Posted by Rajjpuut's Folly on Sunday, August 08, 2010 12:54:47
Race-Baiting Obama and NAACP
Worsen America’s Race Relations
Worsen America’s Race Relations
The truth about our “post-racial” president, Barack Obama, is that rather than seeking to “bring us together” he is deliberately seeking to divide America along racial, class, age, gender and religious lines for his own advantage as he seeks to “fundamentally transform America.” Rajjpuut, who once in his college days beat up two much bigger (thankfully drunk) bullies in a Taco Bell restaurant in Greeley, Colorado, who were taunting three young Black girls with the N-word, is now becoming a racist . . . let us for clarity call Rajjpuut, a NEO-RACIST. The NEO-RACIST divides the world of men into the competent individualist and the incompetent collectivists . . . for separated along lines of intelligence, wisdom and courage: these are the only two races of men that matter. As far as conventional racial matters here in the United States, Obama has dramatically worsened them.
A NEO-RACIST like Rajjpuut is utterly prejudiced, utterly biased against those who advocate their various versions of utopian collectivism which canNOT stand under the light of sound economic principles nor human nature. The NEO-RACIST wants utter freedom for himself and for you . . . while the collectivists who fear him want all men shackled into unending personal sacrifice toward statism’s unachievable and evil and impossible utopian ends.
What are those utopian ends? Rajjpuut can’t say precisely because no logical and detailed picture has ever actually been outlined by the collectivist beyond the phrase “to each according to his needs; from each according to his abilities” . . . an undesirable and unreachable dream-objective requiring the altering of human nature toward mandated self-sacrifice, but dream world aside, Rajjpuut can easily point out the ugly realities. Real lands with real history: like the Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact which both collapsed in the late ‘80’s after first murdering millions of people and creating untold misery. That Soviet utopia was so evil that they had to kill tens of thousands of people trying to leave it and imprison tens of thousands of others, in order that less courageous souls would be bound to their “utopia” by their fears and stay behind to work for the collective.
This NEO-RACISM started out slowly for Rajjpuut. While he voted Libertarian and did not support Mr. Obama, for a brief while he thought it might be great for the country having a Black president. And while that was potentially true in the theoretical sense, it has proven an unmitigated disaster for the country having Barack Obama as our president in every possible tangible sphere.
Almost immediately Obama and his administration and the usual suspects on the left began calling all in opposition to the unfolding Obama agenda “racists” and Rajjpuut found himself getting angry for, of course, he knew the charges were not only baseless lies aimed at the competent, (those clear thinkers who understand the evils that Obama’s unfettered collectivism threatened for our people and to our country and will continue to bring unless brought to a halt) and thoughtful opposition. Competent individuals realized that not only was Obama expanding government’s control over the individual in opposition to our Constitution, but also deliberately exploiting long-standing conceptual chains glorifying the STATE over the individual; and the statists over those who want all men to be free.
When these carte blanche “racism”accusations (zeroing in on all conservatives as “haters” and especially the TEA Party which in Rajjpuut’s not-so-humble opinion consists of the individual Americans that the rest must depend upon if the Obamanation that is now America is to be restored into the great and noble country we once knew) continued unabated, Rajjpuut found himself moving from angered to highly-angered. So Rajjpuut confesses, he is indeed highly prejudiced against leftists and other statists incompetents which means that on neo-racist lines alone he is prejudiced against “the race of incompetent men who unable to think for themselves willing choose to believe that freedom is slavery”: the collectivists.
Indeed, in opposition to collectivism, let us call NEO-RACISM instead NEO-CONSTITUTIONALISM, for there once was a race of men, our founding fathers who dared to breathe free air and to contemplate a land where mankind would forever be free so long as the Constitution, the rule of law, and more particularly the Bill of Rights within the rule of law, protected men’s freedoms and men were willing to keep their thoughts free and defend that freedom. Barack Obama, who once taught “Constitutional Law” while simultaneously teaching a course about Saul Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals” . . . a juxtaposition akin to preaching virtue in a brothel . . . clearly would use the United States Constitution for toilet paper.
By the way, the terms “freedom” and “liberty” are just meaningless words unless their underlying concepts are defined understood and fought for. Freedom means being free from the unwanted negative effects from the actions of other men and of government; and all other men likewise being free from the negative effects I, the individual, might bring them as well as from all other men and government. The natural state of a man alone without government and other men around is freedom. What exactly are the benefits of interacting with other men? While there are many, forced-collectivism has not pounded one nail, mastered fire, or grown one crop of corn. Free association with other men, on the other hand, brings us freely the benefits of all men’s efforts through the magic of free markets. The purpose of freedom, such as our Constitution guarantees us from our creator, is to maximize the blessings of interacting with other men and with government while minimizing the negatives of such interactions.
Let us talk about those negative effects we would avoid. Barack Obama, his administration and his radical supporters especially the labor unions are bankrupting this country . . . that is an undeniable fact, yet they would attempt denial. That bankrupting of, or biting of the hand that feeds them . . . as well as other more deliberate “Cloward-Piven” strategic moves . . . are illogical and counter-productive from the standpoint of normal rational self-interest.
Why would the collectivists act contrary to the good of individual men . . . because, out of the resulting chaos, they see their best chance to enslave us all and move into power. They do NOT own the personal competence to achieve but must gain their power by attacking those individuals that do . . . Rajjpuut as a NEO-RACIST/NEO-Constitutionalist, declares himself the enemy of all that race of incompetents who put their faith in a state-planned utopia of collectivist origin. In this movement, they deny their history. They deny the almost 150 million slaughtered souls that collectivists like Stalin, Mao** and Hitler bequeathed to 20th Century mankind. Yes, Hitler was a collectivists and more . . . Hitler was a National SOCIALIST, not a conservative at all, look at the goals of his party from 1933 through 1939 (the Third Reich’s glory years) and you’ll see reflections of the goals of Obama in 2009.
Hitler’s much ballyhooed attacks upon communism were not attacks upon the benighted left by the benighted right but rather part of a serious squabble between leftists. The left of Lenin, Trotsky, Mao, and Stalin seeks even today to enslave men in accord with the lying dictums of Marx and Engles. Hitler’s left sought to enslave men to a separate utopian lie based upon Teutonic racial purity. Both groups were leftists. Both groups were collectivists. Both groups were socialistic statists.
The lie that both Nazism and Obama-style communism espouse is that the tyranny of the masses is good for the individual and creates a more beneficial kind of state. By belonging to their “new wave” one unites with a vision greater than himself and becomes greater than one already is, HAH!
The BIG LIE that all who oppose Obama’s collectivist agenda are racists had been dragged into stark relief beneath the glaring light of recent history. Let’s get one thing straight, when it comes to Andrew Breitbart’s video which caused so much stir three weeks ago: Shirley Sherrod was never the story although a lot of people assumed she was. The real story was, and still is the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP). Three things are very clear here . . . recently . . . .
A) The NAACP had just held a meeting in which a key speaker was allowed to praise a preacher and his thug friends who had just been arrested for beating up a Black entrepreneur selling “The audacity of DOPE” buttons. The man had made a fortune selling Obama buttons in 2008, but misjudged his audience when he began selling buttons showing Obama smoking a joint (marijuana cigarette, if you’ve been off the planet for half a century). The speaker was cheered loudly as he repeatedly called the victim “an Uncle Tom” and praised his assailants
B) Without one iota of proof, the NAACP has repeatedly joined the Democrats and Obama in calling the TEA Party a “racist” group. The NAACP has made its career over the last half century calling Whites racists devils and this happens despite the fact that in the face of claims that the “N-word” was used by TEA Partiers “at least fifteen” and “up to twenty-nine times” against Black congressmen on the day that the Obamacare bill passed. Breitbart has offered $100,000 to anyone who can show up with indisputable video proof that the N-word was used even at all, even once, that day.
So far despite all the cameras and video devices on site, no one has come forward to prove those sworn to nasty events happened. Of course, supposedly one Black congressman said he was “spat upon” but no video of that footage has occurred either, making critical minds think that spitting incident never happened either. Breitbart’s money is still in his bank account.
C) Now to the video itself, Sherrod herself was apparently a terrible victim in her youth when her father was, she said, killed by a White southern man and justice was never done. That was left out. Then later (in the 43-minute speech which the NAACP had recorded in its entirety) she talks about her epiphany that it “wasn’t about black and white at all” or at least not mainly about black and white but rather about helping the poor regardless of race. In other words her epiphany was that she learned how to do her job.
Part of that, a good part, was left out of the video. What was actually left in the video segment? What was left in was that while she was talking, the NAACP membership (which did NOT know where the speech and her story were going) was tittering and laughing and giving virtual “Hallelujah, Girl!” treatment to the speech as she was talking about a very uneasy interracial contact in her job with a White Man who “thought he was superior to me.” That in a nutshell was the story, the clearly racist NAACP reaction to the apparently racist story (early in her talk) was uniquely racist for an organization that claims to be seeking equal footing for all races.
The most clear and obvious statistics about racism in this country is that Democrat Barack Obama received more White votes and a larger percentage of White votes in 2008 than John Kerry did in 2004 or Al Gore did in 2000, roughly 48%, (roughly the same percentage that Bill Clinton received in being re-elected in 1996) meanwhile John Mc Cain in our recent election received around 4.4 % of Black votes. That single fact more than any other propelled Barack Obama into office with a 6-7 % edge in the popular vote. In other words, Whites in 2008 were roughly eleven times more likely to cross racial lines in casting their votes then Blacks were and that cemented Obama’s win.
Rajjpuut suggests that probably 90% of the White’s who voted against Obama and 100% of the Blacks who voted for Mc Cain in 2008 did so, as Rajjpuut did, for objective dislike of socialism, big spending and high taxes rather than racial reasons. Today, 55% of Americans now label Obama a “socialist,” yet despite his miserable performance as president, 25% of the people still strong approve of Obama’s performance as president, the same 25% of people that are calling all Obama’s opposition “racists.”
Who then are the real “racists?” Who are those who much use this emotionally-loaded way to disparage the compent free? Why then do so many cling to the collectivism that the Left and Barack Obama espouse? It is out of fear. They have bought into the “victim” lie of the Left so thoroughly, that they see themselves incapable of succeeding on their own and REQUIRING the state or the union or the collective to help them. Rajjpuut suggests that instead of a “false and noisy” black pride, gay pride, women’s pride, brown pride, etc. a quiet and calm HUMAN PRIDE be adopted by those who see themselves as downtrodden so they might then allow the spirit of our founding fathers’ courageous movement to infuse their every action.
To clear the air here, Rajjpuut, a Libertarian, similarly did NOT vote for Barack Obama because after reading “Dreams from My Father,” and listening to his speeches and going deep into research into his past voting and into the character of his mother Stanley Ann Dunham, grandfather Stanley Armour Dunham and Barak (no ‘c’) Hussein Obama, Sr. his Kenyan birth-father . . . Rajjpuut rightly decided that Obama was at least a highly-exuberant socialist but far more likely an abject communist.
The word “prejudice” refers to pre-judging a situation, person, etc. without having all the facts. When that prejudice is along the lines of race or color then the word “racist” is applicable. When the “prevailing direction” of race hatred is breached then reverse-racism occurs. The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) has today become what it fears: a group of racists, or more properly a group of reverse-racists. While some liberated Blacks talk about the NAACP as “becoming increasingly irrelevant,” the truth is that the NAACP has for several years now become a monstrous impediment on the road to better race relations. The biggest impediment on that road, however, is Barack Obama. Our “post-racial” president is either personally a racist or impersonally (for political advantage) the most highly visible race-baiter in America’s history . . . or most likely both.
Emphasizing specifics, the NAACP is a racist organization because unlike the great Martin Luther King, Jr., the NAACP judges Whites on their skin color not by the content of their caracter; and Barack Obama who seems to be doing the same thing is most likely judging voters on their stance for him or against him and using that prejudice as motivation for calling them “racists” to weaken, he hopes, the strength of their political opposition to him and the will of others to unite against him.
While throwing brickbats around, Shirley Sherrod is also a huge impediment to better race relations . . . a politically-incorrect fact that no one seems to be mentioning since the public-hijinks the other day by Shirley’s former employer the U.S. Department of agriculture. Ms. Sherrod, is also, outside of her being a racist, something called a ‘sewer’ or perhaps ‘suer,’ someone who likes to sue in the hopes of achieving monetary gain . . . she will be most likely suing the USDA for unlawful termination and should, if justice prevails, lose the suit, because her former employer has apologized publicly and publicly offered her a better job than she had earlier, but this is somewhat beside the point.
Ms. Sherrod, the NAACP and President Obama can all be lumped into the same boat, they are highly prejudiced against Whites who are not prejudiced for forced Black economic equality via redistribution of wealth. Read that again, if necessary, for it is a key truth, no one except a few Black TEA Party members seems to be talking about. Democrats as a whole (and the NAACP as a subset containing perhaps 95% Democrats) seem to come at the world of race seeing the Black as a victim and someone the government needs to throw money at . . . . hence programs such as “Affirmative Action” which are merely institutionalized reverse-discrimination. As Martin Luther King emphasized, equality of opportunity is the only opportunity that matters. Equality of everything else (a.k.a. socialism, Marxism) such as Mr. Obama wants to force down our throats might actually be forced upon us and in the end put all Blacks and all Whites and all others into uniform poverty at a level much, much lower than the average American Black now faces. Mr. Obama knows this for a fact and admitted as much several times. The poorest 5% of Americans are much better off than 90% of the worlds’ people thanks to the industry of free men and the magic of free markets. Mr. Obama has seemingly denied the importance of this fact over and over. For instance . . . .
During one of the candidate debates, the moderator gave an example of an economic fact and then asked Obama. “Since it’s been proved that anytime personal and business taxes on the highest earners goes above 28%, the nation is threatened with recession, should we ever raise these taxes above 28%?”
Without hesitating, Mr. Obama said, “I’m interested in ‘fairness’” as he went on to explain why he favored high taxes on the rich and upon business, small and large. There’s your blessed socialistic equality for you: everybody in the same sinking boat . . . this is why Mr. Obama has been working at cross-purposes to the economic best-interests of the American people . . . so that he can put everybody in the same leaky boat when we all know that the ‘rising tide lifts all boats’ and that’s where to put one’s economic emphasis: on making the country more prosperous as a whole. Those American’s living below the poverty line are wealthier than 96% of the world’s people . . . the key, then is to lift the poverty line by say 60% rather than dropping more Americans into much-ballyhooed equality far below the poverty line. Reverse-racism used as a political tool by the NAACP and Mr. Obama for political ends is counter-productive of all worthy goals along those lines and a divisive factor preventing Americans from working together. Faced with these grave challenges, only our Constitution and our courage can save us from Obama’s brave new world. AMEN
Ya’ll live long, strong and ornery
** Mao is the greatest mass murderer in history and yet Mao and another Leftist monster Che Guevara are huge T-shirt favorites right here in America, go figure! According to discoverthenetworks.org, on their searching for utopia, Leftists have ceaselessly “inflicted vast human suffering on their innocent countrymen, innocents in other lands, or both. Among the hallmarks of their ‘progressive’ regimes, which rank among the most oppressive on record, have been the attempt to implement the discredited economic theories of Karl Marx and the determination to create a new page in human history by purging their societies of the ‘reactionary’ ideas of the past and ultimately all dissent, and to do by any means necessary, including torture, murder, mass enslavement, and genocide. Their monstrous crimes were inspired and then justified by the quest for ‘social justice,’ an impossible task that would require the remaking of human beings themselves to accomplish. It is the attempt to remake humanity that produces the atrocities, as the gruesomely monotonous record of radicals in power shows.” Of course their website has only recently been considering that Hitler was a collectivist also, and he certainly ‘progressed’ well beyond the Constituion of the Weimar Republic even before becoming Germany’s full-fledged dictator.