Sissy Republicans Run for Cover over 'Barack the Magic Negro' Parody

The liberal are up to their usual kindergarten-level games.

It seems that last week a politically-correct scandal broke over Tennessee GOP leader and RNC chair candidate Chip Saltsman's distribution of a CD with a parody song.

The song, "Barack the Magic Negro," was created by Paul Shanklin and made famous on the Rush Limbaugh show in the past year.

But while liberals are predictably up-in-arms that any prominent conservative might further this hilarious song, the term "magic negro" in connection with Barack Obama was actually first used by liberal black columnist David Ehrenstein in his LA Times column March 19, 2007.

This is what Ehrenstein said about Barack the Magic Negro:

But it's clear that Obama also is running for an equally important unelected office, in the province of the popular imagination — the "Magic Negro."

The Magic Negro is a figure of postmodern folk culture, coined by snarky 20th century sociologists, to explain a cultural figure who emerged in the wake of Brown vs. Board of Education. "He has no past, he simply appears one day to help the white protagonist," reads the description on Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magical_Negro.

He's there to assuage white "guilt" (i.e., the minimal discomfort they feel) over the role of slavery and racial segregation in American history, while replacing stereotypes of a dangerous, highly sexualized black man with a benign figure for whom interracial sexual congress holds no interest.

Logically, if someone has a problem with the term "magic negro," that angst should be taken out on, right? But since when has the Left ever been encumbered by logic?

Here are the lyrics to "Barack the Magic Negro" and a video which features the song; note that the song parody's notorious race-bater Al Sharpton as the singer of the song:

Barack the Magic Negro lives in D.C.
The L.A. Times, they called him that
‘Cause he’s not authentic like me.
Yeah, the guy from the L.A. paper
Said he makes guilty whites feel good
They’ll vote for him, and not for me
‘Cause he’s not from the hood.

See, real black men, like Snoop Dog,
Or me, or Farrakhan
Have talked the talk, and walked the walk.
Not come in late and won!

Oh, Barack the Magic Negro, lives in D.C.
The L.A. Times, they called him that
‘Cause he’s black, but not authentically.
Oh, Barack the Magic Negro, lives in D.C.
The L.A. Times, they called him that
‘Cause he’s black, but not authentically.

Some say Barack’s “articulate”
And bright and new and “clean.”
The media sure loves this guy,
A white interloper’s dream!
But, when you vote for president,
Watch out, and don’t be fooled!
Don’t vote the Magic Negro in –
‘Cause —

’Cause I won’t have nothing after all these years of sacrifice
And I won’t get justice. This is about justice. This isn’t about me, it’s about justice.
It’s about buffet. I don’t have no buffet and there won’t be any church contributions,
And there’ll be no cash in the collection plate.
There ain’t gonna be no cash money, no walkin’ around money, no phoning money.
Now, Barack going to come in here and ........

If one was also interested in the truth of the background of this parody, one might recall that it was Vice-President-Elect Joe Biden who said of Obama that "You got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy."

But it isn't just liberals in the Democrat Party who are having a cat over this parody. Liberals and other sissies in the Republican Party are also running for cover.

If the GOP is this sissified over political correctness, it doesn't bode well for the GOP in the next four years. Sorry, Republicans; in case you missed, the the conservative base of the GOP has low tolerance for PC sissies.

Negro is a perfectly legitimate word to describe people with dark skin and of African descent, unlike the "n word" used to slur people with dark skin.

Is the United Negro College Fund a racist organization? Is the National Council of Negro Women a racist organization? Is the Universal Negro Improvement Association a racist institution? Is the National Association of Negro Musicians?

Or are these organizations merely identifying an ethnic focus?

The author of the column, David Ehrenstein, is himself a liberal. He is also black. But of course who gets the heat for a term he used first? Conservatives, of course. Being liberal, black, and a defender of homosexuality, Ehrenstein is, of course, immune from criticism. Consistency is unknown on the Left; the means to an end supersedes all.

Of course, when black conservatives like Michael Steele or Ken Blackwell call this faux controversy what it is ("hypersensitivity") they are derided as ignorant and considered to certainly meet the definition of an "Uncle Tom" in the playbook of the Left. (Incidentally, I had the honor of having dinner with Ken Blackwell and some other people a few months ago in D.C., and found him to be engaging and witty--not at all the dullard liberals seem to think he is.)

In fact, I think the contrast between the responses of Steele and Blackwell, and the timid response of others in the Republican leadership, separates the men from the boys. I am all-the-more justified in having called for a complete change of leadership in the Republican Party, and for having supported Ken Blackwell for RNC Chairman.

As all-too-usual, Republican leadership is cowering in fear at the prospect of being called names by liberals. Didn't their mama's give them the "sticks and stones" speech when they were little? Weren't they given the "cowboy up" talk at some point?

As usual, ignorance and infantile comprehension reign on the Left. They know they can't best conservatives on the legitimacy and merit of their ideas, so they are left with silly snits like this.

The awkward co-dependence of blacks, liberal Democrats

BY STAR PARKER
FOUNDER & PRESIDENT
COALITION ON URBAN RENEWAL & EDUCATION

What does Caroline Kennedy have in common with black America? If your answer is not much, I'd tend to agree with you.

When I think of Caroline, I think of Manhattan and Park Avenue, not the Bronx and Brooklyn. I think of Brentwood and Beverly Hills, not Watts and South Central Los Angeles.

But there is something that Caroline and black America do have in common: The Democratic Party.

Whether or not Kennedy succeeds to slide into Hillary Clinton's soon-to-be-vacated Senate seat will have little to do with her Democratic Party bona fides. Per her policy positions ticked off the other day, she is in perfect and predictable liberal alignment with party boilerplate. If she fails, it will be for reasons other than her views.

So what exactly is the common political ground that Kennedy blue bloods share with the 90 percent of America's blacks who vote for Democrats?

A careful look shows the deep internal contradictions of the Democratic Party and the complexity of the political psyche of black Americans.

Ironically, despite Democratic Party rhetoric about economic inequities and wealth and income gaps in America, those gaps are more pronounced inside the Democratic tent than in the Republican one.

According to exit polls from November's election, Barack Obama captured the vote of America's richest and America's poorest. Fifty-two percent of those with incomes over $200,000 voted for Sen. Obama, and more than 60 percent of those earning less than $30,000 did as well.

Our wealthiest senator, John Kerry, is a Democrat, as is our wealthiest House member, Jane Harman.

The nation's two wealthiest men, Bill Gates and Warren Buffett are both, by all indication, Democrats.

What political aspirations can black Americans, whose median income lags the nation's, share with these multimillionaires and billionaires?

There is little common ground regarding values.

Church attendance correlates reliably over time with party affiliation, and this remained true in this last election. Those who attend church frequently vote Republican. Those who don't vote Democratic – except blacks.

Blacks, in fact, have the highest church attendance in the country. Seventy-six percent of black Democrats attend church at least monthly. Sixty-seven percent of Republicans do and 50 percent of white Democrats do.

A recent Gallup poll shows blacks more aligned with Republicans than Democrats on social issues – moral acceptability of homosexuality, abortion and sexual promiscuity.

On energy and environmental issues, blacks poll more closely with conservatives than with liberals. It's because these are pocketbook issues. Working blacks have little interest in paying the higher taxes and bearing the higher costs that will result from chasing global warming windmills and displacing cheap hydrocarbon energy with exotic government subsidized alternatives. Lower energy costs also put blacks on the side of offshore drilling for oil and gas.

How about education? Wealthy liberals, despite having their own kids in private schools, oppose school choice. When blacks are given the opportunity to pull their child out of a failing public school and send him or her to a church school or another alternative they are grateful.

So where's the common ground? Income redistribution. A recent Zogby poll shows 80 percent of Democrats, 90 percent of liberals, and 76 percent of blacks support taxing the wealthy to give money to low-income Americans.

Despite everything else, blacks vote to stay on the liberal plantation. Pop psychologists would call the relationship between wealthy liberals and blacks co-dependence.

Republicans are wrong if they think they'll win blacks on social issues alone. They need to help blacks understand that limited government provides the economic mobility and opportunity they need and that the welfare, redistribution state does the opposite. They must help blacks gain self-confidence so that they can enjoy the benefits that can only come from freedom.

So far Republicans have failed to do this – which is another reason why they now sit on the outside looking in.

Star Parker is president of the Coalition on Urban Renewal & Education and author of the new book White Ghetto: How Middle Class America Reflects Inner City Decay.

Prior to her involvement in social activism, Star Parker was a single welfare mother in Los Angeles, California. After receiving Christ, Star returned to college, received a BS degree in marketing and launched an urban Christian magazine. The 1992 Los Angeles riots destroyed her business, yet served as a springboard for her focus on faith and market-based alternatives to empower the lives of the poor.

Wright, Ayers Crawl Out of their Hole

Now that the election has passed, I see that Barack Obama's racist anti-American pastor Jeremiah Wright and his anti-American terrorist associate Bill Ayers have crawled out of whatever hole they were kept in to keep them quiet.

In the Fox News story below, it is said that Wright claims the "media" tried to use him against Obama. What a joke!

Ayers is also engaging in some serious historical revision, making himself sound oh-so-innocent. His idols Lenin and Stalin would be proud!

The "mainstream" media tried to keep both of these nuts buried and quiet; they only reason word got out at all on Obama's radical, America-hating friends at all was because the new media created such a buzz about it, and some of the coverage that Fox News gave it.

Perhaps that's what Wright means, because most of the others (ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, PBS, NPR, the New York Times, the Washington Post, the LA Times, et al) didn't do a whole lot of coverage.

A couple of notable exceptions were that CNN did actually do an expose on Ayers.

Fox News reporter Jesse Waters attempted to interview the Marxist Bill Ayers, but Ayers wouldn't talk to him and called the police (you know, the police Ayers bombed back in his active terrorist days) to get the reporter off his front doorstep (I didn't think Marxists liked private property rights).

And I'll give kudos for ABC also giving it one unsuccessful shot.

But the issue of Obama's associations with people who viscerally hate the United States certainly didn't get a fraction of the attention it deserved.

The proof of this was found post-election when we saw John Ziegler's video and the Zogby poll results. We found that while many Obama voters knew all the inaccurate slander on John McCain and especially Sarah Palin, they were almost entirely ignorant of the very real and accurate dirt on Barack Obama and Joe Biden.

But the damage is done, now. We have elected a man who associates with a domestic terrorist who bombed numerous buildings and remains unrepentant for his anti-American acts. We have elected a man who sat under the preaching for 20 years of a man who holds pure disdain for non-blacks and loathes America.

We will soon begin to find out what we have done to our country.

Liberal Myopia on Parade in History

There are certain things you can see coming from a mile away, and (ironically) liberal myopia is definitely one of them.

So it was this morning as I published today's "American Minute" by historian William Federer. The piece highlighted Sojourner Truth's Christian faith and her inspired work in the abolitionist movement.

Realizing how liberals have hijacked every civil rights figure possible and distort them to further their demonization of America and Christianity, I was virtually certain that liberal drool would come dripping out from some corner of the Left in response. And I was not mistaken.

Because she felt I and her readers needed a history lesson, in response Anna at DakotaWomen posted a speech by Sojourner Truth which is often cited by feminists.

Anna says she has "a feeling Sojourner wouldn't be allowed into some of the higher-profile fundamentalist churches in South Dakota were she living today and making speeches like that."

Really? I wonder which "higher-profile fundamentalist churches" she means, and why she believes that.

Interestingly, the version of Sojourner Truth's speech published by Marcus Robinson about a month after it was given is significantly different than the version published some 12 years later and quoted by DakotaWomen.

The version published by Robinson was a little more Christ-centered (acknowledging that Jesus "never spurned woman from him") and a little less useful for fueling feminist loathing for Christianity, so you'll have to decide which is more likely to be accurate and in harmony with the Christian faith expressed by Sojourner Truth in today's American Minute.

Its interesting, too, that the issue with which Sojourner Truth is most closely identified--the abolition of slavery--bears striking similarities with the most pressing civil rights issue of today: abortion.

You see, some people in the 1800s felt black people weren't really human, and as such didn't deserve human rights and full protection under the law.

Some people today feel that unborn children still inside their mother's wombs aren't human either and consequently don't deserve civil rights and equal protection under the law.

They manage to believe this despite the fact that these children--different from other children only in development--have human DNA, unique human DNA that makes them separate and distinct from their mother (in other words, not a part of the woman's body), with all the genetic material they'll ever need for the rest of their life already present.

As you can see, the discrimination based on skin color of the 1800s was no more scientific and fact-based than is today's discrimination based on developmental level.

And as the ironies mount, we see that the fringe element within Christendom who in the 1800s attempted to justify their denial of humanity did so then in defiance of the plain teaching of Scripture, just as a fringe element does today.

A further irony is that many of those who perpetuate this denial of human rights are women, and since abortion is decimating the next generation of black children at a higher rate than any other ethnicity, it is perhaps most ironic that this denial of human rights is most acute in the black community.

It seems so hard for humans to learn from history, doesn't it? Thankfully, as genuine Christianity has promoted human dignity for women and black Americans, so Christianity will continue to promote the dignity and worth of the most innocent and vulnerable human beings in society.

On a final note, notice that while the storm troopers of myopia over at DakotaWomen might be afraid to link to a "truth site" (they consider the truth about liberal errors to be "hate") I've experienced no anxiety in linking to them. Perhaps I'm just more tolerant that the apostles of tolerance at DakotaWomen.

Smithsonian Honors Racist Eugenicist Margaret Sanger

Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, is being honored with your tax dollars at the Smithsonian Institute.

In addition to starting the nation's #1 provider of abortions, Sanger was also a eugenicist (one who sought to cleanse the gene pool of "undesirable" races) of great proportions.

Aren't you thrilled to have this dark element of your country's past (and present) honored at the Smithsonian?

Aren't you even more thrilled that your wallet is being lightened to do it?

The Smithsonian is honoring one of the 20th century's most notorious eugenics proponets, Margaret Sanger. American Life League exposes Sanger's racist plan to create a "master race."

Click To Play

The Intolerance of the Tolerant: The Beat Goes On

If homosexual activists keep showing bigoted Americans like me how to display "tolerance," I'm going to run out of creative or semi-creative titles for these posts.

The latest example of homosexual "tolerance" comes from LifeSiteNews. Since black Americans voted in favor of California's marriage protection amendment Proposition 8 by a 70%-30% margin, apparently "tolerance" in the homosexual handbook involves calling black people by the dreaded "n" word.

One reader of Rod 2.0, a leading gay blog by an African-American, reported that when he joined the large homosexual protest outside Westwood's Mormon Temple, protesters called him a "nigger" at least twice.

"It was like being at a klan rally except the klansmen were wearing Abercrombie polos and Birkenstocks," wrote the commenter.

"YOU NIGGER, one man shouted at men (sic). If your people want to call me a FAGGOT, I will call you a nigger. Someone else said same thing to me on the next block near the temple ... me and my friend were walking, he is also gay but Korean, and a young WeHo clone said after last night the niggers better not come to West Hollywood if they knew what was BEST for them."

Another African-American reader from Los Angeles reports that he and his boyfriend, also black, were harassed about their race despite their prominently carrying "No on 8" signs.

Now I know that I've been very "intolerant" of homosexuals and their desire to not only sodomize one another but to call their unions "marriage" and use restrooms of the opposite sex and things like that. I've been hateful enough to repeat God's warnings against homosexual behavior and warn them of the tremendous health risks involved with homosexual behavior.

I only hope that someday I can live up to the level of "tolerance" modeled for me by the apostles of tolerance in the homosexual community.

Kinda makes you want to just run out and let them counterfeit marriage right now, doesn't it?

America Headed for the Woodshed

By Marie Jon'

Being politically correct has its rewards. Nevertheless, I must speak my mind without regard to acceptance or reprisals. I feel the need to express my thoughts.

As the huge crowd gathered at Grant Park in Chicago for a historical celebration, others like myself wept. Deep inside my heart, I knew what was to come. I did not see the stature bestowed upon this man who was not worthy of America's trust.

While many good Americans were confused, I was not. For more than a year, political pundits had focused on Obama's past political history, his choice of friends, and his quasi-Christian faith. His choice of Afrocentric Black liberation theology reinforced Obama's disdain for America. He chose the theme of change and made it part of his ongoing mantra because it reflects his own political social agenda.

Happily, others will call Barack Obama their president. I cannot, because of who he is and what he stands for. Bluntly put, I have absolutely no respect for the Democrat Party or the man who will soon occupy the Oval Office. What little trust I had in the "opposition" has been destroyed. They knew who the real Obama was from the get-go, but still desperately desired him. Through Obama, all things are possible.

Is it any wonder that many Americans fear this man? Our worst days are yet to come. Obama is Saul Alinsky and Rev. Jeremiah Wright embodied into one confused human being. For the first time in America's history, our newly-elected president will attempt to punish our country for its past transgressions. America does not deserve that kind of humiliation.

Excerpts from The American Spectator: "Saul Alinsky Takes the White House":

"Conservatives may not realize just how difficult it might be to recover from this week's elections.

"The day after the big defeat, the conservative chatter everywhere was about how the "movement" and the Republican Party (two different things) could finally unshackle themselves from the bad old habits that brought them down, and about how the ability to draw a sharp contrast with the Obama/Pelosi/Reid triumvirate would allow us to focus attention, rally the faithful, and re-storm the castle in 2010 and 2012.

"Fat chance.

"Too many conservatives think we've seen all this before — in 1964 and 1974 and 1992 — and that we know how to handle it. Fly, meet ointment: We're not dealing with the same sorts of opponents. These New Alinskyites who are taking over the White House, combined with the most leftist congressional leadership in memory, will not let us play by the same rules under which conservatives recovered from those earlier debacles. They will try to drastically tilt the playing field, seed our side of the field with land mines and, in short, rig the process to make it next to impossible for the political right, or Republicans, to recover. And they are likely to succeed in at least some of these designs.

"It will begin with their efforts to secure a filibuster-proof majority of 60 senators (including the two independents). Right now the libs (and yes, all the Democratic senators, with the possible exception of Nebraska's Ben Nelson, are libs) have 56, with three Republican moderates and one conservative leading their races but awaiting recounts or runoffs. Watch for the Alinskyites to try stealing all four, and to succeed in at least two. We've seen this game before. They did it in Indiana's 'Bloody Eighth' congressional district in 1984. They almost succeeded in 2000 in Florida. They did succeed, outrageously so, in the Washington State governor's race in 2004. Those are just the most obvious of many similar examples. And now they are even more ruthless, more lawyered-up, and in a more powerful position to pull it off than they were in any of those instances. " Full Article

Obama used his winsome charm, and the whole world wondered after him, as if he were an angel of light. This cult-like figure filled people's minds by using repetitive chants of "Hope" and "Yes We Can" to bedazzle his willing, but duped, followers. The media paved the path to allow Obama to seize the White House by not reporting everything they knew about the man.

As it stands, President Obama will lead America to hell and back using bullying, intrusive tactics. Just ask Samuel J. Wurzelbacher, a private citizen who asked a question. The entire world knows more about Joe the plumber than President Obama.

Joe's privacy was invaded by a Democrat state official in Ohio. "Big Brother" will be watching and listening. Be careful. Every bit of Mr. Wurzelbacher's personal information was revealed for the media to peruse. They tried to diminish and assassinate the man's character in his own community. Is this what we have to look forward to in this Obama administration?

While many in our country feel jubilant, my knowledge of Obama prevents me from taking him to heart.

The most beloved civil rights leader, Dr. Martin Luther King, said it all for me and most other Americans who find themselves in a very uncomfortable and awkward position:

"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character." — Martin Luther King, Jr.

While I am pleased to see how far racial relations have evolved for the betterment of our country, it was no surprise to me that a black American would become president. I have always felt proud of America's willingness to correct her wrongs. However, it is devastating when I see that the wrong people are given great power and political sway over others who are made to feel unworthy to help themselves through education and hard work. The Democrat Party has victimized a part of its constituency by encouraging them to look towards big government for their every need.

Their brand of politics also hurts me. I am a Christian with a heart to love all peoples. Many patriotic Americans are fed up with the Rev. Wrights of the world and the drive-by media who imply that all conservatives are closet bigots.

During Obama's run for the presidency, he continually injected race into the campaign. Dr. King died to suppress that kind of politics. He was victorious. However, Obama will change the way we see one another if we're not cautious.

America will be sent to the woodshed for a thrashing by a bitter president. When speaking to a group of elitists in San Francisco, Obama said: "And it's not surprising then they (Pennsylvanians) get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren't like them." However, he had nothing but praise for the good citizens of Pennsylvania when he stood before them to ask for their votes. Little did they know of his intentions to bankrupt the coal mining industry.

When I look at Obama, I see a man who Americans will not be able to count on. Sadly, he will continually divide our country and hasten the demise of America as we know it today.

Obama's policies will bring grief, not only to America but to many other countries who continuously count on us to bring stability to the free world.

Americans will eventually regret giving the reigns over to a radicalized party that sees nothing worthy of preserving in our great country. I am sad to inform you that what has taken place might never be reversed. Once socialism takes root, it buries itself very deeply. We won't see America for a very long time, if ever.

Related Readings:
The Change You'll Get
The American electorate: Gullible's Travels

Marie Jon' is a political/religious-based writer and founder of www.DrawingClose.org and www.PeoplePoliticallyRight.com — sister websites to RenewAmerica. Marie extends her hand of welcome; visit DrawingClose and receive your free gift of salvation by taking an online Bible study.

Marie's writings have appeared on many sites, including The New Media Journal, ChronWatch, and ABCNews, to name a few. Marie brings a refreshing and spirited point of view that is reflected in her writings. Marie is a nurse, a lay student of the Bible, and a patriot. She is an advocate for American troops serving abroad, as well as the Blue and Gold Star Mothers of America and their families. Marie enjoys Townhall.com radio, Rush Limbaugh, Bruce Elliott Saturdays 5AM-9AM EST and her friend Larry Elder.

Obama Supporter: Obama Lacked Courage to Leave Racist Church

According to Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), the reason Barack Obama stayed in Rev. Jeremiah Wright's hate-filled church for 20 years wasn't because he agreed with all this hate; Obama just lacked the courage to leave.

From WorldNetDaily:

"Think of the history here. You have a guy who's half-white, half-black. He goes to an Ivy League school, comes to Chicago ... to start a political career. Doesn't know anybody.

"Gets involved with community organizing – why? Because that's how you form a base. OK. Joins the largest church in the neighborhood. About 8,000 members. ... Why did he join the church? ... Because that's how you get to know people.

"Now maybe it takes a couple years," states Nadler, claiming eventually Obama begins to view Wright differently. "'Jesus, the guy's a nut, the guy's a lunatic.' But you don't walk out of a church with 8,000 members in your district."

"He didn't have the political courage to make the statement of walking out," Nadler said of Obama.

You know, this explanation has a lot of merit. I really couldn't think of another reason why Obama would stay in such a racist, anti-American church--not just for "a couple of years" but for 20 years--like this...unless he stayed because he agreed with these racist, anti-American sentiments.

Given that Obama is surrounded by anti-American associates like the domestic terrorist Bill Ayers, PLO spokesman Rashid Khalidi, Ali Abunimah and others, maybe Obama fit in there better than we know. After all, terrorist organizations like Hamas and al-Qaida think pretty highly of him.

But even if Nadler is right and Obama just lacked the "political courage" to leave this hate-spewing church, what would such a huge lapse in courage bode for a President Obama on the national scene.

Would President Obama lack the political courage to oppose terrorist organizations like al-Qaida and Hamas? Would he have trouble summoning the courage to protect the U.S. from threats like Iran? Could he overcome his naive predilection to talk with America's enemies without precondition?

Could he get over the fear of hurting the feelings of his terrorist allies?

Words don't mean squat without tangible acts to back them up. What does Obama's history tell you about how he would handle America's enemies?

That's a question Americans need to consider first and foremost before pulling the lever tomorrow.

The Obama Obsession with Skin Color

Someone sent me some interesting information recently about Michelle Obama and the kind of activities she considered important in college.

Below is a brief video and here is a picture (click to enlarge) of Michelle Robinson Obama's college yearbook.

As you can see from the activities listed for Michelle Robinson, she was into Black Unity and activities at the Third World Center.

According to this article from Princeton, the Third World Center "was established in 1971 to provide a social, cultural and political environment that reflects the needs and concerns of students of color at the University."

It has since been renamed the Carl A. Fields Center for Equality and Cultural Understanding. One of the goals listed is to "Sustain a sincere and continued commitment to addressing issues of diversity, equality, equity throughout all facets of the Princeton community." A couple of the academic priorities listed are "Attraction and Retention of Diverse Faculty" and "Ethnic Studies and Area Studies."

In the mission statement we find the center wants to "educate and to engage the broader University community regarding issues of cultural pluralism" and "enhance the multicultural consciousness and empowerment of our students." It encourages "exploration of diverse heritages, values and cultural experiences."

They also sponsor "dialogue groups that explore issues such as racism, sexism, heterosexism, inter-ethnic relationships and cultural identity." (emphasis added)

Given this level of ethno-centrism, one can't help but recall the racist, Afrocentric Obama pastor of 20 years, Jeremiah Wright, his obsession with skin color, and his fiery denunciations of "rich white people."

Seeing Michelle Robinson Obama's heavy involvement with this organization, it is no wonder that her thesis was on "racial divide" and entitled "Princeton-Educated Blacks and the Black Community."

From The Politico:

"My experiences at Princeton have made me far more aware of my 'blackness' than ever before," the future Mrs. Obama wrote in her thesis introduction. "I have found that at Princeton, no matter how liberal and open-minded some of my white professors and classmates try to be toward me, I sometimes feel like a visitor on campus; as if I really don't belong. Regardless of the circumstances under which I interact with whites at Princeton, it often seems as if, to them, I will always be black first and a student second."

Another excerpt from her thesis:

"In defining the concept of identification or the ability to identify with the black community," the Princeton student wrote, "I based my definition on the premise that there is a distinctive black culture very different from white culture."

How about just embracing "American culture"?

One of the things that has helped America become a unified nation (i.e. e pluribus unum) though our ancestors come from every nation on earth has been the "melting pot" approach. Traditionally, immigrants immersed themselves in American culture and set about the task of "becoming American" not just in name and citizenship but in culture as well.

Unfortunately many ethno-centric people and the "multicultural" and "diversity" crowd take the opposite approach: out of one, many. They emphasize skin color, ethnic background and ancestral national origin. This tends to keep us divided not only in our ancestral backgrounds, but in our minds...and ultimately in our goals, values, purposes...and allegiances.

We intentionally divide ourselves when we should be celebrating our American citizenship. Unfortunately, that leaves us divided and weak before many hostile forces in the world who would love nothing more than to see our common country in ruin.

But with the growing body of evidence that Michelle Obama seems more concerned about skin color than about being American (regardless of skin color and ancestral origin), it's hardly a wonder that only in the last year, as her husband has gained national political prominence, has she for the first time been proud of her country.

My source for this yearbook information was a classmate of Michelle Robinson. He tells me that at Princeton she ate at Stevenson Hall rather than one of the "eating clubs."

"While not every one at Stevenson was a 'radical,' it was definitely not where the 'in' crowd ate," my source tells me.

He believes she did not try to assimilate at Princeton, and that perhaps her feelings of disenfranchisement were in part of her own doing. My source says that unfortunately many blacks intentionally segregated themselves from the rest of the campus at Princeton.

Michelle's husband Barack also seems to feel alienated from American culture and overly embraces "black culture." We might recall his sentiments on "white folks."

I have no problem at all with with the idea of a black man as president; after all, I've had black friends all my life, have worked with and for black people during my time in the military and since, and my best man at my wedding was a black man.

But I have grave misgivings about entrusting the leadership of our nation to anyone who is more wrapped up in their ethnic heritage than they are American heritage--whether their ethnic heritage be African, Irish, Italian, English, French or Mongolian.

In fact, evidence would strongly suggest that Barack Obama has more than a fair amount of disdain for American heritage, given his disparaging comments about the Founders and our Constitution.

If you are aware of his 2001 interview in which he discussed a "reparative" strategy for wealth redistribution, you will recall that he lamented the "constraints" the Founders put on the Constitution to limit government (and protect our freedom). Obama views the enumerated powers of the Constitution as a tragic impediment to his Marxist goal of redistributing everyones wealth as he sees fit.

Someone with this kind of Marxist ideology, and this kind of chip on their shoulder about American heritage and our form of government cannot rationally be entrusted with the leadership of our nation.


Shown is Michelle LaVaughn Robinson (Obama) in the 1985 Nassau Herald (the Princeton Univ. Yearbook). Note the organizations that Michelle were part of. Unlike other students who listed a variety of activities, including theatre, team sports, band or orchestra, etc., Michelle Obama listed only one type of activity -- activities that showed her single-minded focus on the third-world and black unity. No wonder she wasn't proud of America until recently.

Obama's Pastor Roughs It in Mansion With 4-Car Garage

Barack Obama's racist, anti-American pastor Jeremiah Wright seems to be doing okay these days.

Jesse Waters from Fox News went out to the reverends new mansion to take a look around and see how he was surviving in this terrible land of oppression known as the U.S. of K.K.K. America.

Wright's mansion has a four-car garage, Greek columns, a golf course in his back yard, a huge driveway, and lots of "rich white people" around.

What squalor!

I wonder if he still believes God should damn America?

It sure looks rough, being a black maaaaan living in the U.S. of K.K.K. America.

Obama Disdain for 'White Folks'

This is a lengthy video (about 10 minutes) but reveals a disappointing picture of Barack Obama's opinion of ethnic issues and "white folks."

This brings back memories of Obama's racist pastor of 20 years, Jeremiah Wright, who seemed to hate whites and even successful blacks.

It is indisputable that black Americans have received a raw deal from the white majority in America for most of our history.

But we have made major gains, and in the last 40 years have made great strides in establishing equality between the skin colors in both practice and thought.

When we have been wronged, we have two choices: dwell on the wrongs, become bitter and hateful...or concentrate on doing what we can personally to put such wrongs behind us to build a better world.

I don't think Barack Obama and people like his pastor are ready to do the latter.

But consider how these statements would look coming from someone else.

Just substitute "white" for "black" and try to imagine John McCain saying this about "black folks."

Or, if you prefer, since McCain was imprisoned and tortured for years by the North Vietnamese communists (who were, by the way, Marxists), substitute "Asian" for "white" and imagine McCain talking about "Asian folks."

It isn't too pretty, is it? Is it any prettier coming from Barack Obama--the man who wants to lead America (black, whites, reds, yellows, browns and purple-polka-dotted and all)?

How about we put aside all the envy, animosity and ethnic disdain? Regardless of skin color, we're all Americans here. We're all on the same team. Let's act like it.

Unfortunately, it doesn't look like Barack Obama is ready to put aside the ethnic animosity.

From the description of the video...
Barack Obama Says "White Folks" Are "Cruel" (Real Audio From Him Reading His Book. If you don't look like him, Obama hates you. Because of that, he intends to use the government to take MORE of the money you earn and work hard for so he can give your money to people who do look like him. This is Barack Obama's tribalism, this is Barack Obama's lifetime war on "white folks". It is unAmerican and unConstitutional.

Interview Shows Obama Radical Ideas on Constitution and Weath Redistribution

Below is a video/audio recording of Barack Obama in a 2001 interview talking about a 'reparative' strategy for wealth redistribution.

There is also a transcript of the audio available here, thanks to Power Line News.

This interview is a remarkable insight into what Obama thinks about taking your hard-earned dollars and giving them to someone else (he obviously knows better than you who needs your money and how it should be spent).

Notice how Obama thinks the constraints the Founders put on government through the Constitution are a "tragedy" and that he regrets that even radical Supreme Court makeups have failed to "break free" from those constraints the founders put there.

Some of those limits are exemplified in comments like these from the Founders:

A wise and frugal government...shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. – Thomas Jefferson

Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but only those specifically enumerated. - Thomas Jefferson

With respect to the two words 'general welfare,' I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators. – James Madison

I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents. – James Madison

Notice Obama doesn't talk about whether it's right or wrong to take one person's property and give it to another.

Notice Obama doesn't even so much talk about whether, since we are legally blocked from doing this by the Constitution, we should work on an amendment to the constitution, but rather how best to ignore and get around the Constitution, either through the courts, or legislatively, or administratively.

The sad irony here is that wealth redistribution is already happening, and has been in this country for decades. Obama and the socialists like him are only dissatisfied at the slow pace of it and the meager level of redistribution--meager in terms of where they'd like to see it, at least.

Obama's ideas of wealth redistribution are unAmerican (i.e. they run counter to the ideals of our Constitution and our American heritage of personal responsibility and private property rights). Rather, they are Marxist ideas. They are the ideas of nations that have opposed us and sought to destroy us for decades.

How can we possibly be considering allowing someone who believes this unAmerican rot to lead the country?


TRANSCRIPT:
MODERATOR: Good morning and welcome to Odyssey on WBEZ Chicago 91.5 FM and we’re joined by Barack Obama who is Illinois State Senator from the 13th district and senior lecturer in the law school at the University of Chicago.

OBAMA: If you look at the victories and failures of the civil rights movement and its litigation strategy in the court, I think where it succeeded was to vest formal rights in previously dispossessed peoples. So that I would now have the right to vote, I would now be able to sit at the lunch counter and order and as long as I could pay for it I’d be okay.

But the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth and sort of more basic issues of political and economic justice in this society. And to that extent as radical as people tried to characterize the Warren court, it wasn’t that radical. It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution, at least as it’s been interpreted, and the Warren court interpreted it in the same way that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. It says what the states can’t do to you, it says what the federal government can’t do to you, but it doesn’t say what the federal government or the state government must do on your behalf. And that hasn’t shifted. One of the I think tragedies of the civil rights movement was because the civil rights movement became so court focused, I think that there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributed change and in some ways we still suffer from that.

MODERATOR: Let’s talk with Karen. Good morning, Karen, you’re on Chicago Public Radio.

KAREN: Hi. The gentleman made the point that the Warren court wasn’t terribly radical with economic changes. My question is, is it too late for that kind of reparative work economically and is that that the appropriate place for reparative economic work to take place – the court – or would it be legislation at this point?

OBAMA: Maybe I’m showing my bias here as a legislator as well as a law professor, but I’m not optimistic about bringing about major redistributive change through the courts. The institution just isn’t structured that way.

You just look at very rare examples during the desegregation era the court was willing to for example order changes that cost money to a local school district. The court was very uncomfortable with it. It was very hard to manage, it was hard to figure out. You start getting into all sorts of separation of powers issues in terms of the court monitoring or engaging in a process that essentially is administrative and takes a lot of time.

The court’s just not very good at it and politically it’s very hard to legitimize opinions from the court in that regard. So I think that although you can craft theoretical justifications for it legally. Any three of us sitting here could come up with a rational for bringing about economic change through the courts.


In this newly uncovered radio interview from 2001, Barack Obama charts a 'reparative' strategy for wealth redistribution

Video: Obama on White Suburbia and Racism

Here is the video you've been hearing about. It's of a 1995 interview--and more--of Barack Obama talking about how white Americans are racist and don't want to pay taxes because inner-city black Americans might get their tax dollars.

More promotion of victimhood over personal responsibility from The One, the Most Beneficent Lordship Barack Obama.

We just aren't "spreading the wealth" around the way His Lordship would like to see it; too much requirement that people create their own wealth; not enough softening of the blow from the consequences of bad personal decisions.

"My individual salvation is not going to come about without a collective salvation for the country."

Thinking Beyond the Rhetoric and the Skin Color

Great ad! It would be great and historic to see America's first black president...if he was a good man with a strong moral center, who thoroughly understood the principles of freedom and human dignity upon which America was founded.

Unfortunately, we do not have a black candidate like that in the race this time.

We should always vote values...before skin color, before sex, before background, before anything.

Dist. 32 Candidate Elli Schwiesow on Native American Issues

Running as an Independent in the South Dakota Legislative District 32 senate race, Elli Schwiesow has her work cut out for her.

Though she is a life-long Republican who has held a number of official positions in the local and state Republican Parties, she chose to run as an Independent in the general election to avoid a costly primary fight with wealthy Republican candidate Stan Adelstein. She also faces incumbent senator Tom Katus.

In our continuing series of articles on Elli Schwiesow and the issues, today Schwiesow talks about Native American issues. We have previously examined her views on taxes, Second Amendment rights, universal preschool and energy policy.

"I wish someone had all the answers to the problems of the reservation," Schwiesow told me with a smile. "But as a first measure I would suggest or rather endorse the idea that reservations take advantage of the adjacent county seat to obtain justice."

Schwiesow said she has been told that tribal courts are failures in that they cannot be counted on to dispense justice equally.

"The rule of law must apply to everyone equally," said Schwiesow. "Unfortunately on the reservation, that is not the case."

According to Schwiesow, if justice was applied equally, she believes conditions on the reservations would improve.

She acknowledges, however, that alcohol related incidents are complex problems and are not easily addressed by government intervention.

"Individuals must be given incentives to tackle and defeat their own problems," she said.

The conflicting jurisdictions make it very difficult for the government to assist in making progress on the reservations.

"I lived on Pine Ridge Reservation for a while when I was there working for John Thune during his 2004 campaign," she said. "To live there is to learn a lot. Shannon and Todd Counties don't have county seats. Shannon goes to Fall River jurisdiction.

"When there's a problem or a meal program or elderly program is needed, usually you go to your county, but they don't have that option nearby in Shannon and Todd Counties. They have to go to Washington D.C. and the federal government. The more local the action is, the better. How can Native people address problems effectively when the Bureau of Indian Affairs is headquartered in Washington, and tribal government has a lot of corruption problems? These problems actually extend through many levels of government."

Schwiesow believes an old-fashioned tool may go a long way in helping find solutions.

"We can try to improve relationships," she said. "John Thune is working to improve law enforcement on the reservations, to bring down that high crime. The average citizen can do a lot by building relationships. There are many groups who come from out of state to help Natives. I was there when a group from Europe even came to help. But what are we in the surrounding communities doing? Are we doing enough?"

That is a question on the minds of many South Dakotans, both on and off the reservation. The past year has seen several news reports of alarmingly high suicide rates on some reservations.

Schwiesow said, "Suicide on reservations is high, there is a sense of hopelessness. It's a Catch 22. Folks want to hold dearly onto their heritage and culture. That's a wonderful thing, but if that includes not working and looking to others to subsidize your lifestyle, that is to the detriment of family and society. Every culture has wonderful things that are passed on. But many of the kids I've encountered wanted nothing to do with the tribe. Many of them couldn't wait to get rid of the 'Rez Pride' hats and things."

While admitting the problems faced by people on the reservations are complex and there are no easy solutions, the concern in Schwiesow's voice made it clear she is committed to working hard to help those suffering from injustice and despair.

Next time, Schwiesow discusses abortion.

Obama Talks About the Job Terrorist Bill Ayers Gave Him

In multiple clips in this video, Barack Obama talks about his association with domestic terrorist Bill Ayers (not "just a guy in the neighborhood"), the group of which both served together on the board, and other dealings with Ayers.

From the YouTube publisher:

Amazing Video Found of Obama saying the job Ayers gave him is one of his major qualifications for political office. In this video he also calls Rev Meeks and Father Pfleger friends. A must see.

The Reckless Ideology Behind the Financial Crisis

Glenn Beck: Are You Paying Attention? Obama, ACORN Racists—the Ones to Blame for the Economic Crisis

Values Voter Summit: Bishop Harry Jackson

Bishop Harry Jackson of the High Impact Leadership Coalition spoke at the Family Research Council Washington Briefing this morning.

Bishop Jackson said that Martin Luther King Jr's famous speech profoundly changed things in America. Jackson said at the time of the speech, that his father had been doing manual labor in a post office despite having an accounting degree. But a few years after Kings speech, his father became the head of personnel at the Bureau of Engraving and Printing in Washington D.C.

Jackson said that no matter who ends up in the White House later this year, God has a job for everyone present at the summit.

Jackson said that during the First Great Awakening in America, preaching began against slavery. It also followed in the Second Great Awakening of the 1800s. He said people began to realize that God's truth and social policy go hand-in-hand.

Expressing his disappointment with President George W. Bush's failure to lead the nation with solid moral direction, Jackson said we probably failed in thinking that all we had to do was get a praying president into the White House and everything would be alright.

Jackson said he believes being a Christian will make you a conservative, but being a conservative won't make you a Christian.

Jackson said there will be no political messiah, either Democrat or Republican; God's people will have to humble their hearts, work hard and pray harder.

Judge Thomas: Racial Preference Unconstitutional

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas is flirting with making the media as mad at him as they are at Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin.

They already have been, you say? Well, I guess he doesn't have much to lose, then.

Thomas stated today that racial preferences and quotas are unconstitutional.

From Breitbart.com:

WASHINGTON (AP) - Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas said Tuesday that African-Americans are better served by colorblind programs than affirmative action.

Thomas, addressing leaders of historically black colleges, said affirmative action "has become this mantra and there almost has become this secular religiosity about it. I think it almost trumps thinking."

A longtime opponent of race-based preferences in hiring and school admissions, Thomas said, "Just from a constitutional standpoint, I think we're going to run into problems if we say the Constitution says we can consider race sometimes."

Imagine that: that the Constitution requires that we treat all people equally, regardless of skin color. What seems elementary to most Americans must be explicitly laid out for the liberal elite.

We shouldn't prefer white people for jobs and schools...and we shouldn't prefer black people for jobs and schools, either.

What a concept! Almost sounds...American.

Which Party Has Been the Better Friend to Black Americans?

A very educational video from the National Black Republican Association.

Isn't it amazing how the Left, along with their buddies in the "mainstream" media have managed to rewrite racial history in America.

At worst, as far as policy goes, the only thing that might even remotely be considered "racist" (not that it is, but I'm being generous for the sake of the argument) is traditional Republican opposition to quotas (which incidentally demean blacks, but that's another issue for another time).

As for the rest...well, watch the video. Black Americans: any time your ready, you're welcome--as you always have been--in the Republican Party.