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.

Quality or Not -- Support the Woman: Hillary Clinton for President

by Carrie K. Hutchens

I find it totally offensive that some women are supporting Hillary Clinton simply because she is a woman. How disrespectful of self and others is that?

I believe that "qualified" and "quality" women should have an equal chance at being in law enforcement (or any other position being sought) as any "qualified" and "quality" man. However, I do not believe that women should have some free pass that skips the qualified and quality stage and puts totally unsuitable women in a position they (as individuals) have no business being in.

Responding to any call, promoting the "women's agenda" would be the last thing on my mind. I would want my fellow officers to be trained and capable. I really wouldn't be happy to know that my supposed backup was a female that was wearing the badge not because she deserved it, but because women's rights groups not only forced the door open for her -- they decreased "quality" in the process. Primary on my mind would be all of us getting home safely -- not that some points were made for the women's movement.

So what are women thinking in this voting process?

Do they want a "woman" so badly that they are willing to sell themselves out?

Do they think if we don't grab Hillary that we have lost all chances of putting a woman in charge of the White House ever?

Do they think Hillary Clinton is the last woman in the world?

Perhaps we should share the secret that there are plenty of truly qualified and quality women out there that could and would excel as our president. We don't need to settle. We don't need to lie, steal, cheat, or manipulate our way to the top position of our country. Instead, we need to be honest, able and ready to fight for right for all, rather than clinging to out-dated personal agendas that have turned destructive in nature and action.

Sexism has affected Hillary Clinton's campaign and she is complaining? Looks like the only way it has affected her campaign is to get her a blind following. A following that will vote for the woman irregardless of any reason they shouldn't. (Isn't this sexism in and of itself?)

Sexism? It isn't that HIllary Clinton is a woman that goes against her. It is that the woman is Hillary Clinton.

We don't have to settle and we shouldn't.

Carrie Hutchens is a former law enforcement officer and a freelance writer who is active in fighting against the death culture movement and the injustices within the judicial and law enforcement systems.

Boy Scouts ignore 'pay-up-or-move' ultimatum

Boy Scouts ignore 'pay-up-or-move' ultimatum
Philadelphia threatening $199,999 rent increase or eviction

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: December 4, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern



© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com

Officials with the Cradle of Liberty Boy Scouts organization in Philadelphia have ignored a city deadline either to promise to pay a rent hike of $199,999 a year or agree to move out of the organization's historic headquarters.

Officials with the national headquarters for Boy Scouts of America declined comment, telling WND the issue had been left up to Cradle of Liberty organization officials to explain, and they did not return WND requests for a comment.

However, council spokesman Jeff Jubelirer told the Associated Press the group can neither go against a national organization policy, nor can it pay the rent, which the city raised from $1 a year to $200,000.

The city had demanded a decision from the Boy Scouts by Monday on whether they would pay the rent, raised by the city after the organization refused city demands to drop a national policy banning homosexuals as members or Scout leaders.

"If I do not receive an executed lease, signed by the Boy Scouts, to remain as tenants paying a fair market rent, we will begin looking for alternative tenants that can take over the property June 1, 2008," Romulo Diaz, the city solicitor, said earlier. He, according to Philadelphia media reports, is an open homosexual.

(Full article)

Philadelphia should be ashamed of itself, as should the activist involved.

It's "THAT" Time of Year Again!

Get ready for the ACLU and pals to move into Scrooge mode! On the bright side though... it looks like the numbers are growing and more and more Americans are ready to take Christmas back!!!

"Saturday, November 24, 2007

HOLIDAY BLUES
Americans get fed up with 'Happy Holidays'
But many Democrats in new poll can't stomach 'Merry Christmas'

Posted: November 24, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern

© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com


A new poll finds Americans overwhelmingly prefer that stores use the phrase "Merry Christmas" in their seasonal advertising rather than "Happy Holidays.

The Rasmussen survey found 67 percent favor "Merry Christmas" while just 26 percent prefer "Happy Holidays."

Rasmussen said the poll results were the same for males and females, and there were few demographic differences.

A sharp difference, however, showed up between Republicans and Democrats.

While 88 percent of Republicans prefer "Merry Christmas," just 57 percent of Democrats favor the saying."

(Read the entire article)

Merry Christmas from me to you!

Phelps' Hate Muddies a Clear Issue

By Carrie K. Hutchens

Homosexual activists may be delighting in Fred Phelps' loss in the court battle and thinking it is a win for them against Christians, but it isn't! Phelps is not representative of the vast majority of Christians and to suggest he is would be a bold-faced untruth most likely presented to make it look like those mean Christians are at it again. See how these mean old out-dated Christians refuse to move into the 21st century with the evolved attitudes of the rest of the world. (Full Article)

A Woman Person for President?

I definitely don't have a problem with a woman being president, but I am definitely particular about the woman that gets elected. I don't just want "any" woman, simply because she is a woman and possibly can stir up enough money and power to push her way into the office. I want one that knows what integrity is and lives it. I want one that is qualified and interested in the welfare and well-being of the people of the US without trying to make the citizens wards of the government and at the mercy of the so-called elite. I want one that remembers what this nation stood for and is proud to be an American. PROUD and doesn't feel a need to make excuses for being one.

When such a woman runs for president, I'll vote for her if she is the best candidate running! My vote -- your vote -- all votes -- are too important to use to sell us into failure and slavery at the hands of someone... anyone... who believes Big Brother and socialism is what is best for the American people, except for the ones that are here illegally and therefore not required to follow the same rules as the rest of us.

Stephen Colbert won't appear on SC ballot

Colbert won't appear on SC ballot
By JIM DAVENPORT, Associated Press Writer 31 minutes ago

South Carolina Democrats squashed Stephen Colbert's fanciful White House bid on Thursday.

Colbert, who poses as a conservative talk-show host on the Comedy Central cable network, filed to get on the ballot as a Democratic candidate in his native South Carolina. His campaign paid a $2,500 filing fee just before the noon deadline, said state Democratic Party Chairwoman Carol Fowler.

However, after about 40 minutes of discussion by top party officials, the executive council voted 13-3 to keep the host of "The Colbert Report" off the ballot.

"He's really trying to use South Carolina Democrats as suckers so he can further a comedy routine," said Waring Howe, a member of the executive council. And Colbert "serves to detract from the serious candidates on the ballot."

You mean we haven't been watching a comedy routine playing out? One where the joke appears to be on the citizens of the United States of America?

Children Removed from Christians out of Political Correctness

Here's the mirror of the "Children Placed with Pedophiles out of Political Correctness" post I made yesterday. It's an illustration of how upside down Western civilization has become.

From the UK Daily Mail:

They are devoted foster parents with an unblemished record of caring for almost 30 vulnerable children.

But Vincent and Pauline Matherick will this week have their latest foster son taken away because they have refused to sign new sexual equality regulations.

To do so, they claim, would force them to promote homosexuality and go against their Christian faith.

The 11-year-old boy, who has been in their care for two years, will be placed in a council hostel this week and the Mathericks will no longer be given children to look after.

The devastated couple, who have three grown up children of their own, became foster parents in 2001 and have since cared for 28 children at their home in Chard, Somerset.

Earlier this year, Somerset County Council's social services department asked them to sign a contract to implement Labour's new Sexual Orientation Regulations, part of the Equality Act 2006, which make discrimination on the grounds of sexuality illegal.

Officials told the couple that under the regulations they would be required to discuss same-sex relationships with children as young as 11 and tell them that gay partnerships were just as acceptable as heterosexual marriages.

They could also be required to take teenagers to gay association meetings.

When the Mathericks objected, they were told they would be taken off the register of foster parents.

On one hand, officials are so afraid of political correctness and being branded "homophobes" that they'll leave children with homosexual pedophiles after complaints.

On the other hand, Christians foster parents who refuse to indoctrinate children in homosexual acceptance have children taken away from them.

The Bible says in Isaiah 5:20, "Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness."

These two incidents illustrate what this verse warns against.

Children Placed with Pedophiles out of Political Correctness

From the UK Daily Mail:

A homosexual foster couple were left free to sexually abuse vulnerable boys in their care because social workers feared being accused of discrimination if they investigated complaints, an inquiry concluded yesterday.

Craig Faunch and Ian Wathey were one of the first homosexual couples in the country to be officially approved as foster parents.

They looked after 18 children in only 15 months.

With no previous convictions, they came across as respectable men who simply wanted to help boys with a variety of problems.

In reality, they were paedophiles, who repeatedly abused the children in their care.

Even when the mother of two of the children reported her suspicions to the council, officials accepted the men's explanations and did nothing.

Instead of banning children from staying with Faunch and Wathey, they sent youngsters with more serious problems to them. Between them, the couple abused four boys aged between eight and 14.

No wonder the social worker was afraid of being branded a "homophobe;" you can get a visit from the police in England just for reiterating the Bible's condemnation of homosexuality.

It's not a stretch to consider it possible that people who are willing to ignore one sexual norm (heterosexuality) might also be willing to ignore other sexual norms (pedophilia).

Isn't it wonderful how "hate crimes" legislation protects innocent children?

Build Family Housing = Heterosexist

From LifeSite, the newest bit of homosexual political correctness from my old stomping ground of Cambridge, England:

A former mayor of Cambridge, England, John Hipkin, is demanding an apology and a retraction after being accused publicly of “heterosexism” for suggesting that more homes need to be built to accommodate families.

Hipkin wondered aloud at a planning meeting last fall whether the preference of housing developers for one and two bedroom homes was not “putting huge pressure of a contraceptive nature on this city.”

Hipkin said at the time, “People presumably start off single or young marrieds and have children, don't they? Where are they going to go?”

Now why in the world would we want to build housing that was suitable for families. It's only been the natural order of civilization for thousands of years. What was this homophobe thinking???

Calling the complaint a “slur on his character,” Hipkin said, “Such an allegation runs contrary to all the things I think I am. I have spent my life opposing homophobia, sexism, racism - all forms of discrimination.”

Actually, his mistake was not paying close enough attention to what he was thinking and saying, and he accidentally lapsed into non-politically-correct, real-world thinking. He'd better guard himself more carefully in the future, lest he jeopardize his liberal credentials.