid of the host population, and a state that could make use of it. The exile of the Huguenots from France to other Protestant countries throughout Europe is a good example of this sort of relatively peaceful ethno-religious cleansing. The more serious proposal is to break up the United States, due to incompatible moral visions of society among the differing members.

In this way, you could separate the states between those that believe Whites are demons whose sin requires punishment on this Earth, and those who believe that Whites are men to be judged by God and perhaps by other men when the time calls for it.

Much like Stalin rewarded journalists and minor authors with high prizes for authoring tracts against the Kulaks, our contemporary authorities award such prizes for demonizing our Kulaks. None of this will make much sense without a good understanding of the greatest, most terrible man of the 20th century, and this biography is a wonderful place to start.

Being able to credibly threaten this would be the only thing that could even begin to derail the de-Kulakization program in place. Once the authorities can no longer promise worthwhile prizes and status in return for mouthing words of hatred towards the White devil, the words will stop being spoken with nearly as much authentic fervor.

We should learn from history that negotiation with the terror is not possible — that is the road to the fate of men like the Girondists, moderates exterminated by the Jacobins. Taking the symbolic meaning of language seriously is important, because people must use strong symbols to arrange any project, either great or terrible.

When the left says that they want to expropriate you (and later kill you) in increasingly less subtle terms, they are being entirely serious, and the dumbest mistake to make is to treat it as idle talk. They mean what they say. They will do what they say as soon as they have the political will and the numbers to execute it. That could be a long time, but it might not be, either.

Also, to think that you can deflect the hatred towards some other subclass of Kulak is folly, because you’re next, even if that succeeds.

In the contemporary sense, just as historically, the way to avoid the de-Kulakization is to re-align yourself with the state and against the Kulaks. If you could credibly be mistaken for a Kulak, you instead loudly proclaim how much you hate Kulaks, and how willing you are to assist in their expropriation.

A defense can be mounted in a secure state, but it can’t be  mounted within a state that is entirely oriented against you. Finland withstood the Soviet invasion, but the states which were already in the Soviet orbit left the gates unlocked, and gladly accepted absorption. During the civil war in Spain, towns purged and counter-purged one another until the borders were clear — the secular Bolsheviks versus the Catholic Francoists.

Even then, people caught on the wrong side of the internal border were killed by their friends and neighbors, often with crude farm tools in barbaric rituals.

This even of course has occurred in recent times under American supervision — similar mass-killing of civilians is going on as I write this in Ukraine and New Russia. Ethnic cleansing famously occurred under hapless US supervision in Iraq, amassing an enormous body count. The American press is uniform in either glossing over these murders of civilians or in lauding them as necessary.

It is not so much of a jump to say that the same governing class that did not bat an eye in those wars would not bat an eye to do the same domestically, at least following a crisis of significant magnitude.

It’s not wise to trust in moderate political parties to brake the success of the neo-Jacobin left, because moderate parties are the first ones to go in crisis, under pressure from both sides.

Of course, none of this will make any sense if you are totally unfamiliar with the history of the left, especially in the 20th century. The rhetoric will seem benign because the symbols that they use for certain things are going to appear benign, rather than containing murderous intent. The normalcy that you have experienced for most of your life will be what you expect to experience for the foreseeable future, because you don’t have the records of others stored in your head, warning of such things.

In the same way, when people talk about ‘socialized medicine,’ you are going to have an entirely different emotional reaction to it if you know that Soviet doctors dumped dying patients out in front of hospitals to make their statistics look better than if you are wholly ignorant of that anecdote.

This is why it is often so difficult to make what should be an alarming historical parallel argument with regards to the bloody history of the left — contemporary people have been trained into fearing the ‘Brown scare,’ but not the far more dangerous ‘Red scare.’ They feel calm when they should feel alarm. They dismiss language that they should take seriously until precisely the moment before language commands action.

Netanyahu Wins And Immediately The Obama Praetorian Media Declares It…. You Guessed It…RACIST.

Obama’s shock troops sent into Israel to unseat Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu fails miserably.  Obama media in this country declares Bibi Racist.

Nevermind that the Arabs lob rockets into cafes and strap bombs on their children to kill Israelis and vow to wipe the state of Israel off the map, the American media with absolutely NO understanding of how Israeli parliamentary politics works, are going berserk over the upset win of Bibi Netanyahu over Obama’s dog-in-the-race-radical Leftist Isaac Herzog.

They believed the big lie the media preached about Netanyahu’s inevitable loss to Obama’s man, and when reality slapped them upside the head this afternoon when the results of the Likud Party’s win – they were completely stunned into the typical angry rage that comes when Leftists are defeated by the people they want subjugated and ruled.

Therefore the old standby cry-wolf screech of “Racist”! and ‘Racism!” is being vomited forth after the talking points memo was no doubt sent out from Obama’s White House to his Praetorian media guards.  Like trained parrots, every media news broadcast in the last few hours has repeated this mantra of racism as the Leftists go absolutely batshiite crazy since Obama’s chosen lapdog lost to Netanyahu, who has proven to be clearly the only leader of the free world.

Netanyahu Engaged In “Racist Fear-Mongering” To Win Israeli Election…

Today, the prime minister engaged in racist fear-mongering to boost right-wing turnout, claiming that his government was “in danger” because “Arab voters [Palestinian citizens of Israel, who form approximately 20 percent of Israel’s citizenry] are coming out in droves to the polls.” Netanyahu’s alarmism over Palestinian citizens of Israel exercising their right to vote reflects an increasingly anti-democratic sentiment within Israel’s body politic.

As usual, the Obama media have no idea what they are talking about considering the Arabs in Israel have their own party coalitions and attempting to frame the narrative as if the Israeli election were an American election simply serves the narrative the media will attempt to brainwash Americans into believing.

So today the Obama narrative to his Praetorian media is to push the “Hands up! Don’t vote!” myth to describe why the leader of the free world won the election in Israel.

CNN’s Christiane Amanpour Attacks Netanyahu, ‘Right-Wing’ for Being ‘Racist’ Toward Arabs

Appearing on CNN’s The Lead on Tuesday afternoon, chief international correspondent Christiane Amanpour slammed Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, his Likud Party and “right-wing” allies for having “a sort-of racist police towards” Arabs that has been “very scary for them” as the world awaited results from the national elections in Israel.

…Continuing to build that victim narrative, Amanpour defended Arabs and declined to refute their straw-man argument about Netanyahu:

We are citizens of this country. Let’s not forget, it’s not like a bunch of Arabs from neighboring next door are being bused in to the elections. Israeli Arabs, citizens of the country, 1.7 million of them, as this parliamentarian told me, have been incredibly motivated in this election and they want to get out and try to better their lives, but they’re very conscious, as one of them – as this one told me, that they feel that the Likud Party and the right wing do have a sort-of racist policy towards them and it’s very scary for them.

While Amanpour was mounting a full defense of Arab-Israelis, she failed to cite the fact that the Arab parties that combined to form a joint list for the election include members who have some radical and arguably anti-Semitic policies themselves.

The remainder of the segment revolved around Amanpour running point for Netanyahu’s main rival, Isaac Herzog, for focusing not on foreign policy or the negotiations taking place in Switzerland over Iran’s nuclear program but the economy and blasting Netanyahu for refusing to move the needle on peace talks with the Palestinians to create a two-state solution.

 

CNN Host calls Netanyahu’s Arab-bussing comment DISTURBING, suggests it was RACIST

Netanyahu said today that the right-wing was in danger because the leftists in Israel were bussing in Arab voters in droves. CNN host Erin Burnett said this comment was pretty disturbing, comparing it to an American politician saying that about black voters, and asked Huckabee if it was a racist thing to say.

And of course do not leave out the Leftist Bird Cage Liner Of Record, the New York Slimes:

NY Times:[Netanyahu] railed against Israeli Arabs — because they had gone out to vote.

In many ways it is great fun to watch Obama’s SS go this nuts over a defeat of Obama’s chosen man and the repudiation of Obama’s attempts to interfere with an Israeli election in order to continue to aid and comfort Jihadists worldwide.  So Obama’s stormtroopers in media will do as they have been trained to do in order to brainwash the American public: any defiance of Obama’s will and desire, is racist!

Perfect keeping with the adage of telling the big lie,  and to repeat it often so it becomes accepted as the truth.

Pouring Gasoline On A Smoldering Race War: “More White Kids Must Die Before We Understand Racism”

MSNBC host makes on-air suggestion to murder white kids while black mobs attack whites in retribution for the George Zimmerman verdict.

The Race War Commeth, is inaccurate.  A Race War is here – even if many are not willing to call it that.  Black Marxists and Reverse Racists obviously WANT a war.  They consider themselves in a state of war.  They WANT white kids to die.  Justice is what THEY say it is – not what a jury or facts or the law says.   They want retribution and death be meted out because they did not get what they demanded of an orchestrated flash point by the Obama regime and his media.

The lawless mob screams to the cheerleading by the Obama regime and it’s goose-stepping Leftist stooges.  Damn the Constitution!  Damn the Second and Fifth Amendments!  They demand Justice for Trayvon!  That means the jury failed to vote the way the mob demanded.  Despite the kangaroo court proceedings, the judge failed to reject the verdict and tell the jury to go back and keep deliberating until they reached a guilty verdict.  So the mob demands the government charge Zimmerman with civil rights violations, and the Obama regime rewards it’s loyal brownshirts by helping to fan the flames of race war.

In the aftermath of the Zimmerman verdict, Eric Holder forms a posse and asks the public for ‘tips’ so they can persecute George Zimmerman AFTER his acquittal.  This is of course after it is discovered that Holder and Obama’s InJustice Department orchestrated and sent down instigators to drum up protests to push for bogus charges against Zimmerman last year in the first place.

Meanwhile the feral inner city mobs “march” and riot.  They scream “Justice for Trayvon!”   “Kill Whitey!” and then beat the crap out of any hapless white person that finds itself in their path.

Sound fantastic?  Sound ridiculous and conspiratorial?

If you think so, you are not paying attention to what Obama’s black ghetto army and his Poverty Pimp sycophants are saying and doing, and what it means to the illiterate gang-infested masses of whom Obama is messiah.

The fuse for a race war was set by Obama, Holder and their MarxoFascist stooges when they got involved in making this case national.  That was done for political reasons; to empower the Obama State with more dictatorial power to enact it’s agenda that they can not get passed lawfully.  Now that the verdict is in, the fuse is lit because the verdict is not what the mob demands – so Obama and Holder are on the dias, in soft tones of seeming conciliation, while tossing gasoline all around the sizzling fuse to the powder of chaos and upheaval.  They do this because it serves the purpose of their ‘transformational revolution’.

That agenda and purpose of this race-war was made today when our inalienable right to self-defense and state laws to protect that right, were blamed for the death of Martin by no less than the Attorney General of the United States!   He asserted today that we do not have a right to self defense, instead we have a DUTY TO RETREAT from black inner city thug gangstas beating the piss out of you.  That redefinition of our inalienable right to self defense, is horrifying when you consider how far that precedent will be used to eradicate resistance to tyranny under the color of law.

Eric Holder calls for a repeal of our natural right to self-defense by redefining that right to “a duty to retreat“:

“We must examine laws that take this further by eliminating the common sense and age-old requirement that people who feel threatened have a duty to retreat, outside their home, if they can do so safely,” Holder said. “By allowing — and perhaps encouraging — violent situations to escalate in public, such laws undermine public safety.” 

That gets to the crux of it – individuals who exercise self defense UNDERMINE public safety in the eyes of Obama’s MarxoFascist regime.  Everything must come from the god of the Obama’s State.  Even your defense.

While Holder blames our God-granted right to self-defense for the death of Trayvon Martin – Obama himself  focuses on getting his draconian gun control disarmament plan passed and the drones and brownshirts for the Left, are firing up the calls to take their temper-tantrum over not getting their way – to the levels of violence and bloodshed, while screaming racism and justifying criminality as an expression of their ‘rage’.

MSNBC Contributor: More White Kids Must Die Before We Understand Racism

In light of a jury finding George Zimmerman not guilty of murder or manslaughter over the weekend, the folks over at MSNBC are becoming even more unhinged than usual. Monday during a panel on NOW with Alex Wagner, MSNBC contributor, fill-in host and Georgetown Professor Michael Eric Dyson suggested America won’t understand racism until more white children are killed. ViaTwitchy:

So now we get more approximate to the truth of what race is in this country. As for Eric Holder, look: the reality is you gotta act now. The president, you won the second term. You’re in office. You are ensconced. Do something courageous, bold, and helpful. Not only to African American people but to America. Because unless we do this, white Americans and others will feel that this was a justifiable verdict, this is how things happen. Not until, and unless, the number of white kids die that approximate the numbers of black and other kids who die, will America see. It’s beyond logic. It’s about rationality. It’s about let’s get something done. I think the attorney general will look at this and I think it’s time for him to act.”

See, when they do not get their way – they demand the entire weight and resources of the Obama federal government be used to DESTROY a single individual or group that they hate, even calling for the deaths of white kids, in order to set into motion, a climate of fear.

Folks, this is what happened to the Jews in Germany some 70 years ago.  The Nazi leaders riled up their party faithful and Jews found themselves beaten with impunity until such ‘pogroms’ became institutionalized – and a lawful genocide resulted in what we call the Holocaust.  And these kinds of stories are similar to what history is screaming at us.

Police are investigating a beating in Baltimore where a witness says he heard “This is for Trayvon.” before a black mob attacked an hispanic man near Patterson Park.

IT WAS GRUESOME’: WAITER PUMMELED IN THE FACE WITH HAMMER-LIKE OBJECT WHILE PROTECTING BUSINESS DURING TRAYVON PROTEST

It’s not enough to go berserk against a race that you want to see punished with this cabal.  Some want to make it beyond a case of race, some what to make it a case of religion too.  They will even go so far as to decry God, declaring Him a racist and saying that it is Christians that are responsible for all the woe in the country.

And isn’t that what this entire thing boils down to?  It’s the hatred of the biblical and Conservative Right that these people really hate.  Their hatred burns bright enough to not only blame skin color, but the entirety of biblical faith as well.

Again, we saw this once before in Germany some 70 years ago.  But this loathsome creep is a PROFESSOR who teaches our kids this garbage.

God ‘a white racist god’ after Zimmerman verdict

In light of a Florida jury verdict finding George Zimmerman not guilty, a professor at an Ivy League university has now concluded that God is “a white racist god with a problem” who “is carrying a gun and stalking young black men.”

“God ain’t good all of the time. In fact, sometimes, God is not for us. As a black woman in an nation that has taken too many pains to remind me that I am not a white man, and am not capable of taking care of my reproductive rights, or my voting rights, I know that this American god ain’t my god. As a matter of fact, I think he’s a white racist god with a problem. More importantly, he is carrying a gun and stalking young black men.

“Whatever makes them protected, safe, and secure, is worth it at the expense of the black and brown people they fear,” she rages. “

Their god is the god that wants to erase race, make everyone act “properly” and respect, as the president said, “a nation of laws”; laws that they made to crush those they consider inferior.”

A fire is burning, and the race and poverty pimps are ready with gasoline to throw on the flames, waiting for their signal from the Obama regime and it’s stormtroopers on the Left to do what all Marxists desperately need in order to put down an iron fist to “restore order”.

Republicans Charge Eric Holder With Contempt Because He’s Black

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

On the day His Heinous has exerted Royal Privelege, er – ‘Executive Privelege’ to hide the documents Attorney General Eric Holder has refused to turn over to Rep. Daryl Issa’s Congressional Oversight committee’s subpoena, I am marveling at the Useful Idiots in Congress and the Media’s attempts to cover for Obama’s cover-up of White House sanctioned murder in order to infringe upon the Second Amendment of the Constitution.

To me, this asked-for Executive Privilege is admission that Obama himself was involved directly in the Gunwalker scandal.   If not, Obama has just involved himself personally, in order to provide cover and keep secret the documents that implicate and lead the Gunwalker scandal to the doors of the highest offices in the land, and the nefarious attempts by Holder to lie and deceive the Congressional Committee investigating the insidious plot.

It is not lost on those of us watching this scandal unfold that Eric Holder is a firewall to any justice being brought to bear on the Obama regime’s usurpations of power and treason committed since 2009, so Obama will indeed protect Holder no matter what.

Enforcing the law is now up against a criminal regime that says to the GOP and Issa; “How many Divisions does this Congressional Committee have at it’s disposal?”  Obama has tossed down a gauntlet to the GOP in Congress saying in essence: “Come get me if you dare”.  Given the spinelessness that exemplifies the GOP leadership of Boehner and McConnell, the split second the hint of the charge ‘racism’ is in the air, look for the GOP leadership to shut down Issa and order it’s party to ‘lighten up on Obama’ after a contempt vote is held.

The documents may show the Obama regime’s scheme and designs to walk guns to Mexican drug cartels in the hopes of killing Americans in order to change public opposition to Obama’s gun ban plans.  Eric Holder, the top ‘law enforcement officer in the country’ has perjured himself on multiple occasions during the 8 months of hearings the Obama media has buried from public view.

The Regime and the MarxoFascist Democrats have declared the hearings nothing more than “political theater”, and have gone on the offensive to decry these proceedings as ‘political’.  The lead up has been to charge the GOP with ‘coming down too hard’ on Eric Holder.  The narrative today by the drones for the Dictatorial Regime is that “Fast & Furious” was all BUSH’S FAULT.  They say it was a Bush operation and Obama’s regime knew nothing of it when they took office.   Of course, this is nothing but a contemptible lie, easily proven via video testimony from Holder himself.  But to an emoting populace, hating Bush is still a tactic the regime hopes is an effective deterrent in tossing muddy water on who is actually responsible for the deaths of Mexicans and Americans such as Border patrol officer Brian Terry.  Unlike Watergate, there are many dead people as a result of this ‘operation’, but the Regime and it’s sycophants will continue to insist this Constitutional crisis is merely a GOP political ploy that nearly everyone wants to pretend does not exist.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

However, if the heat of public scorn continues and is not deflected from the Regime, if Holder looks to suffer further actions after contempt charges, let me be one of the first to print that the Useful MarxoFascist idiots and their media apparatus WILL employ the race card. Obama himself may parrot such talking points and suggest race and politics is the issue being used to ‘attack’ his regime.   The skids are already being greased for this anyway by race pimps such as Al Sharpton who in the act of supporting the regime, are already claiming the only reason Holder is being targeted is because “he’s black”.   This will become the narrative if  “Blame Bush” does not fool the majority of people who get their news from Comedy Central and diminish the crisis in the public eye.

“Because he’s black” is the trump card to absolve the Regime from responsibility and culpability.  It’s the welfare victim mindset played out now to perfection after decades of excusing criminal behavior and aberrant culture rotting American society.  “Because they’re black” is how and why Eric Holder was allowed to get away with not following the law to prosecute the Black Panthers intimidating voters at the polls in 2008.  “Because he’s black” is how the criminality of this regime and it’s supporters in the Congressional Black Caucus is excused and ignored.

The race card works and gets the emoting black welfare populace of “Holder’s People” all ‘wee-weed up’.  It’s reliable political TNT to ensure silence and capitulation to the Left and their messiah, Obama.  It is already demonstrated that the GOP leadership are cowards and will run away from their duties of upholding their oaths and justice, holding their privates in fear.  Sharpton already lit the fuse for this coming narrative:

The Marxofascists figure that even in the face of proven criminality of this regime, the racism charge negates and abolishes justice and the rule of law.   Mob rule and injustice is part and parcel of Obama’s ‘Hope and Change’, taking a Representative Republic into a Marxist Tyranny.

UPDATE: The Congressional Committee has voted to hold the Attorney General in Contempt, the vote of course along party lines.

Many of the Democrats in the hearing using the occasion to bash gun rights and excuse Holder from his lies and obfuscation.  Rep. Connolly talked about Kangaroo courts and said we need more gun control and an assault rifle ban instead of a contempt vote while Rep. Speier said that gun walking still exists because anyone in American can buy guns “they do not need” like AK 47’s.

I guess to tyrants in positions of governmental power like Speier, getting such guns out of the hands of American citizens and putting such weapons into the hands of Mexican drug cartels for use ON Americans, is perfectly acceptable.

UPDATE II: The Obama Media Propagandists are so predictable.  Within 8 hours of this blog post, Chris Matthews – unhinged as he is decides to lead the establishment of this narrative that the contempt charge against Holder is based on racism:

MATTHEWS: I don’t want to start too much forest fire here, but it is my instinct: Is this ethnic, Mr. Mayor?

BROWN: I think it has some ethnic flavor to it. It will be interrupted by some in that vein.

MATTHEWS: Yes.

BROWN: And you have to be careful you don’t give the opportunity to make that case factually and what Darrell Issa is doing is — has given some individuals the opportunity to make that case and to compare it to a stop and frisk.

Whites Need Not Apply to Become Nurses or Docs in Obama’s Healthcare Plan

Underrepresented minorities to get preferences for grants, contracts and enrollment to become doctors, nurses or dentists.  Skin color will determine careers in Obama’s Marxist world.

While the legislation is clever enough not to actually state “No Whites” or  “Whitey Take A Hike” – we’re not stupid.  We know the intent in the Marxist Healthcare Bill that Obama is pushing like a crack dealer on America is clear: minorities get the jobs, the grants, the education in healthcare.  Merit, skill, aptitude and achievement are no longer the criteria in America; skin color is.  Class status is.

Color blind America?  Nope, not with the Marxist Democrats and Obama.  Al they see is color and class – and they are about the task of institutionalizing their brand of racism on America, a “revenge” for the sins of the patriarchs.

 “Change” America was stupid enough to vote for.

Racial Preferences in the Democrats’ Health Care Bill

By Allan J. Favish

All 1,018 pages of the Democrats’ health care bill can be inspected here. The bill includes racial preferences. Under the Democrats’ health care bill, if a medical school wants to increase its chances of receiving many different kinds of grants and contracts from the federal government, it should have a demonstrated record of training individuals who are from underrepresented minority groups. This is because the Democrats’ health care bill requires the Secretary of Health and Human Services to give preference to the entities that have demonstrated such a record in the awarding of these contracts to medical schools and other institutions.

The bill does not state what would qualify as a “demonstrated record”, so we can expect medical schools and the other entities to do whatever they think they can get away with to train as many “individuals who are from underrepresented minority groups” as they think they might need to have a better “demonstrated record” in this regard then other entities competing for the grants and contracts. The Democrats’ health care bill creates a very significant financial incentive for medical schools and other entities to lower admission standards for “individuals who are from underrepresented minority groups” if that is what it takes to have the winning “demonstrated record”.

On page 879-880, the bill states that the Secretary of Health and Human Services

“shall make grants to, or enter into contracts with, eligible entities . . . to operate a professional training program in the field of family medicine, general internal medicine, general pediatrics, or geriatrics, to provide financial assistance and traineeships and fellowships to those students, interns, residents or physicians who plan to work in or teach in the field of family medicine, general internal medicine, general pediatrics, or geriatrics.”

On page 881-882 the bill states:

“In awarding grants or contracts under this section, the Secretary shall give preference to entities that have a demonstrated record of the following: . . . Training individuals who are from underrepresented minority groups or disadvantaged backgrounds.”

On page 883 the bill states:

“The Secretary shall make grants to, or enter into contracts with, eligible entities . . . to operate or participate in an established primary care residency training program, which may include-(A) planning and developing curricula; (B) recruitment and training of residents; and (C) retention of faculty.”

On page 884-885 the bill states:

“In awarding grants and contracts . . . the Secretary shall give preference to entities that have a demonstrated record of training . . . individuals who are from underrepresented minority groups or disadvantaged backgrounds . . . .”

On page 887-889 the bill states that the

“Secretary shall make grants to, or enter into contracts with, eligible entities . . . to operate a professional training program for oral health professionals, to provide financial assistance and traineeships and fellowships to those professionals who plan to work in or teach general, pediatric, or public health dentistry, or dental hygiene, to establish, maintain, or improve academic administrative units (including departments, divisions, or other appropriate units) in the specialties of general, pediatric, or public health dentistry, to operate a loan repayment program for full-time faculty in a program of general, pediatric, or public health dentistry.”

On page 889-890 the bill states:

“In awarding grants or contracts under this section, the Secretary shall give preference to entities that have a demonstrated record of the following: . . . Training individuals who are from underrepresented minority groups or disadvantaged backgrounds.”

On page 908-909 the bill states: “The Secretary shall award grants and contracts to eligible entities” to do the same things for the field of public health as the Secretary can do for dentistry.

On page 909 the bill states:

“In awarding grants or contracts under this section, the Secretary shall give preference to entities that have a demonstrated record of the following: . . . Training individuals who are from underrepresented minority groups or disadvantaged backgrounds.”

Apart from the legality of such preferences under the U.S. Constitution and the 1964 Civil Rights Act, and the unfairness to those who are not “individuals who are from underrepresented minority groups”, the Democrats’ policy will foster the racial preference climate that continues to stigmatize and demean those individuals who receive the preferences. For example, if you know nothing else about two university students, except that one was probably admitted under a program where intellectual standards were reduced and the student received a preference for being the child of an alumnus, and the other was admitted under more rigorous intellectual standards without receiving any nonmerit-based preference, what are you going to think about these two students? Is the answer any different when the preference is based on race rather than an alumni relationship?

A nonmerit-based preference program based on an individual’s physical appearance or surname is no less a “badge of inferiority” than the one condemned in Brown v. Board of Education. Thanks to the Democrats’ racial preference program, all of the “individuals who are from underrepresented minority groups” at these medical schools and other entities, including those who deserved admission without the racial preference, will wear that badge.

Obama’s Message and Platform Influenced By Extremism

Some think he’s the equivalent of the Political Second Coming.

Some of us are beginning to wonder if he’s the equivalent of something else.

In the continuing fallout from the revelations about Obama’s choice in immersing himself and his family in the anti-American, racist and extremist views of his longtime mentor and Pastor; Rev. Jeremiah Wright, the question of how much of Wright’s views have shaped and influenced Barrack Hussein Obama’s views?

It appears, quite a bit.

From Barrack Hussein Obama’s book “The Audacity of Hope”, to his own campaign platform of “Hope” and ‘Change” – it is now obvious that Jeremiah Wright Jr. has been an inspiration and lightning rod for Obama’s ideas and campaign.

How could he not be after two decades of Sundays with the kind of anti-American Black Nationalist sermons that we are now watching and seeing? How can one, whom by CHOICE decides to convert from non-devout Islam, be baptised, be married and have your children baptised in a church for two decades – NOT be influenced by the messages and ideas preached from the pulpit? His pastor certainly endorses Obama in almost messianic terms:

“There is a man here who can take this country in a new direction,” Wright said during his Jan. 13 sermon.

During a Christmas sermon, Wright tried to compare Obama’s upbringing to Jesus at the hands of the Romans.

“Barack knows what it means living in a country and a culture that is controlled by rich white people,” Wright said.

Is it now any wonder why fellow Black nationalist Nation of Islam’s Louis Farrakhan shares similar sentiments about Barrack Hussein Obama and proclaimed him as the “savior” of America and the world?

No. The answer is simple, these men endorse Obama because Obama best represents their own views.

In typical political spin and skill, Obama says he does not agree with what his pastor has said, yet Obama saw fit to attend this man’s congregation and subject himself to these views for 20 years. There is no way possible, that someone who who had such a deep association with such a radical who is in fact Obama’s spiritual advisor, who preaches a hate-America Afro-centric gospel was not influenced by the message this 40 year career pastor has been preaching. An ideology Obama willingly allowed himself and family to sit through for years and become deeply involved in. The Blame White America First mindset explains Michelle Obama’s statement that she has never been proud of America until her husband began winning primaries. It explains Obama’s promise to yank America out of the War on Jihadists and sit down to tea with the Iranians and Syrians. After all, Obama believes that America should not think itself “superior” in interactions with other countries.

Obama’s Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago taught a doctrine of anti-Americanism and anti-White racism that squarely blamed America for 9-11.

“In the 21st century, white America got a wake-up call after 9/11/01. White America and the Western world came to realize that people of color had not gone away, faded into the woodwork or just “disappeared” as the Great White West kept on its merry way of ignoring Black concerns.”

As the Wall Street Journal notes today:

Hearing Mr. Wright’s venomous and paranoid denunciations of this country, the vast majority of Americans would walk out. Instead, Mr. Obama and his wife Michelle have presumably sat through numerous similar sermons by Mr. Wright.

Indeed, Mr. Obama has described Mr. Wright as his “sounding board” during the two decades he has known him. Mr. Obama has said he found religion through the minister in the 1980s. He joined the church in 1991 and walked down the aisle in a formal commitment of faith.

The title of Mr. Obama’s bestseller “The Audacity of Hope” comes from one of Wright’s sermons. Mr. Wright is one of the first people Mr. Obama thanked after his election to the Senate in 2004. Mr. Obama consulted Mr. Wright before deciding to run for president. He prayed privately with Mr. Wright before announcing his candidacy last year.

Mr. Obama obviously would not choose to belong to Mr. Wright’s church and seek his advice unless he agreed with at least some of his views. In light of Mr. Wright’s perspective, Michelle Obama’s comment that she feels proud of America for the first time in her adult life makes perfect sense.

Much as most of us would appreciate the symbolism of a black man ascending to the presidency, what we have in Barack Obama is a politician whose closeness to Mr. Wright underscores his radical record.

Obama’s press spokesman Bill Burton said, “Sen. Obama has said repeatedly that personal attacks such as this have no place in this campaign or our politics, whether they’re offered from a platform at a rally or the pulpit of a church. Sen. Obama does not think of the pastor of his church in political terms. Like a member of his family, there are things he says with which Sen. Obama deeply disagrees”.

Obama described the pastor as “an old uncle who sometimes will say things that I don’t agree with.”

Well, this begs the question: how much of the “social gospel” of this racist Anti-American pastor DOES Obama agree with? The litany of sermons and political ideas of Jeremiah Wright Jr. indicate a man who lives and breathes what he believes and preaches. Are we to assume Obama disagrees with all of Wright’s social gospel views and sermons yet attended willingly for two decades and named this man as his “spiritual advisor and mentor”??

I remember the absolute insanity that the Democrats went beserk in 2000 over when then-candidate Bush spoke at Bob Jones University, with the equivalency made that anyone who even spoke at the college as beholden to their views. Can we not apply that same sentiment to Obama’s fellowship with a known racist and anti-semetic congregation that he wilingly attended for two decades?

Besides, you aren’t going to call someone a “spiritual advisor” and “mentor” if you do not agree with their main ideology. Yet somehow, Obama expects us to.

A January 2007 Chicago Tribune article, Obama spoke of the pastor as a spiritual mentor and role model who helped keep his priorities straight and his moral compass calibrated.

“What I value most about Pastor Wright is not his day-to-day political advice,” Obama said. “He’s much more of a sounding board for me to make sure that I am speaking as truthfully about what I believe as possible and that I’m not losing myself in some of the hype and hoopla and stress that’s involved in national politics.”

In Obama’s book “Dreams from My Father,” he recounts that when he met Wright, the pastor warned that getting involved with Trinity might turn off other black clergy because of the church’s radical reputation.

The Tribune profile said that while Wright and Obama do not often talk one-on-one often, the senator checks with his pastor before making any bold political moves, including in 2006, when considering a run for the White House.

Wright cautioned Obama not to let politics change him, but he also encouraged him to dive in, win or lose.

So what ARE Obama’s true beliefs besides the nebulous idea of “change”?

Mona Charen asks the question and has the answer:

I am coming to believe that Barack Obama is one of the greatest con artists we’ve seen. His entire campaign has been about “coming together,” a post-racial consensus, etc. Any mention of his middle name was immediately condemned as ignorant fear-mongering. He has played the role of racial unifier with great skill and finesse.

But there is a great deal of evidence out there that he is anything but. The Reverend Wright is exhibit A. Mrs. Obama is Exhibit B. But there’s lots more. Here is a piece by John Batchelor about some of Obama’s other connections. For example:

William Ayers is the second Chicago figure to consider in the political profile of Mr. Obama. William C. Ayers, known as Bill Ayers, is notorious as a terrorist bomber from the 1970s who, on September 11, 2001, in the New York Times was quoted as finding “a certain eloquence in bombs.” Now, at 62, Mr. Ayers, a former aide to the current Mayor Richard M. Daley, is an established professor of education at the University of Illinois in Chicago. Importantly, Mr. Ayers and his wife, the equally notorious Weatherman terrorist Bernardine Dohrn, hosted a crucial meet-the-candidate event in their Hyde Park neighborhood home in 1995 when Mr. Obama, also a Hyde Park resident, was sounded out by vital citizens, among them the retiring state senator Alice Palmer for the 13th District.

Obama’s book is strewn with hints of his far left sympathies, as when he tells an African cousin who complains about the hardships of life in Kenya that things are no better in America. Or when he suggests that the lives of poor black young men in the inner city are blighted by white racism. He never says it explicitly, but it’s there.

He has been very friendly with Rashid Khaladi, the fierce anti-Israel professor who took Edward Said’s post at Columbia.

My own theory, FWIW, is that Obama acquired his far left views at least in part to make himself as authentically black as he could to compensate for having a white mother. His mother, of course, was very left herself. But looking the way he does, and having been raised among only white people (mother and maternal grandparents) he felt the need to better identify with his black heritage. That struggle is what the book is all about.

One can have sympathy for his psychological predicament . But that sympathy certainly does not extend to electing him president of a country that I sincerely believe he does not love.

I think Obama is entirely unqualified for the presidency. He was obviously attracted to the Black Power and racist diatribes coming from this Pastor Wright, and CHOSE to attend this church for the last 20 years. He even discussed his first meeting with Wright in his Memoirs, and the Wright he describes there is the same anti-American Wright we are now witnessing on Youtube and ABC News. This alone is enough evidence to indicate that this man has been steeped in hating everything this country stands for, which explains why Obama is so popular among the extremist far left.

How in the world could people come to the conclusion that a man indoctrinated into the world of hate Wright constructed for his church, could somehow “heal” America’s racist past? That he will “change” this country for the better? I’m sorry, a person doesn’t immerse himself into such a racist world as Wright’s without absorbing some, or all, of the hate and racism he preaches in that world.

We do well to be wary of the lamb-like speech coming from Obama, a man who has as his mentor and spiritual advisor, a pastor who speaks like a dragon.