By now most of you have seen that old video of the 1991 speech by Obama when he was a student at Harvard Law School in praise of Professor Derrick Bell. In case you haven't, here it is.
Of course, one can say this is old news. After all, we already know about Jeremiah Wright, Bill Ayres, Bernadine Dohrn, Rashid Khalidi and all those other old friends of Obama. We also know that Bill Clinton was a pot-smoking, draft-dodging anti-Viet Nam war protester-in England no less. So what?
But there is a little more to the story.
First of all, PJ Media reports that one of the organizers of the sit-down protest, at which Obama spoke at Harvard, has been named to the federal bench by Obama.
http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/03/08/breaking-radical-cronyism-sit-in-leader-nominated-as-judge-by-pres-obama
So what, right?
We also now have learned that Harvard professor Charles Ogletree bragged about having hid that video during the 2008 election. (Daily Mail)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2111679/Andrew-Breitbart-Obama-race-video-Charles-Ogletree-hid-Derrick-Bell-support-speech-2008-election.html?ITO=1490
I know what you are saying. "So what?"
Of course, the college student Barack Obama of 1991 may be much different than today's president. He was hardly the only college kid arguing for race-based hiring, I'm sure.
But when you keep adding up the life history and associations of Obama, you keep wondering. Derrick Bell was a professor who pretty much saw the world through a race-based lens. The same can be said of Charles Ogletree.
We also know that his attorney general, Eric Holder, sees the world through the prism of race. He has said it, and he has demonstrated it.
In addition, any fair-minded person must ask-especially given the intense scrutiny the media gives to the Republican contenders- why did the media not devote even a minimum of time and effort to vetting candidate Obama? The mainstream media asked him one question about Ayres and happily accepted Obama's answer that he was just some guy who lived in the neighborhood. There are reports that to this day, the LA Times has a video of Obama locked in its vaults that shows him assuring Khalidi that he really was on the Palestinian side. He seems to have demonstrated that notwithstanding his absurd speech at AIPAC last Sunday.
Let's say we are working on one of those 1,000 piece puzzles, let's say of the Matterhorn. How many pieces do you need to put together before you at least realize that the picture is one of a mountain?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
It is not so much the content of the video as much as it is what Derrick Bell and Charles Ogletree stand for. It is not equal treatment. Also, the fact that Ogletree hid the video, is proof enough that they know Obama is a "radical", like them. As Gary points out, Obama's Administration is full of these radicals who want to "punish the enemy" as Obama does. If you were an oil company, coal company you are out. If you are a solar like "Solyndra" you are in (although is is bankrupt. If you are the New Black Panthers, you get a get out of jail card. If you are Tea Party, you get audited by the IRS. If you are the ACLJ, you get threatened. If your are the ACLU, you get money. If you are Eric Holder, you get to traffic arms across the Mexican boarder and not get fired.
Obama is a "Radical" as Stanley Kurtz points out so well, in his book "Radical-In-Chief. This fact is what Obama tries to hide with his over a million dollar expense to conceal who he really is.
As more videos come out, and they will, check the folks who are featured. Do not listen to MSM as they down-play the videos.
Squid
So what?
So what? Well, it just a piece of the puzzle. So what is what they said when Obama's connections with Wright came out. So what is what people said when his connections with Ayres came out.
So now what he have a radical leftist president who has brought more radical leftists into the government and turned the Justice Department into a corrupt entity.
That's what.
I only wish a few more people would have figured out earlier what Obama meant when he promised to "transform America". I believe I have mentioned before that, at least to date, no single individual has yet been able to destroy this country. I do not believe even Obama can do that in a second term, but it will be a rough little horseback ride for a while, since he will not have an election to worry about then.
What puzzle?
First, as Squid freely admits, there is nothing reprehensible about the content of Barack Obama's speech on the video. Nothing.
Second, while you may personally disagree with the political advocacy of either Ogletree, or Bell, nobody who speaks well of them has committed either a crime nor a political indiscretion. There is no scandal, although you may well disagree with them, which is your right to do. It is when you parade this as some violation of universal values that I have to ask, as you anticipated, "So what?"
When the Wright thing surface, I watched a number of Wright sermons on YouTube. I found little to object to. I remain quite certain that he said "God damned America," past tense, not "God damn America," future wish. Arguably true; Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell said the same, for different reasons.
Wright only became an albatross when he stepped into the limelight gleefully shouting his most absurd lines. At that point, I became convinced that the prospect of a member of his church actually being elected shook his sense of racial victimhood, and he set out to sabotage any chance of Obama winning. He failed, and America vindicated itself from the slander Wright had nursed all those years. But nobody builds a church of 20,000 on such fears.
Ayers? Don't make me laugh. A young candidate for the state senate received an offer from a tenured university professor to hold a fundraising party at his house? His wife is the director of a highly regarded legal services program for children? The candidate failed to look deeply into the fact that the tenured professor had committed some acts of violence when the candidate was eight years old?
Maybe they should have been sentenced to life in prison... but Reagan's justice department cut a deal with them.
I don't consider "radical leftist" to be either a coherent label nor an axiomatic slur.
To the whole faux "puzzle" I ask again, "So what?"
Did Wright also say "God blessed America" (past tense) rather than "God bless America" (present tense)?? Probably not.
He said neither one to my knowledge, elwood. So what?
Or are you trying to set a rule that any candidate for president whose pastor has not at least once said "God blessed America" from the pulpit, should be disqualified from holding the office?
Y'all are getting more ridiculous by the column inch.
Here's what MY pastor said on Sunday September 16, 2001:
"You know, we are one cocky arrogant nation. What happened to us last Tuesday was terrible, but don't you know there are people in the world who wake up every day wondering if a bomb will fall in their living room? What makes our pain so much more important than theirs?"
Siarlys--is "so what??" your newest and latest buzzword/weaselword??
Of course he said "God bless America??", as a question, then said "No, God damn America", at least as I remember it.
The point was that if Wright actually said "God damned America", in the sense in which you intend it to be understood, (which he did not), consistency would dictate that he would have said "God blessed America" first, which by your own admission he also did not.
Which of course,then, clearly indicates that his epithet meant exactly what it said, calling upon God to damn America, and is about as far from what your pastor said as you can get.
Post a Comment