The Sickening Satisfaction Of The Victim Status

I wrote the following in response to an incredibly dumb comment left by a troll in a previous thread:

"Black America by and large has no interest in truth, only the sick satisfaction derived from grievance politics."

(Here is the obligatory caveat -- I'm not talking about every Black American. Just the racism chasers, Obama supporters, and mindless drones.)

But I sincerely hope that I'm proven wrong.

If It Looks Like A Duck and Quacks Like A Duck Then Dammit It's A Duck!!!

I am re-posting an article I happened upon this afternoon for all of those who believe that Socialist Duck-In-Chief isn't a Socialist Duck!:

Will MSM Report on Obama Membership in Socialist New Party?

By P.J. Gladnick (Bio | Archive)
October 8, 2008 - 16:15 ET

The mainstream media thought that the membership of Todd Palin, who is not a candidate for any office, in the Alaska Independence Party important enough to report in such outlets as the Los Angeles Times, MSNBC, and the New York Times, among others.

So now that Barack Obama's membership in the far left New Party has been unearthed, will they report his membership in that Socialist organization?

Proof of Obama's membership in the New Party was discovered by the Politically Drunk On Power blog:

In June sources released information that during his campaign for the State Senate in Illinois, Barack Obama was endorsed by an organization known as the Chicago "New Party". The 'New Party' was a political party established by the Democratic Socialists of America (the DSA) to push forth the socialist principles of the DSA by focusing on winnable elections at a local level and spreading the Socialist movement upwards. The admittedly Socialist Organization experienced a moderate rise in numbers between 1995 and 1999. By 1999, however, the Socialist 'New Party' was essentially defunct after losing a supreme court challenge that ruled the organizations "fusion" reform platform as unconstitutional.

After allegations surfaced in early summer over the 'New Party's' endorsement of Obama, the Obama campaign along with the remnants of the New Party and Democratic Socialists of America claimed that Obama was never a member of either organization. The DSA and 'New Party' then systematically attempted to cover up any ties between Obama and the Socialist Organizations. However, it now appears that Barack Obama was indeed a certified and acknowledged member of the DSA's New Party.

On Tuesday, I discovered a web page that had been scrubbed from the New Party's website. The web page which was published in October 1996, was an internet newsletter update on that years congressional races. Although the web page was deleted from the New Party's website, the non-profit Internet Archive Organization had archived the page.

From the October 1996 Update of the DSA 'New Party':
"New Party members are busy knocking on doors, hammering down lawn signs, and phoning voters to support NP candidates this fall. Here are some of our key races...

Illinois: Three NP-members won Democratic primaries last Spring and face off against Republican opponents on election day: Danny Davis (U.S. House), Barack Obama (State Senate) and Patricia Martin (Cook County Judiciary)."

You can find the above quote from the scubbed New Party web page at this Internet Archive Organization link. More confirmation of Obama's membership in the New Party can be found at an article in the November 1996 Progressive Populist magazine:

New Party members and supported candidates won 16 of 23 races, including an at-large race for the Little Rock, Ark., City Council, a seat on the county board for Little Rock and the school board for Prince George's County, Md. Chicago is sending the first New Party member to Congress, as Danny Davis, who ran as a Democrat, won an overwhelming 85% victory. New Party member Barack Obama was uncontested for a State Senate seat from Chicago.

The Democratic Socialist Party of America also reported on Obama's New Party membership in its July/August 1996 edition:

The Chicago New Party is increasely becoming a viable political organization that can make a different in Chicago politics. It is crucial for a political organization to have a solid infrastructure and visible results in its political program. The New Party has continued to solidify this base.

First, in relation to its infrastructure, the NP's membership has increased since January '95 from 225 to 440. National membership has increased from 5700 in December '95 to 7000. Currently the NP's fiscal balance is $7,000 and receives an average of $450/month is sustainer donations.

Secondly, the NP's '96 Political Program has been enormously successful with 3 of 4 endorsed candidates winning electoral primaries. All four candidates attended the NP membership meeting on April 11th to express their gratitude. Danny Davis, winner in the 7th Congressional District, invited NPers to join his Campaign Steering Committee. Patricia Martin, who won the race for Judge in 7th Subcircuit Court, explained that due to the NP she was able to network and get experienced advice from progressives like Davis. Barack Obama, victor in the 13th State Senate District, encouraged NPers to join in his task forces on Voter Education and Voter Registration. The lone loser was Willie Delgado, in the 3rd Illinois House District. Although Delgado received 45% of the vote, he lost by only 800 votes. Delgado commented that it was due to the NP volunteers that he carried the 32nd Ward. Delgado emphasized that he will remain a visible community activist in Humbolt Park. He will conduct four Immigration workshops and encouraged NP activists to get involved.

Kudos to Politically Drunk On Power for digging up this information about Obama's membership in the socialist New Party. The question now is if the MSM will deem his party membership important enough to report on. They sure didn't hesitate to report on Todd Palin's membership in the Alaska Independence Party.

UPDATE: Yet more proof of Obama's close involvement in the socialist New Party from NewsBusters' Hermano who provided this link to the Chicago Democratic Socialists of American September-October 1995 New Ground 42 edition:

About 50 activists attended the Chicago New Party membership meeting in July. The purpose of the meeting was to update members on local activities and to hear appeals for NP support from four potential political candidates. The NP is being very active in organization building and politics. There are 300 members in Chicago. In order to build an organizational and financial base the NP is sponsoring house parties. Locally it has been successful both fiscally and in building a grassroots base. Nationwide it has resulted in 1000 people committed to monthly contributions. The NP's political strategy is to support progressive candidates in elections only if they have a concrete chance to "win". This has resulted in a winning ratio of 77 of 110 elections. Candidates must be approved via a NP political committee. Once approved, candidates must sign a contract with the NP. The contract mandates that they must have a visible and active relationship with the NP.

The political entourage included Alderman Michael Chandler, William Delgado, chief of staff for State Rep Miguel del Valle, and spokespersons for State Sen. Alice Palmer, Sonya Sanchez, chief of staff for State Sen. Jesse Garcia, who is running for State Rep in Garcia's District; and Barack Obama, chief of staff for State Sen. Alice Palmer. Obama is running for Palmer's vacant seat.

So Obama signed a contract with the New Party? Verrrry interesting.

—P.J. Gladnick is a freelance writer and creator of the DUmmie FUnnies blog. (source)


I don't know why I bothered......most of the "government educated/indoctrinated" Obama supporters don't have a problem with Socialism. Hell, some of them even theorize that Socialism is biblical!

Do You Love Obama More Than You Love America's Sovereignty?

Do you think that is a preposterous question? If this question were posed a few short months ago, I would have thought so -- but no more. What's worse is that unless one avails themselves to alternative media sources they would have no idea that "We the People" of the United States of America are in great danger of surrendering our sovereignty to an international entity. The warm and fuzzy phrase which is hallowed throughout the halls of academia and echoed during convocation ceremonies routinely of "global citizenship" is about to become a reality for the United States of America. As much as it pains me to go all "Alex Jones" on you this is true. In December of 2009 at the United Nations Climate Summit in Copenhagen, there is a very strong probability that President Obama will sign a treaty that will trump the powers of the US Constitution, if the signed treaty is ratified by the Senate.

Lord Christopher Monckton, former policy adviser to Margaret Thatcher warned of the impending danger last week as he addressed the Free Market Institute at Bethel University...


Did you catch that? He said:

"I have read that treaty. And what it says is this: That a world government is going to be created. The word "government" actually appears as the first of three purposes of the new entity. The second purpose is the transfer of wealth from the countries of the West to countries, in satisfaction of what is called, coyly, "a climate debt," because we have been burning CO2 and they haven't and we've been screwing up the climate. We haven't been screwing up the climate, but that's the line. And the third purpose of this new entity, this government is "enforcement." How many of you think that the word "election" or "democracy" or "vote" or "ballot" occurs anywhere in the 200 pages of that treaty? Quite right! It doesn't appear once. So at last the communists who piled out of the Berlin Wall and into the environmental movement and took over Greenpeace so that my friends who funded it left within a year because they'd captured it. Now the apotheosis is at hand.They are about to impose a communist world government on the world. You have a president who has very strong sympathies with that point of view. He's going to sign. He'll sign anything. He's a Nobel peace laureate. Of course he'll sign it!
So, thank you, You were the beacon of freedom to the world. It is a privilege merely to stand on this soil of freedom while it is still free. But in the next few weeks, unless you stop it, your president will sign your freedom, your democracy, and your prosperity away forever -- and neither you nor any subsequent government you may elect would have any power whatsoever to take it back again. That is how serious it is." (emphasis added)

The entire speech can be viewed here and the accompanying power point presentation can be viewed here

I was accused a few threads ago of sounding like a "looney right wing kook" for referring to President Obama's affinity for all things socialist . I can not fathom how Obama supporters can't see the obvious. But, it's gravely important that they now take off the blinders and take a stand against this diabolical agenda . Our very SOVEREIGNTY AS A NATION is imperiled. Our economic policies as well as our energy policies will be subordinated to what the world body at the United Nations says we can or cannot do.

So the questions du jour for Obama supporters and racism chasers (not necessarily the same) are -- Do you love Barack Obama more than you love America's sovereignty? Do you really want America to surrender it's economic prosperity to third world countries? Do you really believe that YOU owe a debt to poorer countries because you breathe? Right, the liberal lie is that CO2 (our very breath) creates green house gases which in turn cause global warming and millions are dying because of our greenhouse gas emission. If you think I'm distorting this inane liberal lie read for yourself:

"If we do not reach a deal over the next few months let us be in no doubt since once the damage from one checked emissions growth is done no retrospective global agreement in some future period can undo that choice. By then, it will be irretrievably too late. We should never allow ourselves to lose sight of the catastrophe we face if present warming trends continue. Ninety-eight percent of those dying and otherwise seriously affected live in the poorest countries and yet their countries account for only 8% of global emissions. This is the great injustice of climate change. Those being hit first and hardest by climate change are those who have done least to cause it." - Gordon Brown, Prime Minister United Kingdom

So according to the liberal liars the poor nations of the world are poor because of America's CO2 emissions. No. The truth is these nations are poor because of corruption, tyranny, socialism and the lack of wealth creation. The United Nation's wants to cut America down to size and our Nobel Peace Laureate POTUS is down for the cause.

Fake Rush Limbaugh Quotes & Other Stuff

I really like this guy Lee Doren. I think he used to run a blog called Copious Dissenter but I can no longer find it on my reader. Anyway, enjoy his video, consider subscribing to his page.



Here are his sidebar links:

Fake Quotes #1: http://tinyurl.com/yhwuh7w

Fake Quotes #2: http://tinyurl.com/ykx6o3z

Fake Quotes #3: http://tinyurl.com/nbsd22

Fake Quotes #4: http://tinyurl.com/ygrnnlp

Fake Quotes #5: http://tinyurl.com/yl6fxr2

Fake Quotes #6: http://tinyurl.com/ykxjntc

Fake Quotes #7: http://tinyurl.com/ykd6jol

Fake Quotes #8: http://tinyurl.com/yfdy5ar

Rick Sanchez DUI: http://tinyurl.com/ylepayx

Rush Threatens to Sue: http://tinyurl.com/yh5cr37

Non-CNN Retraction: http://tinyurl.com/yhazr4r

Non-ABC Retraction: http://tinyurl.com/yky639w

Robert Reich: http://tinyurl.com/yzforvs

Cuba: http://tinyurl.com/yjuqd96

Update: Part II

Ode To Idiocy....

Just feeling a little silly tonight....and I really wanted to share the snarky message left for my by a "fri-enemy". I wish the sound were better but I'm a little retarded where technology is concerned.

The Real Reason President Obama Was Awarded The Nobel Peace Prize

After speaking with friends and family this weekend it became increasingly clear to me that even Obama supporters initially scratched their heads and wondered what prompted the Peace Prize Committee to give the award to President Barack Obama. However, they have concluded that the accomplishment of becoming the first Black American President is so transformative that hope has been restored to the hearts of black people here and abroad and that phenomenon in and of itself is the reason that President Obama is the deserving chosen recipient. How touching... No, I can't make this stuff up, these are the sentiments of my beloved familiars.

I feel compelled to set the record straight. The REAL reason that the Socialist Norwegian Parliament gave the Nobel Peace Prize to President Obama was to make a political statement that they affirm his socialist agenda and his approach to foreign policy. This is a thinly veiled attempt to influence American foreign policy.

The fact that Obama worshippers supporters are dumb naive enough to think that these socialist Norwegian's give a tinker's damn about "hope in the hearts of black folks" is just laughable.

RIP Black America Parts 1 & 2

Just a little something to think about. If you don't see yourself in any of this then there is no reason to be angry, right?

Part 1


PART 2



There is a part 3 -- but I don't like it. Too much talk about queens & goddesses, which in my humble opinion is just foolish talk.

It's been said that if you are not part of the solution then you are part of the problem. Well, in this case I'm not sure that's true. We can't make choices for other people and choices make all the difference.

Guess Which Greedy, Corrupt, Profit-Driven, Uncaring, Immoral Health Insurer Had The Highest Claim Rejection Rate

Most Obama supporters really should know the answer and probably do -- but since they actually believe that the "Magic Negro" Barack Hussein Obama, mmm, mmm, mmm is going to save the world and all it's ills they do not listen to the still quiet voice of reason within which advises them that this new health care plan and it's public option SUCKS.

Gaius Lawrenitis Negris over at the Magic Negro Watch blog posted the results of the following study below"

"Beverly Gossage, Research Fellow for Show-Me Institute and founder of HSA Benefits Consulting wondered which insurance companies rejected the most claims. She found her answer in the AMA’s own 2008 National Health Insurer Report Card (fairly large PDF).

I'm curious. Was it Aetna? Humana?

A chart showing the major carriers and how Medicare compared to them in the study follows:

Well, well.

The Medicare denial rate found in the study was, on a weighted average basis, roughly 1.7 times that of all of the private carriers combined (99,025 divided by 2,447,216 is 4.05%; 6.85% divided by 4.05% =1.69).

You would think Medicare's sheer size might enable it to have smoother procedures with its providers that would enable it to turn down a lower percentage of claims. But no, this is the government we're talking about.

So who's the most "heartless" now? And why should Americans accept the idea of gradually being forced into a government-run system when, based on documented government experience, they will be more likely to see their claims denied?

And I didn't even get to the idea of refusals to treat in the first place, something that is present to some degree in virtually every state-run system, but is currently against the law in hospital emergency rooms in the U.S."(Source)

Funny how President Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank and others have demonized insurance companies and claimed that unisured individuals are dying because they don't have health insurance. But they don't discuss how the Gov't's existing public option is at the top of the list for denying claims. Oh.....the irony of it all.

The Cost of Impropriety

Denmark Vesey, the self described "Blackest Man on the Internet", posted an adorable (yes, it hurts to say it but really it is) photograph of President and Mrs. Obama under the caption "Not Having A Woman is 80% of Being A Homosexual". Not sure I agree with that, but that's not the point. After DV was accused of having an obsession with gay men, he wrote the following response:

"I see the failure of cats like you to keep a sister, and raise a family as a form of genocide.

I see you punk niggas who haven't raised sons, expressing disdain and disgust at Hip Hop and young black men in general while demanding government intervention as ... faggots.

I see the last 30 years of social engineering that has resulted in a split between the genders as a type of warfare.

Margaret Sanger, her Planned Parenthood organization and the eugenecist Rockefeller Foundation published papers suggesting that one of the best ways to reduce the population was to encourage homosexuality.

Just as 80% of the abortion apparatus in this country is in black neighborhoods, and the very first Planned Parenthood abortion clinic was in Harlem - I believe they target their efforts of engineered homosexuality at black men.

My rallying cry to fight off this attempted genocide of our people, and to build strong black families is ... "Get A Chick".

Now, you can reduce that to "obsession with homosexuality" if you want.

Or you can spend that energy ... Gettin' You A Chick.

Your actions will speak louder than your words." (Source)

I couldn't write that without being accused of "castrating and tearing down the black man" so I was so happy that DV said it for me. However, I am equally as frustrated with women. We have to acknowledge our failures in order to correct them and change courses. DV's comment resonates with me because I am of the opinion that the cost of impropriety is too steep. The effects of impropriety are long lasting and can literally change the cultural fabric of a society. It certainly has changed the cultural fabric of the black family -- that's part of the reason that our children are dying in the streets at the hands of our children.

The rhetoric of the supposed "conscious" sect of black folks literally nauseates me. Not because I hate my blackness -- but because action speaks louder than words. You can call yourself socially "conscious" but as long as more black children are born out of wedlock than those who aren't; as long as more black children are raised in single parent homes than those who aren't; and as long as more mother's are raising sons than fathers-- we will not have equality that you dumb azzes expect the government to provide. If you are really a proud black woman then act like it -- love yourself more than the man who will not marry you and kick his monkey-azz to the curb! If she is really your "black queen" then put her best interest before your own and honor her! If you "conscious Kings and Queens" were really conscious you would be concerned that the black population in the United States is (if not shrinking) certainly not growing.

If you were a real revolutionary you would stop selling out your "people"(using this term loosely because you "conscious" Negroes don't really give a damn about anyone except yourselves) for a metaphorical 30 pieces of silver by supporting politicians who care more about the possible extinction of Seychelles sheath-tailed bats than your possible extinction. If you "conscious" men were real revolutionaries then you would head your households . Likewise, "conscious" women you would allow them to be the head of the household. If the black family were intact, then there would be no need to look to President Obama for hope. (Seriously, that whole phenomenon during the election with grown men and women overcome with emotion because we finally have the 1st black president still fascinates me -- what the hell was that? Actually I know -- BAMBOOZLED... again)

Update: I had an offline conversation with AttorneyMom and she applied this scripture to the times in which we live.

1 But know this, that in the last days perilous times will come: 2 For men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, 3 unloving, unforgiving, slanderers, without self-control, brutal, despisers of good, 4 traitors, headstrong, haughty, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, 5 having a form of godliness but denying its power. And from such people turn away! 6 For of this sort are those who creep into households and make captives of gullible women loaded down with sins, led away by various lusts, 7 always learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. 8 Now as Jannes and Jambres resisted Moses, so do these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds, disapproved concerning the faith; 9 but they will progress no further, for their folly will be manifest to all, as theirs also was. - 2 Timothy 3:17

(Yes, I feel strange about quoting scripture, since I wasn't in a very reverent place when I wrote this rant earlier. But God always chastens and I'm thankful...)