Racist Professor Asks “Can My Children Be Friends With White People?”

Where does one even begin with this level of absurdity?  This so-called professor of law posits the question “Can My Children Be Friends With White People?”, and unequivocally answers with “NO.”  He uses lots of broad brush arguments with no basis in fact that I would assume he KNOWS would never hold up in court, and would be immediately thrown out as hearsay and slander.  He is a “law” professor, right?  Let’s look at some of the more egregious examples of his projectionism and hypocrisy.

“Donald Trump’s election has made it clear that I will teach my boys the lesson generations old, one that I for the most part nearly escaped.”

As you do later in your diatribe, you are associating Donald Trump and his supporters with racism against blacks, yet you provide not one scintilla of evidence that Donald Trump is or has done anything racist against blacks.  I guess the approximately 8% of the black community who voted for Trump aren’t black enough for you?  Perhaps they are “Uncle Toms?”

“The Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s famous dream of black and white children holding hands was a dream precisely because he realized that in Alabama, conditions of dominance made real friendship between white and black people impossible.”

Mr. Yankah is accusing an entire race of being racist, but in doing so is showing himself to be the bigoted racist.  There are SOME white people who are racist, just as there are SOME black people who are racist.  Mr. Yankah, why aren’t you embracing the words of the man whose coattails you hide behind by judging INDIVIDUALS by the content of their character rather than the color of their skin?  Hypocrite.

“History has provided little reason for people of color to trust white people in this way, and these recent months have put in the starkest relief the contempt with which the country measures the value of racial minorities.”

No reason to trust whites?  While blacks were at one time enslaved by whites (AND by blacks, AND by arab muslims), you were also freed by WHITES.  You were given the right to vote by WHITES.  The Civil Rights Act was passed by, you guessed it, WHITES.  The VAST majority of welfare dollars going to the black community is also be collected overwhelmingly from… wait for it… WHITES.  Sir, if you couldn’t trust whites, you would still be in chains working in cotton fields.  If you can read this, thank a WHITE Republican.

“America is transfixed on the opioid epidemic among white Americans (who often get hooked after being overprescribed painkillers — while studies show that doctors underprescribe pain medication for African-Americans). But when black lives were struck by addiction, we cordoned off minority communities with the police and threw away an entire generation of black and Hispanic men.”

Notice what the disingenuous “professor” of law does here.  He does the bait and switch.  He tries to equate the opioid problem in the white community with the illicit trade and addiction problems of crack, heroin, and meth in the black community.  Both are horrible, but they are NOT the same thing.  One who is prescribed opioids by a doctor is generally taking them for pain associated with a medical procedure, at least initially.  Those who take and become addicted to crack, meth, and/or heroine do it by CHOICE from the beginning.

“I will teach my boys to have profound doubts that friendship with white people is possible.”

You, sir, are a flaming racist, projecting your own faults onto people whom you have never met, and do not know.  You are making a sweeping generalization that is PURELY based on race while pointing the finger of racism at others.  Hypocrite.

“Only white people can cordon off Mr. Trump’s political meaning, ignore the “unpleasantness” from a position of safety.”

EXCUSE ME????  WHO has been more in danger since Trump was elected, and just as much during Barack Obama’s presidency???  You can’t continue the bullcrap lie that blacks are being targeted by white cops, or are being murdered by whites at some abnormally high rate.  The ACTUAL crime statistics prove that to be entirely false.  The ACTUAL crime statistics prove that blacks are MANY times more likely to be murdered by a BLACK person than by a white person.  They also prove that a white person is more likely to be killed by a black person than a white person.  But let’s go back to the “fear” thing.  Are their roving bands of whites roaming the inner cities LITERALLY hunting black people?  No.  There ARE mobs of blacks beating up whites.  How about things like the “knockout” “game?” Most perpetrators have been black attacking whites.  If there is ANY group that should be afraid of another based on the evidence, it is whites who should be “suspicious” of blacks.  But I don’t advocate the broad brush racism that you do.  I advocate a situational suspicion instead of a race-based suspicion.  If an angry mob of ANY color of people is moving toward you, you don’t wait around to see if they want to be friends.  If someone is pointing a gun at you, it doesn’t matter what skin color they are.  If someone is passing laws that are detrimental to your freedom and liberty, it doesn’t matter what their skin color happens to be, right?

“So, too, is his history of housing discrimination,…”

Again, you offer ZERO proof of your allegations.  Just like the rest of the Alinsky-left, you are just slinging mud to see what sticks.  You are repeating progressive media talking points with no citation, or research of your own.  You’re supposed to be a freaking LAW professor.  You of all people should know you don’t build a case on hearsay.

“…his casual conflation of Muslims with terrorists,…”

See above.  He has NEVER said that all muslims are terrorists.  He has POINTED OUT that many of the terrorist attacks in this country have been committed by MUSLIMS, most of whom were IMMIGRANTS or “REFUGEES” who were NEVER PROPERLY VETTED.  Donald Trump has been attempting to put in place travel and immigration restrictions on the VERY SAME countries that BARACK OBAMA did.  So, are you going to be intellectually honest and call Barack Obama an islamophobe and racist now?  No, you’re too much of an intellectually weak coward to be that even handed.

“…his reducing Mexican-Americans to murderers and rapists.”

TRUMP. NEVER. SAID. THIS.  You are quoting a viral MISQUOTATION of Donald Trump when he said that there are SOME bad people, rapists and murderers, coming across our border.  And he is FACTUALLY, 100% CORRECT to say so.  Does MS-13 ring a bell?  Do you read the news AT ALL?  There are dozens of stories every week of illegal aliens killing Americans, stealing identities, and all sorts of other crimes, ON TOP OF THEIR ORIGINAL CRIME OF COMING HERE ILLEGALLY.  Oh, and you refer to a group of “Mexican-Americans.”  I say you’re either American, or you’re whatever nationality the country you came from calls its citizens.  If you become an American citizen, there can be no dual loyalty.  One cannot serve two masters.  There can be no hyphens.

“They bristle at the accusation that they supported racism, insisting they had to ignore Mr. Trump’s ugliness.”

So, if I as a white American say that I do not support or condone racism in any way, I am to be dismissed and labeled a racist despite the COMPLETE LACK OF EVIDENCE that would back any assertion of racism, but if YOU say you’re not a racist, despite an entire article of evidence which the New York Times has published for you, we’re supposed to just believe you?  Again, Mr. Morally Superior Black Man, I point you back to the message of MLK, Jr. which you hide behind and PRETEND to embrace.  He would disavow you in a heartbeat, you noisy cymbal and clanging gong.

“They protest: Have they ever said anything racist? Don’t they shovel the sidewalk of the new black neighbors? Surely, they say, politics — a single vote — does not mean we can’t be friends.”

Yes, you jackwagon.  That’s EXACTLY what we say, and BELIEVE.  I don’t care if my neighbor is black, white, latino, oriental, Indian, Native American, etc.  I care that my neighbor ISN’T AN A**HOLE.

“My bi-ethnic wife, my most trusted friend, understands she is seen as a white woman, even though her brother and father are not. Among my dearest friends, the wedding party and children’s godparents variety, many are white.”

Funny how if a white person points out that they have black friends, or even a black spouse, people like YOU immediately say they have a “token black” friend to “hide their racism.”  Do you see the irony here?

As a self-respecting PERSON, I would be ashamed to pen my name to such an ignorant, racist piece of drivel as this NYT article by Mr. Ekow N. Yankah. However, the left has no shame, and doesn’t seem to have a problem exposing their own ignorance, racism, hatred, and hypocrisy. In fact, they seem to be wearing them as badges of “honor.”

Link to article:  https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/11/opinion/sunday/interracial-friendship-donald-trump.html

Advertisements

Bush 41 and 43 Finally Admit They Are Big-Government, Democrat-Lite, RINOs

If I wasn’t officially done with the Bush clan, I am now. 41, I appreciate your military service, but my respect for you stops there. You became a big-government apparatchik and sold out conservatives. Read my lips, remember? 43, I appreciated your support for the military, but disagreed with you on nearly everything else. Were it not for Barack Obama, you would be the biggest spending president in American history. You did nothing to secure the border, and the size of government did nothing but grow under your tenure.  Remember your parting shot of abandoning conservative principles to “save” conservative principles?  What a joke.  A very bad joke. You say you are worried that you will be the “last Republican.” That is laughable. You and your father were Republican in name only, and being a Republican is supposed to be associated with being a CONSERVATIVE, which neither of you are. You are showing your true colors by siding with democrats. Donald Trump is far from perfect, but he is acting more like a conservative than either of you EVER did.



 

George H.W. Bush Admits He Voted for Hillary, Calls Trump ‘Blowhard’

Former President George H.W. Bush has a low opinion of President Donald Trump, according to Mark K. Updegrove’s new book, “The Last Republicans.”

Bush, 93, admitted, “I don’t like (Trump),” and criticized the president for being driven by his ego and encouraging public anger.

“I don’t know much about him, but I know he’s a blowhard. And I’m not too excited about him being a leader,” Bush said, according to Fox News.

He also revealed that he voted for Democrat nominee Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential elections.

Updegrove was director of the Lyndon Baines Johnson Presidential Library and Museum and is now the chief executive and founder of the  National Medal of Honor Museum.

Through these two positions, Updegrove spoke frequently with both Bush and his son, former President George W. Bush, and convinced them to allow him to interview them for his book.

The New York Times‘ review of the book revealed that the younger Bush also had concerns about Trump.

The title of the book was inspired by a statement George W. Bush reportedly made to its author: “I’m worried that I will be the last Republican president.”

The younger Bush also confided his feelings about why his brother, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, did not win the Republican presidential nomination in 2016.

“If you’re angry with the powers that be,” he said, “you’re angry with the so-called establishment, and there’s nothing more established than having a father and brother that have been president.”

Reportedly, the younger Bush didn’t vote for Trump in 2016 either, submitting instead a ballot for “none of the above.”

The book’s release comes only a few weeks after a speech by the younger Bush that, while not mentioning Trump by name, was seen by many as a rebuke to the current president’s term so far.

The book says that Trump has moved away from long-time Republican policies that both former presidents worked to see through, including free trade, support for immigration and the United States’ presence on the world stage.

Updegrove elaborated on this in an interview, claiming Trump also appealed to “xenophobia.”

“But if you look at (George W. Bush’s) values and those shared by his father and Ronald Reagan, they are very much in contrast to the values of the Republican Party today,” Updegrove said.

“In particular the platform that Donald Trump ran on, which is essentially protectionism and a certain xenophobia.”

https://www.westernjournal.com/george-h-w-bush-admits-voted-hillary-calls-trump-blowhard/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=rustyhumphries&utm_campaign=can&utm_content=2017-11-04

Trying to Put a Pretty Face On an Ugly Party

Tulsi Gabbard on Tucker Carlson

“We, as the American people, should be concerned when any president of the United States launches an illegal and unconstitutional military strike against a foreign government.  This is something congress has not authorized, and it’s an escalation of a counterproductive regime-change war in Syria that our country has been waging for years.  First for many years through the CIA covertly, and now overtly through President Trump’s reckless military strike last night.” –Tulsi Gabbard, Democrat (HI)

While I am still not so sure that striking Syria at this time was such a good idea, I am sure that the democrat response, and specifically the response of Tulsi Gabbard who seems to represent the views of most democrats on this issue, is one of outright hypocrisy.  Despite her relatively attractive external appearance, she is just as dark and intellectually bankrupt on the inside as the rest of the democrat party.

Perhaps you remember one Barack Hussein Obama committing US forces to combat in Libya to support rebels seeking to overthrow the government of Libya.  There was no legitimate US interest in overthrowing Muammar Gaddafi, who had kept to himself since nearly being killed by Ronald Reagan in Operation El Dorado Canyon, and in fact had actually been cooperating with us by providing intelligence on terrorist organizations and activities.  Yet Barack Obama sided with the rebels seeking to overthrow Gaddafi, violating the War Powers Act by not receiving approval from congress within the required time, or at all.  In doing so, Obama fanned the flames of what came to be known as the “Arab Spring,” which ultimately destabilized the ENTIRE MIDDLE EAST, and created what became ISIS.

In Gabbard’s revised history, did she or the democrats say the American people should have been concerned when Barack Obama launched an illegal and unconstitutional military strike against a foreign government?  No.  No, they did not.  In fact, she completely left out Obama’s and the democrats involvement in destabilizing the middle east, and waging a war to overthrow Bashar Assad, who was of no threat to America.

There are a number of reasons why striking Syria right now may not have been the best idea.  There is the possibility Russia may have been responsible for the chemical weapon strike instead of Syria.  If the Syrians performed the strike, why did they have chemical weapons at all, since Obama supposedly arranged for Russia to take all of Syria’s chemical weapons in a brokered deal following Obama’s multiple “red lines” which he never enforced.  Shouldn’t Russia have to answer these questions?  Then there is the possibility that we could have accidentally hit the Russians in Syria, leading to war between us and Russia, which we are not prepared for.

So many reasons NOT to strike Syria.  But we did strike them, and in doing so have ONCE AGAIN exposed the intellectual dishonesty of the democrat party, and the liberal left in America.
+



+

Rep. Gabbard: Syria missile strike ‘illegal and unconstitutional’

Published April 07, 2017

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, D-Hawaii, told Fox News’ “Tucker Carlson Tonight” Friday that the American missile strike on a Syrian airfield as “an illegal and unconstitutional military strike” that drew the United States closer to military conflict with Russia.
Gabbard, an Iraq War veteran, also said the strike was “an escalation of a counterproductive regime change war in Syria that our country’s been waging for years, first through the CIA covertly, and now overtly.”
FLASHBACK: GABBARD SAYS SHE MET WITH ASSAD DURING SYRIA TRIP
In January, Gabbard met with Syrian President Bashar Assad in Damascus. When host Tucker Carlson asked if she believed Assad’s forces to be responsible for the chemical weapons attack that precipitated the missile strikes, Gabbard answered, “It doesn’t matter what I believe or not. What matters is evidence and facts.
“If the Trump administration has the evidence, unequivocally proving this, then share it with the American people,” Gabbard continued. “Share it with Congress. Come to Congress and make your case before launching an unauthorized, illegal military strike against a foreign government.
“Gabbard also said that efforts to overthrow Assad would only strengthen extremist groups, and expressed concerns about Moscow’s response to the missile strikes.
“Russia … are very closely allied with Syria and … have their own military operating [on] the ground there,” the congresswoman said, “and when you consider the consequences of that, the United States and Russia being the two nuclear powers in the world, it should be a cause of great concern for everyone.”

The Enemy Within

How many times do I have to say it?  McCarthy was RIGHT.  Communism is diametrically opposed to the values that founded America, and we USED TO fight to keep communism OUT of America.  Now we not only DON’T fight it any more, we are VOTING FOR IT.

Make no mistake, the ideology that Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Bernie Sanders, the democrat party, and those identifying as “progressives” in America are pushing communism, or a stepping stone to it.  The ignorant among us look as someone like Bernie Sanders and think he’s just a nice old man.  But the ideology he openly espouses, socialism, is merely communism with out the force.  In the Russian communist revolution, you had two major camps.  The Mensheviks, and the Bolsheviks.  They both wanted the same things, but the Mensheviks thought it could and should be achieved at the ballot box, while the Bolsheviks had no problem using force to achieve their goals.  In today’s America, the socialist democrats are the Mensheviks, and “progressives” are the Bolsheviks.

What do the communists want?  Control.  Centralized government control of basically everything.  They sell a Utopian view of equality, but it is a smoke screen.  There will be two classes.  The ruling class that is all powerful and very well off, and everyone else.  Everyone else will be poor and miserable.  Communist Russia, the Soviet Union, was the model for what we can expect.  Venezuela is a more modern example.

To achieve their desired goals, the communists will stop at nothing.  They will cozy up to enemies in order to destroy other enemies, then betray the enemies they were cozying up to.  You can see this happening right now as the communist progressive left is trying to destroy Christianity.  They are cozying up to muslims and selling islam as a good thing, using it as one of many hammers to strike against Christianity.  Once they have destroyed Christianity, they will turn on muslims, and any other religion.  Under communism, there can be no religion other than the government.  Worship of anything other than government can not be tolerated.  They have used the same strategy with blacks in America for decades.  They have promised blacks the moon and stars in exchange for their vote, but delivered none of the promises.  Now they are abandoning blacks for the newest protected class of Hispanics and illegal aliens.  They see that flooding the nation with these people will achieve their goals more quickly than they could be achieved using blacks.  Too bad that such a small percentage of blacks in America can see this for what it actually is.  Same with gays, transgenders, and any other faction group that the left tries to split us into.  The communist progressives see you as nothing other than a tool to dismantle America as we once knew it.

The bottom line is this.  As a nation we have reached a T-intersection.  We can turn left, and follow the communists to sure destruction, or we can turn right and try to salvage what’s left of the American way, and return to opportunity and prosperity.  A vote for Hillary Clinton is a vote for that left turn, and a vote for destruction.  You may not like Trump, and I’m not a big fan, but at this point is the only viable opportunity to prevent that hard left turn.  Keep these things in mind as you go to the polls on November 8th.  A vote for Hillary, Stein, Johnson, or McMullen is a vote for that hard left turn.  The vote for Hillary needs no explanation.  But a vote for any of the other three is a wasted vote because none of them has a chance at getting elected.  McMullen sounds like a much better choice than Hillary, but has no chance beyond the borders of Utah.  Johnson and Stein are both for open borders, and would be almost as disastrous as Hillary.  Trump may say “mean things,” but has surrounded himself with good people and has at least a chance of making a positive impact on America.  If you’re a “never Trumper,” you own Hillary Clinton if she gets elected.  That includes the RINOs like the Bush family, Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell, John McCain, and a host of others calling themselves “Republicans” who are quietly supporting Hillary.

+



Hillary Clinton: America’s Most Dangerous Enemy Within

From Florida, I flew out to Reno to entertain at the 2016 Nevada Women’s Expo. In between my shows, I made pit-stops in my hotel room. Folks, I could hardly believe what I was seeing. Every news TV channel I turned to was beating the crap out of Trump trying to brand him an abuser of women. Leaked Hillary emails have revealed that the mainstream media gets its marching orders from the Clinton campaign.

Thus, the media fix is in: portray Trump in a red hoodie with a pitchfork; portray wicked-crooked Hillary as angelic, wearing a pure white flowing gown. Never have I seen such a shock-and-awe orchestrated media campaign to demonize a candidate. Continue reading

Leaked Emails Show Facebook Exec Shared Research With Clinton Campaign

Nope.  No liberal agenda or collusion here.  Nothing to see.  Move along.  Zuckerberg had already been caught with his liberal pants down suppressing conservative stories on Facebook.  Now we find that Chief Operating Officer Sheryl Sandberg is colluding with the Clinton campaign with promises of a position in her administration.  QUID. PRO. QUO.

For Trump to win, he will have to win “SO YUGE” to overcome the cheating by the left.  He will have to win by a lot to win by a little.

+



Leaked Emails Show Facebook Exec Shared Research With Clinton Campaign

Posted By Peter Hasson On 4:02 PM 10/10/2016 In | No Comments

Facebook Chief Operating Officer Sheryl Sandberg shared research with key members of the Clinton campaign, newly released emails show.
Sheryl Sandberg (Photo: Kimberly White/Getty Images for Fortune)   Sheryl Sandberg (Photo: Kimberly White/Getty Images for Fortune)   

Sandberg has endorsed Clinton, and just last month Politico reported that Clinton may tap Sandberg for Treasury secretary if elected.

Clinton aide Cheryl Mills set up a meeting in March, 2015 for Sandberg to share research with members of Hillary Clinton’s inner circle, including chief campaign strategist Joel Benenson and campaign manager John Podesta. Continue reading

Can We Build A Wall?


Can we build a wall on our southern border?

• The US-Mexico border is approximately 1,900 miles, or 10,032,000 ft long
• Trump said he would build a wall 30 feet deep (in the ground?), and 30 feet high, and I’ll assume 10 feet thick
• Every 10 foot long section of that wall (assuming solid construction) would require approximately 222.22 cubic yards of concrete
• 1,900 miles of such a wall would require 222,931,104 cubic yards of concrete
• Last time I priced concrete in my local area, it was $110/cubic yard
• At that price it would take $24,522,421,440 (about $24.5 billion) plus labor, etc to build the wall
• In 2010, it was estimated that illegal immigration costs taxpayers $113 billion dollars
• We have several million more illegal aliens now than in 2010, and they are receiving far more in benefits.

So, for LESS THAN HALF OF ONE YEAR’S WORTH of what we are spending on illegal aliens, we could build a heavily fortified wall, and then man it with guards and guns.


%d bloggers like this: