As Americans we’ve been raised on the premise that the United States is a melting pot of ideas, cultures and genetics. That was in the past, when the assimilation of legal immigrants was key to the success of the American experiment. Now the results and the success of that experiment are being challenged from within. We are increasingly becoming a divided assortment of individuals who value their own individual heritage and special interests over America as a whole. A doctrine of the rewarding of lawless criminal squatting has replaced background checks, the rule of law and the right of Americans to decide which and how many foreigners will be their neighbors. A significant portion of our population is made up of individuals who have merely exchanged one geographic location for another with no desire to become an American and no significant cultural identity modifications. Minority racism has become accepted and mainstream, with many of our lawmakers openly declaring their bigotry as members of the Congressional Black Caucus and the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, attendance, membership in and support for the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, and even the faux ‘president’ of the United States and Attorney General teaming up with Al Sharpton’s racist National Action Network. Obama and other Democrats speak regularly before the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, La Raza (the race) and other race-promoting organizations with nobody voicing any concerns whatsoever, at least not in public. Then there is the other side of the coin. Not only do these individuals, all of whom are Democrats, enjoy the “luxury” of their own unchallenged racism, they are throwing some rather large boulders from the upper deck of their glass plantation houses. They are accusing and voicing their displeasure over the actions of another for doing precisely what they have themselves made a career of doing, speaking to a racial preference organization. The difference is that their blatant racism is acceptable because of their own dark pigment. Those lacking in sufficient melanin content must abide by a more restrictive set of rules. Rep Yvette Clarke (D-NY), a leader of the racism-first Congressional Black Caucus organization voiced her bigotry, saying, “It is quite disappointing to learn that in the Twenty-First Century, a member of the Republican leadership in the House of Representatives has, in the past and prior to his election to Congress, addressed a white nationalist organization with a history of hostility towards civil rights for people of color, particularly African-Americans, as well as members of the Jewish faith and immigrants.” She is referring to a speech made by House Majority Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA) in 2002 before a white supremacist type of organization which involved a tax issue while he was a state representative. We remember Rep Clarke as one of a handful of racists who infamously degraded their office by defending a dead thug who attempted to murder a cop with a “hands up don’t shoot” stunt on the House floor. She is attempting to protect her racist turf and supposed legitimacy for those who share her views, while targeting her opposition in order to discourage others from repeating “the same mistake.” She’s also attacking a Republican, albeit one who acts and smells quite a bit like to a Democrat. She calling for an investigation, but Scalise has admitted to making the speech so one has to wonder what there is to investigate. More importantly, which may be a difficult notion for one who only represents black people to understand, who shuns Americans of other colors who might happen to think that she is their representative too, elected officials answer to all of their constituents and are supposed to represent them all regardless of ethnicity or beliefs. Whether or not the group had a racial composition, the issue and the point of discussion was a tax proposal which would affect all of them and they had every right to expect and demand that their legislators would inform them and address their concerns. As an activist who abuses her position to promote an agenda of race preference, that concept might be a little difficult for Clarke to comprehend. It’s part of her job description. She might want to stop flapping her gums and put down her arms long enough to read it.
Posted on: Thu, 01 Jan 2015 20:01:41 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015