The Future of Africa

The Future of Africa

While pastors like John Piper and the rest of the liberals all claim that Africa is 46% Christian and a fine example that we should follow, the rest of us are looking at the dark continent and seeing that 2 + 2 does not equal 5.

South African Schools
South African School Looking Not Unlike a Prison

Consistency is rare sight in any news article on Africa. Consider the opening paragraphs on this NY Times article.

KHAYELITSHA, South Africa — Seniors here at Kwamfundo high school sang freedom songs and protested outside the staff room last year because their accounting teacher chronically failed to show up for class. With looming national examinations that would determine whether they were bound for a university or joblessness, they demanded a replacement.

Finally the students’ frustration turned riotous. They threw bricks, punched two teachers and stabbed one in the head with scissors, witnesses said. The traumatized school’s passing rate on the national exams known as the matric — already in virtual free fall — tumbled to just 44 percent.

Thousands of schools across South Africa are bursting with students who dream of being the accountants, engineers and doctors this country desperately needs, but the education system is often failing the very children depending on it most to escape poverty.

A student who dreams of doing great things with his career does not fall into the same category as a student who stabs anybody in the head with scissors. They are not compatible. If he did obtain his “dream career” and went off to be an engineer, would he one day stab his coworker for similar reasons? Consistency aside, this article places the blame upon the shoulder of the teacher, and ignores the savagely violent and debased culture of the student body also known as “the bright future” of Africa.

The future of Africa relies entirely on non-blacks. As long as blacks control anything, it will fail. History has shown this to be true. Cultural Marxism hates this truth and works endlessly toward it’s goal of rewriting history. But black contempt for non-blacks runs deep. If they worked half as hard toward building their country, as they did at working toward assaulting South African whites, they might actually get somewhere.

Can The Negro Rule Himself?

“Today in Haiti we come to the real crux of the question. At the end of a hundred years of trial, how does the black man govern himself? What progress has he made? Absolutely none.

When he undertakes the task of government, he does so, not with the intent of promoting the public weal, but for the sake of filing his own pocket. His motto is still, “Pluck the fowl, but take care she does not cry out”. Corruption has spread through every portion and every department of the government. Almost all the ills of the country may be traced to their source in tyranny, the ineptitude, and the improbity of those at the helm of state. (…) Can the negro rule himself? Is he congenitally capable? (…) Today, and as matters stands, he certainly cannot rule himself”.
~ Hesketh Prichard, Where Black Rules White – 1900

Ethnic politics pushes and passes Puerto Rican Statehood

US Congress pushes and passes Puerto Rican Statehood today?

Locust:  This will allow a democrat super majority, when will the rest of you wake up, the core problem is not the illegals, its the western core, the ethos of universal equality, not all men are created equal, and we must defend our peoples right to exist.

by Molly Posted 6 hours ago

by James M. Simpson

Apparently there is to be a vote later today on a bill regarding Puerto Rican statehood. They are calling it “non-binding” but it is not non-binding! It is a trap. The bill makes eventual Puerto Rican statehood a virtual certainty. This is despite the fact that statehood has been voted down repeatedly. The Puerto Rican people don’t want it!


But since when has that stopped the Left from ramming what they want down people’s throats? And why do they want this? The same reason they want everything, to further entrench their power. Statehood would mean two new senators, six or seven new representatives, a whole slew of new voters and tons of opportunities to spend more of your money. As’s Robert Moon points out:

Due to its dense population of poverty-stricken minorities, Puerto Rico can be counted on to vote overwhelmingly for Democrats and all their handouts, and their representation will also consequently outnumber that of 25 other existing U.S. states.

Meanwhile, with Puerto Ricans having an average income of less than half that of our poorest state, they will instantly become eligible for dozens of our welfare programs. Truckloads of taxpayer dollars will also have to be perpetually dumped into the territory, by federal law, to bring it up to American infrastructure and environmental standards.

Oh, and never mind us. We don’t get a say in this either. Puerto Rico, which doesn’t want statehood, is being forced to vote, while we American citizens, who have a vested interest in the outcome, will not be given the opportunity to vote! Simply incredible!

HR 2499, titled “A Bill, to provide for a federally sanctioned self-determination process for the people of Puerto Rico” follows a very devious, underhanded multi-step path to essentially force Puerto Rican voters to eventually adopt statehood. Here’s how.

The bill first authorizes Puerto Rico to hold a vote where they are given the following two choices only:

1. Puerto Rico should maintain its current political status.
2. Puerto Rico should have a different political status (Different political status. These vague words are exactly as in the bill.)

So citizens get to choose 1 or 2. Period, no ifs, ands or buts. Then the bill stipulates what comes next:

If the people pick option 1 – which they have chosen multiple times already – then the Puerto Rican government is directed to conduct more plebiscites every eight years for the foreseeable future. So in other words, Mr. Puerto Rican citizen, we are going to keep cramming this down your throat until a majority of you choose option 2.

Once the people choose option 2, then there will be a second vote with the following three options:

1. Full independence.
2. Sovereignty “in association with the United States…” not subject to the Constitution’s Territorial Clause.
3. Statehood.

For the record, the first two options will not get much support. So the entire structure of the bill is designed to funnel Puerto Rican voters into a predetermined outcome: Statehood. This despite the fact that Puerto Ricans have voted against statehood over and over again!

Rep. Luis Gutierrez, a senior Democrat Congressman no less, just posted his views on this bill at Huffington Post. Here is what he has to say about it:

I am a senior Democratic Member of Congress, whose parents were born in Puerto Rico, and for whom Puerto Rico self-determination has been – and remains – a central issue of my congressional career. This statehood bill is the opposite of self-determination.

It is designed to craft an artificial majority for statehood where none exists now. Every time the people of Puerto Rico have been consulted on this issue through a plebiscite they’ve said NO to Statehood. NO to Statehood in 1967. NO to Statehood in 1993. NO to Statehood in 1998. This should be called the “Don’t you dare say NO to Statehood Bill”.

But he is just getting going. Listen to this:

When a similar Puerto Rico bill came up under Speaker Newt Gingrich’s Republican controlled Congress a decade ago, it was the product of lengthy and thorough hearings and an open and fair process. Then, I was given time to offer seven amendments. Then I was able to clarify the bill for the Puerto Rican people. Then, each of my seven amendments got 30 minutes of floor time for debate.

Flash forward to now. Now a Democratic Majority Congress is only allowing me two of the 16 amendments I offered in the Rules Committee on Wednesday. Now I only have 10 minutes to debate each one.

Now, under Democratic Leadership, we get one hearing, no forewarning, no companion Senate bill, and a debate only a few seconds longer than a NASCAR pit-stop…I get more time to debate renaming a Post Office than I will get to debate a bill that could make Puerto Rico the fifty-first state.

In my opinion, this bill is the political equivalent of a shady Goldman Sachs derivative: It’s secretive. It lacks transparency. It’s likely to blow up down the road and cause systemic risk to out democracy. And those who put this political derivative together don’t really tell you what this is really about and will play dumb when it explodes.

We all know now from the outrageous experience of Obamacare that leftists could care less what the will of the people is. For those of you who traditionally vote Democrat this should serve as a warning: that includes you! Even if it’s those poor, downtrodden Puerto Ricans the Left claims to want to help so much. Ram Obamacare down Americas’ throat; ram statehood down Puerto Rico’s throat.

Do I detect a pattern here?

This information needs to go viral. Congress needs to be shut down with phone calls and faxes starting first thing in the morning. That is today, April 29, 2010.

All this is going on while everyone is distracted by the monstrous financial bailout bill coming out of the Senate. The timing was deliberate! And we now hear that despite losing support from lone RINO Republican Lindsey Graham, the Democrats are going to go ahead with illegal immigrant amnesty.

So now we see a pretty comprehensive electoral strategy mapped out:

1. Naturalize 12 million illegal aliens to vote Democrat
2. Universal voter registration
3. Do away with Electoral College using state-by-state approach
4. Force Puerto Rican statehood
5. Soros-funded Secretary of State project to help steal close elections
6. Stimulus monies as political slush fund

If you’re not sufficiently angry and alarmed now, there is no hope for you. These people are demonstrating right to our faces their willingness to trample our rights and defy our will. If they are willing to do this now, what will they do if they get the permanent majorities they want?

We must be ready, war is upon us, make yourselves ready for the time is at hand, only a revolution, a bloody revolution to kill our enemies and retake our nation can save the republic, born in the blood of our patriots!!!
Lets make Mexico the 52nd state. We might as well provide them with free health care and untold entitlement programs. Hell most of them are living here anyway. Sarcasm.

Puerto Rico – 51st State? Congress Scrambling to Make it So

by Kristinn Taylor and Andrea Shea King

Last night (Tuesday) on his TV show, Glenn Beck dropped another bombshell — on Thursday, Congress will take up a bill to make Puerto Rico a state. Why is our Congress doing this now? Secretly? Quickly? If it hadn’t been for one of Beck’s “Refounders” (a Congressional insider), would we even know about this? Why is this important to you and me?

Well, the word is out, and my local 9-12/Tea party organization sent this out this morning. First thing to hit my mailbox, in fact…

There is a bill to make Puerto Rico a state. Again, they are trying to pull one over on us and on Puerto Ricans, who have consistently said they do not want to become a state. Read below for more information (from Eagle Forum). This was also discussed by Rep Tom Price on a conference call yesterday.

Please consider this:

* The U.S. would transform, overnight, into a bilingual nation. At least half of Puerto Ricans do not speak English, the language of our U.S. Constitution and founding documents. The Washington Times article, “Puerto Rican statehood,” analyzes all the implications of adding a foreign language-speaking state to the Union.

* It would bring immediate demands for massive federal spending. The average income of Puerto Ricans is less than half that of our poorest state, and infrastructure and the environment are far below American standards. Puerto Rico has a population with a median national income of $17,741, nearly a third of that for the U.S.

* Puerto Rico is already a democracy. Despite the bill’s deceptive title, Puerto Rico already has an elected government and exists as a self-governed commonwealth of the U.S.

* Statehood would give Puerto Rico more congressional representation than 25 of our 50 states! It would inevitably give Democrats two additional U.S. Senators and 6 to 8 additional Members of the House.

H.R. 2499 is stealth legislation designed to lead to the admission of Spanish-speaking Puerto Rico as the 51st state, thereby making us a de facto bilingual nation, like Canada. The U.S. Congress should not be forcing Puerto Ricans to vote on statehood, especially since the Puerto Rican people have rejected statehood three times since 1991!

No Member of Congress who describes himself as a limited government, fiscal conservative should be casting a YEA vote for H.R. 2499, as Puerto Rican statehood would cause an immediate increase in federal expenditures, particularly for taxpayer-funded welfare state services.

Sponsored by Puerto Rican delegate Pedro Pierluisi (D), the Puerto Rico Democracy Act (H.R. 2499) – which has reared its ugly head a number of times over the past few congresses but has yet to have any success – would require Puerto Ricans to hold a national referendum to decide if they want Puerto Rico to remain a self-governing U.S. commonwealth, or become the 51st state.

The referendum would be set up as two plebiscites which would effectively deceive Puerto Ricans into voting for statehood. In the first round of votes, the Puerto Rican people would be given the choice between remaining a U.S. territory and “pursuing a different political status.” If the majority votes to maintain the status quo, this bill would require that Puerto Rico vote on this same issue every eight years.

If the majority votes for “different status,” a second round of votes would be held where Puerto Ricans would choose either statehood or independence-the status quo of “U.S. territory” would not even be an option! In other words, the two ballots would be rigged to favor the outcome of statehood, overriding the wishes of Americans and Puerto Ricans who want to maintain the current commonwealth status.

* Contact your US congressmen AND
* Take quick action here:

Rep. Luis Gutierrez

Posted: April 28, 2010 11:50 PM

Why the Rush on the Puerto Rico Statehood Bill? Something Doesn’t Add Up

H.R. 2499, the Puerto Rico statehood bill was brought to the House this week after a surprise announcement last Thursday. Debate on this bill has been severely limited by the way Democratic Leaders are managing the process. Democratic Puerto Rican Members of Congress are being shut out of the process and will be severely limited in their ability to debate the bill and offer amendments. Under the current Democratic Leadership, there will be less opportunity for Members and for the people of Puerto Rico to gain a better understanding of the bill.

So, what is up with this Puerto Rico statehood bill?

In my opinion, this bill is the political equivalent of a shady Goldman Sachs derivative: It’s secretive. It lacks transparency. It’s likely to blow up down the road and cause systemic risk to our democracy. And those who put this political derivative together don’t really tell you what this is really about and will play dumb when it explodes.

I get more time to debate renaming a Post Office than I will get to debate a bill that could make Puerto Rico the fifty-first state.

Two Puerto Rican U.S. Senators? Six or seven new Puerto Rican House Members? Really? I can understand why some people would like that idea…but shouldn’t we discuss it first?

When a similar Puerto Rico bill came up under Speaker Newt Gingrich’s Republican controlled Congress a decade ago, it was the product of lengthy and thorough hearings and an open and fair process. Now, under Democratic Leadership, we get one hearing, no forewarning, no companion Senate bill, and a debate only a few seconds longer than a NASCAR pit-stop.

Then, I was given time to offer seven amendments. Then I was able to clarify the bill for the Puerto Rican people. Then, each of my seven amendments got 30 minutes of floor time for debate. Flash forward to now. Now a Democratic Majority Congress is only allowing me two of the 16 amendments I offered in the Rules Committee on Wednesday. Now I only have 10 minutes to debate each one.

Then was then this is now.

This means Speaker Gingrich, not a Speaker I voted for, not MY Speaker, allowed me 210 minutes of debate on my amendments alone, and under Democratic Leadership I get two amendments at ten-minutes each.

What’s the rush? Something is wrong with this picture. It just does not add up.

I am a senior Democratic Member of Congress, whose parents were born in Puerto Rico, and for whom Puerto Rico self-determination has been – and remains – a central issue of my congressional career. This statehood bill is the opposite of self-determination.

It is designed to craft an artificial majority for statehood where none exists now. Every time the people of Puerto Rico have been consulted on this issue through a plebiscite they’ve said NO to Statehood. NO to Statehood in 1967. NO to Statehood in 1993. NO to Statehood in 1998. This should be called the “Don’t you dare say NO to Statehood Bill”.

Why is it that the when the people of the District of Columbia repeatedly and overwhelmingly ask for Statehood, Congress ignores them, and when the people of Puerto Rico, who have never asked for statehood and who have actually said ‘no’ to statehood three times get this statehood bill pushed on them in a rush…with little or no debate?

For the first time I can remember, I am planning to vote against the rule crafted by my party to govern the floor debate of this bill (H.R. 2499). It is a vote I did not expect to have to cast and is a deep disappointment. But I’m left with no choice.

Follow Rep. Luis Gutierrez on Twitter:

Puerto Rico’s “Nuclear Option” Statehood Strategy

Written By: Guest Contributor
Published: 4/23/2010 Print This Article

Puerto Rico’s “Nuclear Option” Statehood Strategy

By Robert DePosada

Next week Congress will vote on a bill to invite Puerto Rico to become our 51st State.  The Democratic leadership in Congress is using their usual playbook of deceptive rhetoric and stealth tactics to push their agenda, but the misleadingly-named Puerto Rico Democracy Act (H.R. 2499) is a new low.

Under the banner of a non-binding self-determination bill, Congress will likely put their stamp of approval on a flawed election process in Puerto Rico that will guarantee the addition of Puerto Rico as our 51st state. In addition to costing U.S. taxpayers more than  $30 billion a year, we will be adopting a state where only 20 percent of its residents speak English, the per capita income is half of Mississippi’s (our poorest state) and the gun control laws are more stringent than any state in the U.S.

Here is how it will work: Congress passes a non-binding self-determination bill which calls for a federally sanctioned self-determination process for Puerto Rico. Statehood leaders in Puerto Rico, who control all branches of government, will design – by not offering the continuation of Puerto Rico’s current status as a commonwealth – an election that guarantees a significant statehood victory. Then, after statehood wins a landslide majority, they will elect a congressional delegation to send to Washington, D.C. and demand they be seated.  With its current population of about four million, Puerto Rico could add six or seven liberal members to the House of Representatives and two to the U.S. Senate.

Because Puerto Ricans have repeatedly rejected statehood and voted to remain a U.S. Commonwealth in all three elections in which they have voted on the issue, the New Progressive Party (PNP) are exerting their one-party control of Puerto Rico’s government to implement their own version of the “nuclear option.”  In fact, the PNP’s 2008 platform says that Puerto Rico will follow the same strategy Tennessee used to gain admission to the Union in 1796: to dispatch its newly elected congressmen to Washington to demand their seats in Congress.

But the Puerto Ricans will have one weapon the Tennesseans lacked. As PNP leader and former Governor Carlos Romero Barceló, told local newspapers, “They [congressional leaders] will have to support [statehood] in order to avoid being accused of bigotry against Hispanics.”In other words the Puerto Ricans won’t hesitate to denounce anyone who resists their demand as “racists.” Anyone who thinks such a public relations strategy is far-fetched should recall the battle over seating Roland Burris, Gov. Rod Blagojevich’s pick to be U.S. Senator from Illinois.

One has to wonder why Puerto Rican statehood leaders would use such strong-arm tactics to force their way into the Union. The main reason is that Puerto Rico’s economy is in shambles and it needs a bailout from the U.S. Treasury that it could not hope to get as a commonwealth.

Next week’s vote should be a wake-up call to all Americans and their Congressional representatives who remain committed to government transparency and our nation’s economic security. Rather than conduct an honest and open debate about the potential costs and benefits of Puerto Rican statehood, Congressional leaders are preparing to use the suspension calendar – which would limit debate and amendments for quick passage – to produce a larger Democratic majority. If Congressional leaders are committed to further stripping away our economic security and cultural identity, they should know that they will need to do it by force and not by stealth.

Tea Party PatriotsNew Patriot Media

<!–[if IE 7]> <![endif]–> GOP brings KBH back into leadership

Obama slams Arizona bill as fight lifts immigration to top of agenda

Threats Against Legislators Captured on Video!

Side Effects: The Catch 22 of Obamacare Risk Pools

Senator Dodd’s Regulation Plan: 14 Fatal Flaws

Puerto Rico’s “Nuclear Option” Statehood Strategy

Lessons from a Big Brother

Morris Makes Zack Space a Target

A Tale of Two Obamas

Tea Party Crash Fizzles Out

More Stories…

Puerto Rican Statehood Ahead?

Puerto Rican Statehood Ahead?

Wednesday, April 28, 2010
By Glenn Beck

I want to talk to you about the fundamental transformation of America. It could happen tomorrow.

But first, you have to understand progressives. What is it that progressives believe?

Big government, power and control: It’s not about Democrats or Republicans, people. It’s power and control. You can’t choose for yourself. You’re too dumb, so progressives will choose and regulate everything for you

Democratic elections: This is important to progressives. You’ll hear it “democratically elected” to refer to leaders like Hitler, Chavez and Castro — all democratically elected

Social justice: Collective redemption through the government: Call it socialism, Marxism, whatever — it’s all about the redistribution of wealth

Now, I want to talk to you about Puerto Rico. Understand: This is not about Hispanics. It’s not about freedom. It’s about power and control.

Puerto Rico is a self-governing commonwealth, but is subject to U.S. jurisdiction and sovereignty. It’s been a U.S. territory since after the Spanish-American War of 1898. They’re not an independent country. It’s similar to Guam, the Virgin Islands and American Samoa. Some people like it, others don’t; they get to enjoy many of the benefits of America — like protection — and they don’t have to pay any taxes. That’s a pretty sweet deal.

// So it’s no wonder “the people” have consistently voted against becoming America’s 51st state; three times since 1967 — the latest in 1998. It’s always been the same question: Do you want to be a state?

Now, let’s take you to Washington, where there’s important vote happening: HR 2499 — it’s called “The Puerto Rico Democracy Act.” Gosh darn it, who could be against that? The bill is a non-binding resolution, supposedly to support Puerto Rico’s “self-determination” on if they want to be a state or not.

That’s so cute. Wait, I thought they already had a right to vote? They do. So I’m left with the question: Why do they need a non-binding resolution to support their self-determination? Is there something going on that I’m not aware of that is so important that we need to take attention away from the economy or immigration?

We’ve asked some of the Republicans in Congress who are supporting this bill and here are some of the answers:

“This is a vote about freedom.”

“This vote does not grant Puerto Rico statehood, it simply gives Puerto Ricans the right to determine if statehood is something they want for themselves.”

See, I thought they already had that. Three times they voted on that. It’s almost like something else is going on. But remember, they keep telling me it’s “non-binding.”

If I just trusted progressives. With progressives, democratic elections always comes with a trick. For instance, Hitler was democratically elected. But as the chancellor, not the fuhrer. Whether it be through parliamentary tricks or corruption, it’s important to progressives to have the appearance of “the republic.” Remember: They went through the democratic process for health care.

So what’s the trick?

HR 2499 — if it passes — would force a yes or no vote in Puerto Rico on whether Puerto Rico should maintain the “current status” of the island. Wait, that’s not a vote on statehood. That’s a vote on do you want to “maintain the status quo.”

Let me ask you this: Do you want to maintain the status quo of America? ACORN’s Bertha Lewis would agree with me and say no, I don’t want our current direction. But we would disagree on the reasons why.

See the trick?

In the past, statehood fails because some people like the status quo, some want to be a state and some want to be independent. There are too many choices, too many options. They need to unite people. Do you want to maintain the status quo unites them, not on the answer but on the question.

See, the folks that like the status quo are more likely to vote for statehood than independence.

In 1998, there were five options on the ballot: Limited self-government; free association; statehood; sovereignty and none of the above. Which one won? None of the above.

But now, the vote is going to happen in two stages. The first stage: Do you want to maintain the status quo? Then a chair is removed. The second vote leaves you with three choices: statehood; full independence or modified commonwealth.

Remember, full independence and modified commonwealth historically get less than 3 percent of the vote. So those options will be the only thing standing in the way of Puerto Rico becoming a state.

But Glenn, it’s non-binding. Big deal!

True, but here’s where if you don’t know history, you are destined to repeat it. Let me introduce something to you called the Tennessee Plan. (This is probably going to sound like a conspiracy theory, but I have one thing the conspiracy theories never have.)

OK — so the Tennessee Plan, you’ve probably never heard of it unless you are from Tennessee or Alaska. Apparently, some of those who took an oath to protect and defend the Constitution haven’t heard of it either. When Tennessee first came to the Union, it had a different name; it was first called “Territory of the United States South of the River Ohio.” It was a U.S. territory, just like Puerto Rico is now.

But instead of waiting for Congress to decide if they wanted to make the territory a state, they took a different, bold route: They forced the issue themselves:

They elected delegates for Congress

They voted on statehood

They drafted a state constitution

And applied for statehood

Then, when Congress dragged their feet, they went to the Capitol and demanded to be seated

Congress was unsure of how to proceed; this was the first territory going for statehood. They relented and Tennessee became America’s 16th state. Alaska did many of the same things.

Again, the Tennessee plan in a nutshell:

Unsuccessfully petitioning Congress for admission

Drafting a state constitution without prior congressional intervention

Holding state elections for state officers, U.S. senators and representatives

In some cases, sending the entire congressional delegation to Washington to demand statehood and claim their seats

Finally, Congress has little choice but to admit a new state through the passage of a simple act of admission

Congressmen, voting for HR 2499 are like sheep being led to slaughter. They’ll say the people of Puerto Rico have a right to vote for themselves. They’ll vote yes. The progressives will then present a false choice to the people. Instead of saying “do you want to be a state?”it’s “Do you want the status quo?” If voters vote no, the next vote removes the status quo from the ballot, leaving statehood against two far less popular options. They’ll vote yes for statehood. Then they’ll elect their congressman and senators, they’ll demand to be seated and a 51st star will be attached to the flag.

How could this happen? Look at the immigration debate. What are Arizona and Texas being called? Racists. Anyone opposing Puerto Rico as state 51 would be called a hatemonger. Why do you hate Puerto Ricans so much? Why do you hate freedom?

This is not about Hispanics or freedom or sovereignty. It’s about power and control. If progressives convince Hispanics that everyone besides progressives are racist, you’ll have their vote for 60 years. But it’s more than that.

Why are Democrats and Republicans for this? Because it’s not about Republicans and Democrats. The progressives in our country know that this is the moment they’ve been waiting for; every Marxist daydream they’ve ever had, now is their time to get it done. They are not going to let it pass.

That’s what’s happening: The fundamental transformation of America. And this is only the beginning.

I told that this sounds like a conspiracy theory. But who is orchestrating this effort in Puerto Rico? Lo and behold, the New Progressive Party; from their own party platform:

“The New Progressive Party adopts the Tennessee Plan as an additional strategy for the decolonization and the claim for the admission of Puerto Rico as the 51st State of the United States of America.”

And: “This shall be done through legislation which will establish a process for the adoption and ratification of the Constitution of the State of Puerto Rico, and the election of two senators and six federal congresspersons to appear before Congress in Washington D.C. to claim their seats and the admission of Puerto Rico as the 51st State of the United States of America.”

They’re going to paint this as a vote for freedom, but Puerto Rico has already voted and they’ve already spoken. When they send the delegates to Washington, if you stand against this you’ll be labeled a racist.

— Watch “Glenn Beck” weekdays at 5 p.m. ET on Fox News Channel

News Channel

#642. The Uproar over “Thor” and more from Stuff Black People Don’t Like

#642. The Uproar over “Thor”

It was said by a man long since gone that, “Myths are public dreams, dreams are private myths.”

During Black History Month we discussed how cinema presents opportunities for Black people to take on roles that reality seems to continually deny them, granting them the chance to play characters who have vocations that are exceedingly rare in the real world.

Perhaps then, you have caught a glimpse of Hollywood’s public dream, creating myths in film by casting Black people in roles that non-celluloid enhanced life shockingly can’t provide.

It is important to note that Joseph Campbell was speaking about myths that unite a cohesive people to the past, safeguard their collective present and grant images of hope and courage to forge on to create a future where those myths may endure.

In Black Run America (BRA), the great myth that binds the nation together is maintained through sports, plus the continued inclusion of Black History Heroes in cinema and television to help satiate the appetite of those in need of entertainment.

Since 2000, the predominate form of entertainment at movie theaters and thus, wherever DVDs are sold, has been through the genre of comic book movies. Raking in billions upon billions in worldwide box office revenue, films such as The Dark Knight, X-Men, Superman, Spider-Man and a host of others have a profound impact upon pop culture.

The problem is of course the nearly complete absence of any Black people in comics or in comic book movies. Hundreds of millions of people see these films, read the comics and buy the merchandise but rarely is it in celebration of any Black comic book hero, but the continued perpetuation of the notion that” only white people can save the world” ideas.

Comic books are the 21st century answer to the myths of old that worked to make mere mortals strive to have the characteristics of the Gods, ennobling us to summon the courage of greater beings in pursuit of truth and the overcoming of personal obstacles:

Comic books have always been popular with the American people, but in recent decades their popularity has increased dramatically. The Christopher Reeve’s Superman movies may have that just shows America’s fascination with that character. Film seems to be America’s choice of form for pop culture, and comic book adaptations seem to be limitless lately.

In the more popular titles there is also more going on that is subtle that draws us to them. The characters are iconic in who they represent too. Superman represents the immigrant. He fully embraces America and will do anything to help his country, but at the same time he has to remember where he came from and that he is not truly an American (or even a human). The Hulk is a representation that anger can take over even the most rational of people and make them into a monster. Batman is an avenger, and uses fear against those who use fear to intimidate regular people. Captain America is an example of the truly patriotic and righteous as he fights the Nazis and Red Skull. The X-Men represent the outsiders, the people who suffer prejudice in the real world. It is these subtleties that also draw us in to these characters and stories.

Over time, these characters have dealt with a changing morality, and they have changed with it. That is one reason that we are drawn to them and why they are still compelling. The Greek and Roman myths changed too. The mythologies reflected morality and human nature, but there were many different versions of the stories just like in comics. Comic books will continue to reflect the nature of our society, and that is why they will continue to be popular. There is a lot more going on in comics than just kid’s stories, and that is why they will be around for a long time to come.

The problem with the comic book movie is one that plagues that Black people, for so few Black faces are seen in these films that can give Black people myths and heroes to cheer for (Barack Obama comics notwithstanding) and engineer any type of character that can import positive ideas to the Black community. The universality of heroism is a noble idea, but to Black people only characters that are distinctively Black can provide idols for young Black people to cheer for, buy their merchandise and strive to replicate (see the power of the Obama Effect).

Thus, in the new Iron Man movie the Ultimate Avengers story, the character of Nick Fury – long an aging white guy – has been replaced with inimitable Samuel L. Jackson. A traditional white character has become a Black character, merely for the sake of integrating the white world of comic books.

In the poorly-received Daredevil film, the master of criminality Kingpin – once again a white character in every incarnation of the comic before – was replaced with a Black actor, Michael Clarke Duncan.

Black people need heroes (and villains) to identify with and the inclusion of Black characters – replacing boring white people – helps to open the door of mythology to more people, bring about inclusion.

Regrettably, Black people forget the incredible 1990s film Meteor Man that stars a nearly all-Black cast and a Black superhero trying to make Washington DC safe for Black people.

The upcoming Thor 2011 film (all part of the plan to eventually make an Avengers film) is one movie that hardly has the ability to cast Black people or any person of color, considering the subject material is the Nordic God of Thunder and his companions of Asgard:

In Norse mythology, Asgard (Old Norse: Ásgarðr; meaning “Enclosure of the Æsir[1]) is one of the Nine Worlds and is the country or capital city of the Norse Gods surrounded by an incomplete wall attributed to a Hrimthurs riding the stallion Svadilfari, according to Gylfaginning. Valhalla is located within Asgard. Odin and his wife, Frigg are the rulers of Asgard.

Ostensibly, a film about Nordic Gods is one that will be devoid of Black people, right? You see, Black people have a problem with white actors playing Black roles. This reasonable response to white people being cast as historical Black characters devalues the films authenticity:

Ya’ll know that every time a historical Black person is deemed to be of merit, his or her onscreen depiction will be done by white people as white people.

Don’t get me wrong: I’m not one of those people so pathologically Black that I have the urge to smash every pane glass window that depicts Jesus as a white man, but anybody with even a cursory knowledge of the bible realizes that he couldn’t have looked like Jim Caviezel.

Anybody that knows Egypt is in Africa wondered what in the world was going on when they first saw the Ten Commandments starring Charleton Heston as Moses.

I mean, this wasn’t an Egypt that had its bloodline significantly lightened by being conquered by Alexander, Caesar, Napoleon and Mussolini seemingly in succession. This was early BC Egypt; the one that still looked like Harlem in the 1980s.

And a lot of times, you don’t even have to be a dead Black person to get a white actor to play you.

Mariane Pearl, wife of slain journalist Daniel Pearl, is an African-Dutch-Jewish-Chinese-Cuban.

Who played her onscreen? Angelina Jolie who is none of the above.

And then (and I know this is a sidebar argument but please allow it) whenever a Black life is deigned significant enough to not only appear onscreen but also with a Black actor playing the part, there always seems to be a white story which serves as an undercurrent.

Take Invictus or Cry Freedom or the Last King of Scotland, movies about, ostensibly at least, Nelson Mandela, Steven Biko and Idi Amin.

Those movies also gave equal time to telling the stories of a white soccer player, a white journalist and a young white physician.

All this makes me wanna make my own movie: The Beatles—starring Charlie Murphy, Tracy Morgan, Kevin Hart and Adewale AkinnuoyeAgbaje.

Black people should have the right to play Black characters in films. Of course this makes sense. However, Black people should also have the right to play white characters as well, no matter how silly the inclusion of such a character in a historical inaccurate might be. In the 2011 Thor film, the casting of Black actor to play a Nordic God makes perfect sense, as we live under the rules of Black Run America (BRA):

Even for an actor who has played a vampire-hunter with a guilty conscience, a Baltimore crime lord with a taste for Adam Smith, and an asset manager with a stalker, the role of the Norse deity Heimdall – guardian of the burning rainbow bridge between the world of men and the world of gods – was always going to be a bit of a challenge.

But playing a god in Kenneth Branagh’s forthcoming film Thor has turned out to be the least of Idris Elba’s worries, after fans of the comic books turned on the star of The Wire for reasons that have nothing to do with his acting ability and everything to do with the colour of his skin.

When news emerged late last year that the 37-year-old black Londoner had been chosen to play Heimdall, “the whitest of the gods”, a being who can hear the sap flowing in trees and look across time and space, many devotees of the Marvel comics on which the film is based flocked to online forums to weep, gnash their teeth and unleash a tide of indignation…

Elba, who was born in Hackney, north-east London, to a Ghanaian mother and Sierra Leonean father, has addressed such concerns in a string of recent interviews.

“There has been a big debate about it: can a black man play a Nordic character?” he told TV Times. “Hang about, Thor’s mythical, right? Thor has a hammer that flies to him when he clicks his fingers. That’s OK, but the colour of my skin is wrong?

“I was cast in Thor and I’m cast as a Nordic god,” he said. “If you know anything about the Nords, they don’t look like me but there you go. I think that’s a sign of the times for the future. I think we will see multi-level casting. I think we will see that, and I think that’s good.”

Cinema, which is far less reliant on existing, classic material, has lagged behind theatre when it comes to colour-blind casting.

Rumours of a black James Bond remain just that, although his CIA friend Felix Leiter has been played by two African-American actors, Bernie Casey in 1983’s Never Say Never Again, and Jeffrey Wright in the Daniel Craig films Casino Royale (2006) and Quantum of Solace (2008).

In 1999, another originally white US lawman, Captain James West, was played by Will Smith in Wild Wild West, which also starred Kenneth Branagh.

Understand, white actors cannot play Black roles but Black actors can play any role they want. Even a character of mythology that belongs to the pantheon of Nordic heroes is fair-game to be portrayed by a Black person, though evidence for Black people arriving in Europe starts in the 16th century.

Nordic myths are quite old and bespeak of a time when a homogeneous people roamed the land, with Gods that reflected their fair skin to worship. However, Black people see nothing historical wrong with the inclusion of a Black person into the world of Asgard, for it makes absolutely perfect sense.

Even Captain America was rumored to be open to a diverse potential actor base, with Will Smith leading the way at one point. Never mind that during World War II the United States Armed Forces were segregated, thus negating the opportunity for a Captain America to be Black as this is of trivial importance:

While everyone seems to be chasing down flimsy leads about who’s playing Captain America, I’m left wondering: What the heck is Marvel thinking here?

It’s been a month since “Captain America” director Joe Johnston promised casting news within “a couple of weeks,” and besides a disappointing (and ever-growing) list of actors I’d never dream of installing as the title character, we’re no closer to anything firm.

None of this answers the question: How is there not one non-white actor on this list? To have 10 actors reportedly in the running, with not a single one of them African American, Latino or otherwise, isn’t exactly representative of the American population these days. Why pass on a great opportunity for Marvel to think outside the box. After all, isn’t America a melting pot?

If a Nordic God can be Black, by gosh a World War II soldier can be Black and thus, earn the title of Captain America. Black people (who were 9 percent of the population during World World II in America, the rest of 90 percent of the people being white) can see themselves playing any role, regardless of the time, place, country or historical figure.

George Washington? Black in the next biopic on his life. Neal Armstrong? Don’t you know all of NASA is Black, as was the first man on the moon? The Romans, Greeks and Egyptians? Black, Blacker and Blackest.

White people cannon be cast as Black characters. Ever. Period. End of discussion.

Especially white women, for the opportunities of Black female actors are precious few to begin with and only growing rarer.

But Black people see no great travesty in playing historically inaccurate characters, especially “the whitest God of them all” as Stuff Black People Don’t Like includes the uproar over Thor.

Black people need myths to guide them by and though African mythology is orally rich , the visual shock of seeing a Black in Valhalla and as a Nordic God offers a chance to continue the displacement of the old mythology that once bound a people together, but now works to bring about their complete dissolution.

By rewriting history and mythology new and more palatable myths emerge.

The Obama Effect in Action – The World Kneels Before Barack Obama

The Obama Effect. What is it? What type of power does it have over the masses in not just America, but the entire world?

Mein Obama was seen as the Tiger Woods of politics, an individual capable of bringing closure to the open sore of race hostilities in the United States, capable of transcending negative stereotypes about Black people while ushering in an era of unprecedented peace and tranquility wrapped in “post-racial world” rhetoric.

All Zod Obama has asked of his loyal subjects is that they kneel before him in obsequious obedience and then the Obama Effect can work to magically cure all that ails and troubles not just in this weary nation, but the entire world:

As approval ratings for Barack Obama continue to decline at home, world opinion of the United States is rising steadily under his stewardship. A new international survey by the British Broadcasting Company reveals that views of the U.S. around the world have “improved sharply” during the first year of the Obama presidency, with positive opinion outweighing negative for the first time since 2005…

World opinion of the United States has warmed thanks to Obama, while opinion of Obama domestically has cooled considerably (save for Black people who still offer monolithic support their president).

In fact, move over Leonardo DiCaprio from Titanic, but it appears that Mein Obama is the true “King of the World”:

President Barack Obama is still the world’s most respected leader, according to a new six-country poll.

Released today by France 24 and Radio France Internationale, the Harris Interactive Poll asked 6,135 adults between the ages of 16 and 64 who live in the United States, Britain, France, Italy, Germany or Spain to name their favorite world leaders.

Seventy-seven percent of those surveyed chose Obama, which is one percentage point higher than when Harris Interactive asked the same question in November.

Like Xerxes before him and Ozymandias of Watchmen fame, Obama is the true God-King of the earth, awarded Nobel Prizes and other accolades for his ability to perform the genuinely difficult tasks that his Vice President stated were uniquely genetically disposed to him (unlike other Black people) during the Democratic Primary season of 2007-2008.

Perhaps the Obama Effect can be best described as uplifting Black hearts (and Disingenuous White Liberals) while simultaneously providing white people with a glimpse of what 2042 (when they are projected to be a minority in the United States) will be like. Thus, the domestic revulsion to Mein Obama that is taking place among white people (who continue to provide the impetus behind the freefall of Obama’s approval rating) is a corollary to the Obama Effect, which enables Black people to reach new heights of optimism tied exclusively to Mein Obama ascension:

But the black high school student is surprisingly optimistic about the future and her chances for a better life — an attitude common among her African-American peers, according to a new nationwide survey of high school students.

“I know kids who’ve been through less and maybe they can’t handle it,” said Fleming, who will head to Florida A&M University in the fall in hopes of eventually becoming a veterinarian. “But my mom always tells me, ‘Work hard, stay positive and you’ll make it.'”

A poll released Thursday by Hamilton College in Clinton, N.Y., found that 70 percent of black students ages 15 to 18 thought their standard of living would be better than their parents, compared with just 36 percent of white students.

Overall, 39 percent of respondents thought they would have a higher living standard.

Those numbers and the level of optimism among black students appeared to be closely tied to their enthusiasm for President Barack Obama, making for what some called the “Obama effect.”

Asked about the president’s performance, more than two-thirds of black students rated his performance as “good” or “very good,” compared with 23 percent of white students. Overall, about a quarter of the students who were surveyed rated the president highly.

DeQuan Foster, a 15-year-old high school sophomore in Newark, N.J., agreed that having someone who looks like him leading the country has strongly influenced his belief in the future and what he can personally achieve.

“You’re always told anything is possible — but when you see it, you believe it. It makes me want to try twice as hard,” said Foster, who’s active in the theater and his local Boys & Girls Club and hopes to start his own entertainment company after college.

It’s an attitude that mirrored the findings of a recent Harvard Institute of Politics survey of 18- to 29-year-olds, and that could have ramifications on November’s midterm elections, said John Della Volpe, the institute’s polling director.

“Young African Americans have this serious afterglow that is not as strong with whites and Hispanics,” Della Volpe said. “And that’s despite (African American youth) having more serious economic concerns.”

The Hamilton College survey involved 818 high school sophomores, juniors and seniors from across the country who were surveyed last month. The poll, funded by the school’s Levitt Center for Public Affairs, has a margin of error of plus-or-minus 3.5 percentage points.

Stephen Wu, the Hamilton economist who oversaw the poll, said he was surprised by the stark difference in optimism among races and that black students’ attitudes appeared to be so tied to their view of the president.

But many students — even in Chicago, the Obama family’s home outside Washington — said they witness the divide all the time.

“It always comes back to Obama,” said Deja Bailey, a 15-year-old African American student who attends the city’s prestigious Walter Payton High School. Even her own friends can’t agree. She said one of them carries a scrapbook about the president and frequently argues with others who say he’s doing a “horrible” job.

The latter attitude also frustrates Foster, the black teen in New Jersey, who wishes his peers had more patience — and more hope.

“Everyone isn’t going to support every decision the man makes. That’s life,” he said. “It’s the same with parents. You may not agree with everything they do, but they have your best interest at heart.”

Black people closely guard the sanctity of Mein Obama’s halo that they rightfully hope to safeguard for four more years of hope, change and continued optimism in 2012. Providing 96 percent of their votes across the nation to Mein Obama in the 2008 President Elections, Black people are the only racial group that stands united behind their president with an approval rating hovering around 90-95 percent.

The Obama Effect causes Black hearts to beat faster with pride, consequently causing those hearts who can see to beat faster as well, but for opposite reasons. The people sense the fate of South Africa and Zimbabwe is what awaits a white minority in 2042 and the precursor to this moment – Mein Obama – offers a telling glimpse into how Democracy will play out for the beleaguered and hated majority now once they are granted permanent minority status.

Voting by those dispossessed is already frowned upon. Imagine what 2042 will bring? Thus, the glee and optimism of pay back for centuries of torment and degradations suffered at the hands at the majority is what motivates the Obama Effect. Good old fashioned revenge.

The humiliations and deprivations that the white majority enacted upon Black people in the past are constantly discussed in middle and high school and exacerbated on college campuses, feeding into the polarization of the purported post-racial world.

While no white people alive today have owned slaves, Black people are constantly bombarded with images and anecdotes from history of the evil nature of their classmate’s ancestors who subjugated Black people and denied them civil and human rights.

This works to enrage Black pupils and demoralize white pupils, feeding into the animosity of the former to the later thanks to the careful work of Crusading White Pedagogues.

If you were told your ancestors were the scum of the earth, would that constitute positive reinforcement or it would serve to severe any emotional attachment to them and thus cloud rosy projections for the future?

Mein Obama is seen as the savior of the world, a real-life General Zod who will usher in a utopia of equality, justice, humanity and the true nature of Democracy.

White kids are resigned to understand their collective fate, while Black pupils correctly project optimistic views of a future that belongs to them.

Most people still refuse to acknowledge the extent of Black Run America (BRA), when indeed we are increasingly becoming a Black Run Earth (BRE). And as the polls showcase, Obama is the Black Knight in shining armor that will reign supreme.

The Obama Effect is thus defined as creating cohesion and positivity among the Black community, who rally to the only flag that truly matters in life – race – while white people slowly resign themselves to protesting abstractions such as health care and other Tea Party ideas of government, losing all faith in the future and hiding behind men of Lloyd Marcus’ persuasion in the process.

We are reminded of the words from Ozymandias in Watchmen, as after he has revealed the plans to bring about world peace and unity through a clandestine calamity he orchestrated, he calmly states:

Do it? Dan, I’m not a Republic Serial villain. Do you seriously think I’d explain my master-stroke if there remained the slightest chance of you affecting its outcome? I did it thirty-five minutes ago.

The United States is fully-vested in Black Run America. No amount of tea party events or those who can see can stop this contingency from coming to fruition. It is upon us, looming ominously in all its terrifying grandeur and optimism.

You can kneel before Obama – as the world seems have started to do – or face the fate of Richard Barrett.

It is your choice.

So-called “civil rights” leaders promise lawlessness in response to immigration bills

So-called “civil rights” leaders promise lawlessness in response to immigration bills

The so-called peaceful and tolerant “civil rights” activists are once again up to their tricks from the 1960’s by threatening riots, violence and promising not to abide by the law:

PHOENIX – Civil-rights activists called on President Obama yesterday to fight a tough new Arizona law targeting illegal immigrants and promised to march in the streets and invite arrest by refusing to comply if the measure takes effect.

U.S. Rep. Raul Grijalva, D-Ariz., told about 3,500 protesters gathered at the state Capitol that the Obama administration can help defeat the law by refusing to cooperate when illegal immigrants are picked up by local police and turned over to federal immigration officers.

“We’re going to overturn this unjust and racist law, and then we’re going to overturn the power structure that created this unjust, racist law,” said Grijalva.

I wonder what would happen if a white conservative activist proudly declared that he or she wasn’t going to abide by the law and that they were going to work to overturn the government. I’m just asking.

Minorities have learned over the course of the past half-century that things will eventually work out to their liking if they simply act out whenever they’re upset. This is childish behavior and such tactics should never be rewarded by a mature society.

Fire spreading through the grassroots?

The strides being made on America First immigration reform has given me more hope, legislatively speaking, than I’ve had in a long, long time!

For her efforts, Arizona Governor Jan Brewer is skyrocketing in public opinion polls:

A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of likely voters in the state shows that 56% now approve of the way Brewer is performing her role as governor. Two weeks ago, just 40% offered their approval.

The new figure includes 22% who Strongly Approve of the governor’s performance. That’s up from five percent (5%) before Brewer signed the law that authorizes local police to stop and verify the immigration status of anyone they suspect of being an illegal immigrant.

The bounce in the polls is also evident in new numbers on the November election. If Brewer is the Republican nominee, she would get 48% of the vote while her likely Democratic opponent, State Attorney General Terry Goddard, would attract 40%. Two weeks ago, it was Brewer 44% and Goddard 40%. Goddard is an outspoken opponent of the new law.

As with all poll bounces, it remains to be seen whether this is a temporary spike in support for the governor or if it signifies a lasting change in the race.

While most Arizona voters favor a welcoming immigration policy, 64% support the new immigration law.

We reported that Utah and Texas are following Arizona’s lead by proposing similar bills in their state houses.

We can now add Missouri to the rapidly growing lists of states that is, thankfully, taking matters into their own hands in order to protect their citizenry from the lawless alien invasion:

KANSAS CITY, Mo. – A big change to Missouri’s immigration laws is waiting in the wings in Jefferson City. It could bring Arizona’s tough new immigration law to Missouri.

Several metro groups were in Jefferson City Wednesday to testify in a House committee meeting. They went to talk about a bill that would crack down on illegal immigrants in a way that opponents believe could put U.S. citizens in jail.

The bill’s sponsor, Rep. Mark Parkinson of St. Charles, is now floating a substitute that would change Missouri’s immigration laws to more closely match the new, controversial law in Arizona. Parkinson said his staff contacted lawmakers in Arizona, so the wording is mirrored in his proposal.

Is a fire spreading through the grassroots that could make a major positive impact on this country? I certainly hope so.

Texas and Utah now set to follow Arizona’s lead on immigration!

You can’t have a first world nation with a third world population. We’ve said it on our radio show countless times. I’ve said it on CNN. Now, elected officials are, apparently, finally beginning to see the light with regard to the illegal immigration issue and move forward with an America First agenda!

Utah and Texas legislators plan to introduce bills similar to that of Arizona’s new immigration law. The Arizona law, in turn, is modeled on federal immigration law:

8 U.S.C. § 1304 : US Code – Section 1304(e)
“Every alien, eighteen years of age and over, shall at all times
carry with him and have in his personal possession any certificate
of alien registration or alien registration receipt card issued to
him pursuant to subsection (d) of this section. Any alien who fails
to comply with the provisions of this subsection shall be guilty of
a misdemeanor and shall upon conviction for each offense be fined
not to exceed $100 or be imprisoned not more than thirty days, or

An alien is anyone who is not a citizen. Correctly used, the term includes legal immigrants. Aliens are required to carry identification papers, whereas citizens are not.

Here is the good news from Texas:

AUSTIN, Texas—A Texas lawmaker says she plans to push for a law similar to Arizona’s get-tough immigration measure.

San Antonio Express-News and Houston Chronicle report Wednesday that Republican Rep. Debbie Riddle of Tomball says she will introduce the measure in the January legislative session.

The new Arizona law would require local and state law enforcement to question people about their immigration status — and make it a crime for immigrants to lack registration documents.

Riddle says if the federal government did its job “Arizona wouldn’t have to take this action, and neither would Texas.”

And here is the good news from Utah:

Arizona’s SB1070, signed into law Friday by Gov. Jan Brewer, calls for, in part, all local law enforcement officers to ask for immigration status documents “whenever there is reasonable suspicion that the person is unlawfully present.”

Rep. Stephen Sandstrom, R-Orem, told the Deseret News Monday he’s started work on drafting a bill for the 2011 Utah legislative session that uses the Arizona statute as a model — a move he said is necessary to stanch the flow of illegal immigrants into the Beehive State.

“It is imperative that we pass similar legislation here in Utah,” Sandstrom said. “In the past, when we’ve seen tougher legislation in Arizona … a lot of illegal immigrants just move here.”

The Democrats are “worried” that these measures will “hurt the GOP” at the ballot box, which should serve as further evidence that the state Republican Parties in Arizona, Texas, and Utah are, for once, doing something right!

How many more states will follow?

It’s just a start, ladies and gentlemen, but it’s a damn fine one!

Special thanks to Dr. Virginia Abernethy for providing me with the links used in this article.

Be sure to tune in this Saturday as we discuss these bills at length on the radio!

Illegals Are For The Birds

Illegals Are For The Birds

I bought a bird feeder. I hung it on my back porch and filled it with seed. What a beauty of a bird feeder it was, as I filled it lovingly with seed. Within a week we had hundreds of birds taking advantage of the continuous flow of free and easily accessible food.

But then the birds started building nests in the boards of the patio, above the table, and next to the barbecue.

Then came the shit. It was everywhere: on the patio tiles, the chairs, the table .. everywhere!

Then some of the birds turned mean. They would dive bomb me and try to peck me even though I had fed them out of my own pocket.

And others birds were boisterous and loud. They sat on the feeder and squawked and screamed at all hours of the day and night and demanded that I fill it when it got low on food.

After a while, I couldn’t even sit on my own back porch anymore. So I took down the bird feeder and in three days the birds were gone. I cleaned up their mess and took down the many nests they had built all over the patio.

Soon, the back yard was like it used to be …. quiet, serene…. and no one demanding their rights to a free meal.

Now let’s see. Our government gives out free food, subsidized housing, free medical care and free education, and allows anyone born here to be an automatic citizen.

Then the illegals came by the tens of thousands. Suddenly our taxes went up to pay for free services; small apartments are housing 5 families; you have to wait 6 hours to be seen by an emergency room doctor; your child’s second grade class is behind other schools because over half the class doesn’t speak English.

Corn Flakes now come in a bilingual box; I have to ‘press one ‘ to hear my bank talk to me in English, and people waving flags other than our flag are squawking and screaming in the streets, demanding more rights and free liberties.

Just my opinion, but maybe it’s time for the government to take down the bird feeder.

If you agree, pass it on; if not, continue cleaning up the shit.

Yes, It Is About Race. Quite Right Too.

Yes, It Is About Race. Quite Right Too.

By Peter Brimelow

I really must congratulate me on this prediction, made back in early March when Obama was still riding high, based on my observation of the intense grass-roots fervor that contrasted so sharply with the complacent Establishment leadership at the just-completed Conservative Political Action Committee conference:

“The followership, the vast and remarkably youthful crowd, essentially all white, both sexes dressed in very proper office clothes, was intensely enthusiastic if confused—applauding both Ron Paul’s assault on indiscriminate military interventionism and former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum’s very disappointing belligerent boilerplate about the Islamic threat with equal enthusiasm, so far as I could see.

“But my guess is that the details don’t matter here. In Kevin MacDonald’s terms, a powerful ‘implicit community’ is blossoming in opposition to Obama’s racial-socialist coup. The backlash to Obama is likely to be faster and more furious than the Beltway Establishment, Right or Left, anticipates.”

(Emphasis added, gloatingly!)

The power of that backlash, at Town Halls and Tea Parties, has been the sensation of the summer. The Obama Administration is obviously shaken. The President hastened to disavow Jimmy Carter’s smear of Rep. Joe Wilson, dumped ACORN, and has even conceded that opposition to Obamacare is not, in itself, “racist”. Nevertheless, large parts of his agenda now seem imperiled.

But it is clear that the Establishment Right is also uncomfortable with the backlash, and particularly with some of its more exuberant enthusiasms, notably the apparently irrepressible demand that Obama produce his birth certificate—although this is clearly a case of symbolic politics filling a void created by the Establishment Right’s failure to lead.

It’s actually really interesting how many grassroots revolts have shaken the Establishment in recent years. The most dramatic examples, of course, was the back-to-back routing of the two Kennedy-Bush amnesty attempts. But I would argue that a precursor was the grassroots backlash to the War Against Christmas, which in the last couple of years has resulted in the simultaneous blossoming of what can only be called War Against Christmas denial, ludicrous in the teeth of scores of examples documented on VDARE.COM, so co-ordinated that it’s almost as if powerful group was shaken, like the Obama Administration, and circulated a secret memo.

Was the summer surge “racist”? I’m sure that New York Times house-broken conservative columnist David Brooks was absolutely right to say he detected no signs of “racism”, in the sense of visceral personal animosity, as he jogged through the 9/12 rally in Washington. (No, It’s Not About Race, New York Times, September 17, 2009.) This got Brooks denounced by Ed Kilgore, a New Republic blogger, as a “Yankee” (!!!apparently because Southerners regularly mingle with blacks, but everyone knows they’re racist). You have to wonder what the 9/12 crowds would have had to do to satisfy these people.

But it’s still “about race”. It is no coincidence, comrades, that the backlash is overwhelming white. Whites in America voted heavily against Obama. White Protestants (“let’s face it, they are America”—Phillip Roth, American Pastoral, p. 311) still make up nearly half (42%) the electorate and they voted 2-1 for McCain. But are even 4% of Obama’s appointments white Protestants?

The plain fact is that the Obama Administration has very shallow roots in historic America. It is, to put it brutally, a minority occupation government. Government and governed have little real contact or mutual understanding. It’s a recipe for continuous clashes.

Inevitably, a significant number of these clashes are racial. A year ago, in my introduction to Steve Sailer’s book America’s Half-Blood Prince, I wrote:

I think the contradictions that Steve has identified in this book will turn any Obama Presidency into a four-year O.J. Simpson trial and that the consequent melt-down will compare to the Chernobyl of the Carter Presidency in its destructive partisan effects.”

And these polarizing O.J. Simpson incidents are coming thick and fast—from the inexplicable dropping of voter intimidation charges against the Philadelphia New Black Panthers, to Obama’s reflexive siding with black Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates against white Cambridge cop James Crowley, to black educator Charisse Carney-Nunes’ instructing school children to rap in praise of Obama to the multicultural photograph posed by the White House to celebrate Obama’s recent rally with doctors in support of his health care legislation. (Typical mordant discussion by Larry Auster here).

Under the clinically scientific headline Birth of a Notion, Scientific American’s Steve Mirsky recently argued that the inexplicable (to him) appeal of the birthers lay in what he called implicit social cognition, which involves the deep-rooted assumptions we all carry around and even act on without realizing it”.

As an example,

“Harvard University psychologist Mahzarin Banaji is a leader in implicit social cognition research. She excavates the hidden beliefs people hold by measuring how fast they make value judgments when shown a rapid-fire succession of stimuli, such as photographs of faces….[She] found that volunteers linked white Americans more strongly than Asian-Americans with, well, America. Banaji and Devos then decided to do what even they thought was a ‘bizarre’ study: they had people gauge the ‘American-ness’ of famous Asian-Americans, such as Connie Chung and tennis player Michael Chang, versus European whites, such as Hugh Grant.

“The study found that white Europeans are more ‘American’ than are nonwhite Americans in most minds….Little surprise, then, that in a study done during the 2008 election campaign, Devos found that John Mc­Cain (who, ironically, was born in Panama, albeit at a U.S. naval base) was seen as more ‘American’ than Obama.”

This may be annoying to Banaji and Mirsky. But, to adapt Phillip Roth, “Let’s face it, they [whites] are America.”

The moral of this story: Diversity is not strength. It is weakness. By importing diversity through the disastrous immigration reform of 1965 and the simultaneous abandonment of enforcement at the southern border, Washington has forced whites—who for most of U.S. history would have been simply called “Americans”—to recognize, if only for now at a subliminal level, that they have common interests and must act to defend them.

This development is unimpeachably legitimate. It is not, of course, a recipe for civil peace.

But I didn’t make current immigration policy. My advice to those who did: you (OK, your illegal alien maid) made your bed—now lie in it.

Peter Brimelow (email him) is editor of VDARE.COM and author of the much-denounced Alien Nation: Common Sense About America’s Immigration Disaster, (Random House – 1995) and The Worm in the Apple (HarperCollins – 2003)