Big Dogs House

On Slavery, I’ll Do Like Obama

Apr 21, 2009 Political

I wrote some time ago about the bill introduced to study reparations for the descendants of slaves. I am opposed to paying reparations for slavery for a number of reasons but mostly because no one alive today was a slave or owned a slave. Slavery is immoral and I could never own another human being but the descendants of slaves are better off today because their ancestors were slaves. If they had never been sold (by other blacks) into slavery then the descendants would have been born in Africa. No one can tell me that life in Africa today is better than life today in the United States.

For the sake of argument we will assume all blacks here are descendants of slaves. That means Barack Obama, a black man, holds the highest job in the land. His brother lives in poverty in Africa and his Aunt is an illegal immigrant from Africa. Would Obama have been better off if his lineage had stayed in Africa? The US would be better off but would Obama?

The same is true for ALL blacks living here. Even the poorest of the poor have it better than the people living in Africa. Those in Africa are in absolute poverty with kids dying of malnutrition, people dying of AIDS and malaria and on top of that they have to worry about fighting among tribes. Where in America does anyone, black or otherwise, have it that bad?

But, there is this call for reparations and I am sure they will work real hard to find a way to make the taxpayers of today pay for the immoral (though legal) actions of the ancestors of white Europeans. I have to voice my opposition and I want to use the Obama approach.

When Bill Ayers and his terrorist acts were discussed during the campaign and his relationship with Obama was brought out into the light, Obama said that he should not be held accountable for his ties to a person who did bad things when he was only 8 years old. When Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega went on a 50 minute tirade against the US (one Obama never defended) Obama said he was glad that Ortega did not blame him for things that happened when he was 3.

I see the rationale here. To Obama, he should not be blamed for things he had nothing to do with. Of course, no one blamed him for things he had nothing to do with. With regard to Ayers, it was his relationship with a man who had done bad things. No one blamed Obama for what Ayers did, only for being his friend which gives the impression (which is actually the truth) that Obama is just as radical.

Be that as it may, Obama said he should not be held accountable for the things that happened when he was a child. He said not to blame him for things that he had nothing to do with.

EXACTLY!

I had nothing to do with slavery. I did not own slaves and I never mistreated anyone based on his color. I am not responsible for what happened so my tax dollars should not go to pay for reparations. As a matter of fact, I had nothing to do with Jim Crow Laws (the Democrats gave us them) and I had nothing to do with segregated lunch counters, rides in the back of the bus or anything else.

Let me put it in Obama’s language:

For slavery, don’t hold me accountable for something that ended 96 years before I was born.

For discrimination, don’t hold me accountable for things that happened when I was a kid.

I am a Republican so don’t hold me accountable for the racism and discrimination that the Democrats caused.

Now you libs have two choices. You can agree with me and say that we are not accountable for what happened over a century ago or you can say that we are responsible and have to pay.

If you take the second course of action you are saying that Obama is accountable for what Ayers did and for the things Ortega ranted about.

The choice is yours. I already know what I believe and nothing will change that.

Share on Facebook

Tags: ayers, Obama, ortega, racism, reparations, slavery

Did Glenn Beck Incite This Syrian

Apr 7, 2009 Political

Gateway Pundit has a post up indicating that a Syrian obtained media credentials from Al-Jazeera TV in a plot to kill Barack Obama. The suspect was arrested last week and indicated that he intended to stab Obama with a knife and that if he had failed there were other accomplices to complete the mission.

There you have it. A peace loving Syrian who would never otherwise consider harming another human being suddenly, and without warning, went off the deep end and became involved in a plot to kill Obama. Something must have caused this man to resort to violence because we all know these peace lovers would never do anything that harmed another, Allah willing.

So was it Glenn Beck who caused this? The left likes to blame him for all the other violence taking place. In fact, the right gets blamed for a lot of the violence that takes place. Commenters here have suggested that my words and the words of others here could cause people to do violent things. The MSM and the blogosphere are on a non stop rampage against the likes of Beck, Limbaugh and Hannity claiming that they incite violence. I guess Beck drove this Syrian over the edge.

The reality is, each of these people is responsible for his own actions. I do not, nor will I ever, accept responsibility for the violence caused by another. People are accountable for their own actions. I can understand how the left has trouble with this because they cannot grasp the concept of personal responsibility. To them it is always someone else’s fault. Obama blames everyone under the Sun and his favorite target is George Bush. It is inherent in their design, point fingers and blame others.

The whole incident raises another issue as well. Wasn’t The Evil Won supposed to unite the world so we could all stand around holding hands and singing Kumbaya? He was supposed to bring us all together so we could sing the Coke song and live in perfect harmony and all that.

Now he has some Syrian wacko trying to kill him. It just seems to me that the “can’t we all just get along” strategy is not paying off.

I am sure that Olberman and the rest of the MSM will continue to blame Beck et al for the violence. They pinned the Pittsburgh cop murders on Beck. It was all his fault, they say.

So who is responsible for the cops killed by Bill Ayers? I mean, he is a liberal and he is a close friend of Obama.

Maybe Glenn Beck caused that too.

Personal responsibility. Something the left would do well to learn.

Share on Facebook

Tags: assassination plot, ayers, glenn beck, knife, Obama, syrian

Carville Wanted Bush To Fail

Mar 12, 2009 Political

There has been an ongoing debate here about the idea that a group of people would want any president to fail. The liberals have taken offense to Rush Limbaugh saying he wanted Obama to fail. They claim that the left did not feel this way about Bush and only “called” him a failure after he actually (in their minds) failed. When I pointed to a Fox poll that asked whether the respondent wanted Bush to succeed in which 51% of Democrats said “no”, I was told that it was a poll taken 5 years after he was in office and that the poll is different than a major figurehead saying the same thing. Randy, a likable commenter stated:

So, 193 people polled, almost five years after George W. Bush took office hoped he didn’t succeed. That is a lot different than a major figurehead of folks identifying as conservatives saying about the President-Elect, “I hope he fails” before the man is even sworn into office.

September 11^th, 2001 was only 8 months after Bush took office. We will remember it as a terrible day that changed America forever. Well, the right will. The left keeps trying to get back to pre 9/11.

On the morning of 9/11, James Carville talking to a group of reporters and told them; “I certainly hope he doesn’t succeed.” For those on the left, this is the same as saying; “I hope he fails.”

Carville is a major player for the Democrats. He is a strategist, a pollster and a pundit. He is on all the talk shows and he is very far left. This major player said that he wanted Bush to fail.

Right after Carville told the reporters this they all received word of the attacks. Carville told them to forget what he said because this [the attacks] changes everything. Carville knew if they printed that he wanted Bush to fail the timing would be bad and it would not look good. Think of how it would have looked if this came out along with the stories of the attacks.

Then again, it probably would not matter to the left. During that time unrepentant terrorist William Ayers gave an interview (I think it hit the stands on 9/11) in which he stated that his group did not do enough [terror] and the article featured a picture of him jumping on an American flag. The left ignored this and continued to ignore it even though Ayers and Obama are buddies.

The reporters did as they were told and did not print Carville’s desire for Bush to fail. But the fact is, he said it and it is no different than what Limbaugh said.

I know this story has already circulated but I wanted to address Randy’s comment and the comments of others who think the Democrats would never do such a thing.

The funny thing about this is that Carville is one of the talking heads who chastised Limbaugh for saying he wanted Obama to fail. This is another example of the hypocrisy of the left.

Share on Facebook

Tags: 9/11, ayers, carville, failure, Limbaugh, Obama

Wikipedia Scrubs Negatives From Obama Entry, Bans Users

Mar 9, 2009 Political

Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia where people can enter items. The items are supposed to be sourced and verifiable but there are often entries that are inaccurate or contain opinion rather than fact. I, as well as a number of people, use Wikipedia as a source for information but I do not accept it as the sole source and often poo poo people who cite it when the information conflicts with more reliable sources.

The Wikipedia people would have you believe that they are concerned with accuracy and that they monitor entries to ensure that only truthful information is added. However, their practice is far from the truth.

Wikipedia is scrubbing the entry on Barack Obama to ensure nothing about him is negative. When a negative entry is made it is scrubbed within minutes even if it is 100% accurate. The person making the entry is banned from entering items for three days. The Obama entry has been scrubbed of any items containing information about the controversy surrounding his birth certificate. One can argue if he is a citizen or not and it would be conjecture or opinion because it has not been proven but mentioning that the controversy exists and that there have been lawsuits over it is factual.

Additionally, there is no mention of Jeremiah Wright or Bill Ayers. One entry with Ayers’ name was deleted and the user banned for three days. This was the entry:

“He served alongside former Weathermen leader William Ayers from 1994 to 2002 on the board of directors of the Woods Fund of Chicago, which in 1985 had been the first foundation to fund the Developing Communities Project, and also from 1994 to 2002 on the board of directors of the Joyce Foundation. Obama served on the board of directors of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge from 1995 to 2002, as founding president and chairman of the board of directors from 1995 to 1991. Ayers was the founder and director of the Challenge.” WND

There is nothing in this entry that is disparaging and it contains completely factual information that was all discussed during the campaign. Obama did not deny any of this and it is a matter of public record.

The problem seems to be that Bill Ayers is mentioned. It seems that the administrators at Wikipedia do not even want that name mentioned so any information, no matter how accurate or relevant, is deleted.

This is a matter of rewriting history. The Wiki folks are presenting a glowing picture of Obama by ignoring the other facts that make the man who he is. Unfortunately, there are millions of people who think Wiki is the be all, end all in information and they will take what is written there as gospel.

Google scrubbed a Googlebomb about The Evil Won (the same Googlebomb about George Bush that it left up for years) and now Wiki is ignoring anything that is now glowingly positive about the Dear Leader. George Soros put up phony websites including one that depicts Obama as pro life. How far will the Obama followers go to hide the truth and to keep the world from knowing the real Obama? In Google’s case, it was not a matter of hiding the truth as it was protecting their guy when they allowed a certain practice for his predecessor.

Wiki asks for donations to keep the site running and, at times, the request is at the top of the page. I would hope that people will think twice before they donate to this group of hacks.

Then again, maybe Obama has already taken care of them…

Share on Facebook

Tags: ayers, Bush, deception, google, googlebomb, lies, Obama, scrub, wikipedia

Muslim Immigrants Convicted In Fort Dix Plot

Dec 22, 2008 Political

Five Muslim Immigrants who were working on a plan to sneak in to Fort Dix New Jersey and kill American soldiers have been convicted and now face life in prison. The five were arrested after their group was infiltrated by an FBI informant.

The would be terrorists did not have a solid plan and they were months away from actually doing anything but they had obtained weapons and were training to kill Americans.

It is good that they were convicted and might end up behind bars for the rest of their miserable lives but I can’t help but wonder about another plot to attack Fort Dix.

Bill Ayers, unrepentant domestic terrorist and friend of Barack Obama, and his group of rag tag misfits had a plan to attack Fort Dix during the Vietnam War. They were going to set off bombs and kill soldiers and their dates attending a dance on post.

Fortunately, the bomb they were building detonated and killed three members of the group. Unfortunately, Ayers and his terrorist wife were not among them.

Now, for some strange reason, Ayers and his wife are successful in the country they declared war against and are hailed as heroes in some circles. Obama launched his political career from their home and they worked together on a program to indoctrinate children in the name of education.

The best thing would have been for them to die in the explosion but since that did not happen, why are they free? They should have been jailed for life like these five Muslims who were much farther away from killing soldiers than Ayers and his cohorts.

At least we got the five Muslims terrorists off the streets. Good thing too. Who knows what Socialist Democrat they might help get elected…

Source:
Breitbart

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader.

Share on Facebook

Tags: attacks, ayers, bombings, fort dix, Muslims, terrorist