Everything the Right Wing Believes - Is Crap!

There used to be a time when I could honestly say that I could listen to people on the Right Side of the political spectrum and take what they said at face value. There used to be a time when I could debate honestly with them... that time is long gone.

Newt Gingrich on the Prop 8 Decision

Judge Walker's ruling overturning Prop 8 is an outrageous disrespect for our Constitution and for the majority of people of the United States who believe marriage is the union of husband and wife. In every state of the union from California to Maine to Georgia, where the people have had a chance to vote they've affirmed that marriage is the union of one man and one woman. Congress now has the responsibility to act immediately to reaffirm marriage as a union of one man and one woman as our national policy. Today’s notorious decision also underscores the importance of the Senate vote tomorrow on the nomination of Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court because judges who oppose the American people are a growing threat to our society.

Really?

Serously?

Has this fracking douche nozzle even read the Constitution?

Here's a refresher.

Amendment 14:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

This Amendment was created to reverse tragically wrong decisions such as Dred Scot where the Supreme Court found...

The question is simply this: Can a negro, whose ancestors were imported into this country, and sold as slaves, become a member of the political community formed and brought into existence by the Constitution of the United States, and as such become entitled to all the rights, and privileges, and immunities, guarantied by that instrument to the citizen? One of which rights is the privilege of suing in a court of the United States in the cases specified in the Constitution.

...

It is very clear, therefore, that no State can, by any act or law of its own, passed since the adoption of the Constitution, introduce a new member into the political community created by the Constitution of the United States. It cannot make him a member of this community by making him a member of its own. And for the same reason it cannot introduce any person, or description of persons, who were not intended to be embraced in this new political family, which the Constitution brought into existence, but were intended to be excluded from it.

In the opinion of the court, the legislation and histories of the times, and the language used in the Declaration of Independence, show, that neither the class of persons who had been imported as slaves, nor their descendants, whether they had become free or not, were then acknowledged as a part of the people, nor intended to be included in the general words used in that memorable instrument.

Quite literally this decision said that "We the People" from the declaration of Independence and in the Constitution didn't include Black folk, whether they be slaves or free.

It took the 14th Amendment to correct this.

And now the Right wants to tear it apart...

Senator John McCain.

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) said Tuesday he supports GOP calls for congressional hearings into altering the Constitution’s 14th Amendment, which grants citizenship to children of illegal immigrants who are born in the United States.

“I support the concept of holding hearings,” McCain told reporters in the Capitol. [...] McCain, who helped lead the charge in 2007 for a comprehensive immigration bill with a pathway to citizenship for illegals, has taken an increasingly hard-line position on the issue as he faces a conservative primary challenger in a state that has become ground zero for the nation’s battle over immigration reform.

Senator Lindsey Graham.

“I may introduce a constitutional amendment that changes the rules if you have a child here,” Graham said during an interview with Fox News’ Greta Van Susteren. “Birthright citizenship I think is a mistake, that we should change our Constitution and say if you come here illegally and you have a child, that child’s automatically not a citizen.”

Senator John Kyl.

"And so the question is," said Kyl, "if both parents are here illegally, should there be a reward for their illegal behavior?"

Since when did the sins of the parents become visited upon their children?

Since when did America become a Nation of Hate?



What the hell is America becoming?

They don't want to help 9-11 First Responders, they don't want to help people on Unemployement looking for work, they don't want to support Firefighters and Cops... they don't believe in anything.

John Beohner.

The American people don’t want more Washington ‘stimulus’ spending – especially in the form of a pay-off to union bosses and liberal special interests. This stunning display of tone-deafness comes at the expense of American workers, who will be hit by another job-killing tax hike because Washington Democrats can’t kick their addiction to more government ‘stimulus’ spending. Democrats should be listening to their constituents – who are asking ‘where are the jobs?’ – instead of scampering back to Washington to push through more special interest bailouts and job-killing tax hikes.

No more job killing tax hikes? It's interesting that the recession of the 1980's ended after the Reagan Tax Hike of 1982, and the George H.W. Bush recession ended after the Bill Clinton Tax hike of 1993. You want to know why? Because when you raise taxes on rich people, they Spend More of their Money on Tax Breaks - and that helps the Economy to grow.

These people CAN NOT be allowed to take over Congress, that can't Happen.

It's just unthinkable.

Vyan

George Carlin - You Have to be Asleep to have the American Dream

This just says it all. The Tea Party think they have a BEEF? This is from 2005, and it's still absolutely True.



We're living in the Age of Corporate Fuedalism, the average person hasn't moved forward in wages since 1973, but the top 1% - ONE PERCENT - have seen their incomes TRIPLE. Where do you think that wealth came from? The rest of us.

Vyan

Deficit Demagogues and Budget Bigots

Over again the Republican Party keeps trying to cut taxes on their primary financial supporters (Industry and their Shareholders) trying to tell us that the hello water raining down on our heads is Rain!

Herein where Con. Bilbray attempts to deny reality, returning the Tax Base to where it was during the Clinton Administration (as it was set before Republicans took over Congress in 1994) would not kill the Economy and would not stop job growth.


Over again the Republican Party keeps trying to cut taxes on their primary financial supporters (Industry and their Shareholders) trying to tell us that the hello water raining down on our heads is Rain!

MATTHEWS: Well there he is, Congressman Bilbray, your leader, your whip is now admitting that if you cut taxes, you’re raising the deficit. ... Why would he say something like that that runs against your orthodoxy?

BILBRAY: The fact is, look, Chris, you can’t get around the fact –

MATTHEWS: Well the fact is that he just said that. Why did he just say that cutting taxes at this point is going to yield a lower revenue and therefore a bigger deficit? What he just said what contradicts to what you just said.

BILBRAY: We’re not even talking about cutting about taxes. We’re talking about not allowing an increase –

MATTHEWS: — continuing the Bush tax cuts is what we’re talking about. And that’s what he was talking about.

BILBRAY: And that is maintaining the status quo –

MATTHEWS: — Are you in disagreement with Eric Cantor? Just tell me you disagree with him and we’ll be on the same page.

BILBRAY: I am disagreement with anybody that thinks we can get ourselves out of this mess by raising more taxes on the American people.

Contrary to Billbray's claim that the Republicans "Helped" cut the Deficit during the 90's the truth is that they attempted to Cut MEDICARE (below the Cost of Living Index) while implementing massive Tax Cuts that would have shot the Deficit up through the Roof and it was only because Bill Clinton was willing to call their bluff and shutdown the entire government - TWICE - that they were prevented from doing what George W. Bush did when he came into office - implement massive tax cuts and CUT Medicare (for which they used Reconciliation).

Republicans wanted a 7-Year Balanced Budget, but in reality the Budget was Balanced within 5 years because they used Clinton's strategy which was to ride the economic growth rather than spend everything via tax cuts in order to land on a specific date.

Bilbray - like other Republicans - suggests we rescind the unspent Stimulus and TARP funds, but most of that would lead to the layoff of Teachers, Cops and Firemen in various states and a Tax Increase on Small Businesses. It's completely opposite to everything he's claiming he supports. But then that's why they filibustered the Unemployement Extension and the latest Jobs Bill.

The fact is that Clinton didn't cut taxes he raised them on the Rich by 3% and it didn't hurt the economy, we had the largest and strongest period of economic growth After he did that. The majority if not all of the Bush Tax Cuts need to be rescinded permanently - returning us back to Clinton Era Tax Levels - or this country WILL NEVER get to a Balanced Budget again.

And as was shown on Countdown Last Night - not even the Architect and Implementor of the Reagan Republican Trickle Down Theory is willing to keep up the facade any longer.



But then again maybe none of this has to do with the Deficit or the Budget but really has to do with Rank Partisan Bigotry as (soon to be former Republican Rep) Bob Inglis Admits.

Inglis said that one of the reasons for his defeat was because he refused to demagogue like other conservatives in the House. In one instance during the primary, Inglis was chastised simply for not calling President Obama a “socialist.” He also noted that many of the GOPs criticisms regarding Obama’s response to the economic crisis were motivated by racism:

Instead, he remarks, his party turned toward demagoguery. Inglis lists the examples: falsely claiming Obama’s health care overhaul included “death panels,” raising questions about Obama’s birthplace, calling the president a socialist, and maintaining that the Community Reinvestment Act was a major factor of the financial meltdown. “CRA,” Inglis says, “has been around for decades. How could it suddenly create this problem? You see how that has other things worked into it?” Racism? “Yes,” Inglis says.

This might be why even John McCain has openly said he supports having hearings to revoke the Birthright Citizenship granted by the 14th Amendment - might that be because one of our President's parents wasn't a citizen? Also interesting since McCain himself was born in Panama. Might it have something to do with McCain favored "Danged Fence" Sherrif spouting Militia Rhetoric and appearing on a White Supremacist Radio Show?

Everything the Republicans are doing is driving us full-on back into the ditch that Bush crashed us into as Paul Krugman notes - they're Addicted to Bush

The truth, however, is that the only problem Republicans ever had with George W. Bush was his low approval rating. They always loved his policies and his governing style — and they want them back. In recent weeks, G.O.P. leaders have come out for a complete return to the Bush agenda, including tax breaks for the rich and financial deregulation. They’ve even resurrected the plan to cut future Social Security benefits.

Mmm Mm, give me some of those Good Ole Time Busisms.

As I've noted before Krugman isn't exaggerating, the Republican Battle Plan as published by Rep. Paul Ryan according to the CBO would...

• Raise Taxes on the Poor and Middle Class by Eliminating nearly ALL Tax Deductions, Offsets and Credits.
• Lower Taxes on the Rich by yet another 12-15%
• Raise Social Security Taxes, while Decreasing Benefits for those under 55 by "Personalizing" up to 1/3rd of it on the Stock Market
• Increase the Eligibility Age for Medicare to 69 and Cut Benefits
• Replace Medicaid with Medical Savings Accounts
• Completely Ignore Climate Change, Stall Green Energy Policies, Environmental Concerns, Safety and Health Regulations

This is what these people want to do, and why the scream and cry so loud. This is what we need to remember every time one of them opens their mouths, they're out to destroy the Middle Class, Period.

Vyan

Tea Party Comix Creator: I'm a Hater - Not a Racist

If you haven't seen any of these Comix Images yet - get ready to be shocked, and then shocked again when you read how the creator of the clearly racist, bigoted and ignorant books reacted when confronted with his Hatred.



From Talking Points Memo

The books were first flagged by Ethan Persoff, the comic book blogger who brought us the hilarious Defense Department Don't Ask, Don't Tell explanation comic book "Dignity and Respect." Pershoff told Rachel Maddow's blog that he bought the first issue of the comic (there are at least three) somewhere in Corpus Christi, Texas.

Each issue of the comic (there are three out on the net) is very, very racist, pulling no punches when it comes to bashing President Obama with the familiar tea party complaints about spending, fears of a biased judiciary and even the infamous death panels (featuring a bonus offensive image of a large-nosed Ezekiel Emanuel.) There's something else interesting about them, one comic book expert at the Atomic Comics megastore in Mesa, Arizona told me today: they're clearly drawn by someone who knows a lot about comics. Each is a fairly faithful parody of a well-known comic book cover.

On this they are right on the money as shown here.

Yeah, it's not like any of that is reminiscent of any of this...



As you might expect in true Tea Party Form, rather than apologize for these Comix, members of the Tea Party instead denied that they were done by a TRUE Tea Partier, claiming instead that they were "a plant"?

"This is not something that is floating around Corpus Christi," Kathy Burnette, president of the largest Corpus Christi, Texas tea party group, told me. "This is the first we've seen or heard of it."

Burnette said her group "unequivocally denounces" the comic book, and said the "content is in poor taste at best and does nothing but cause more division in a time when our country needs unity." She added "racism has no place in our movement or our nation."

Shelby Blakely, executive director of the Tea Party Patriots' official online publication Patriot Journal said fakery in the comics was obvious.

"It's a plant and a bad one at that," she told me. "The truth is in the details."

Blakely said the comic does not have the feel of a tea party "giveaway," which is how one dealer on eBay characterizes it (attempts to reach the dealer today were unsuccessful). Plus, she said, imagery like the Tea Party Comix would raise flags instantly among tea party groups.

Denial is not just a River in Egypt.


That was their story on day one, but now on day two the actual creator of these Comix has come forward to whine that he's NOT a racist, he's just a Hater - the worm has turned.

Subject: TEA PARTY COMIX Thursday, July 29, 2010 5:23 AM

From: [Name and email address redacted by EP.TC]

To: Ethan Persoff

I have taken all TEA PARTY COMIX OFF of [Internet marketplace]. I hope you are happy and I hope the world is a little bit better better place in which to live now. ....I do not understand the connection with "big ears" and "racism", and I do not understand how a "dark face" implies racism...... The accusation of "Hate" is true, but it is the hate of an IDEOLGY, not a of race of people..... I understand that the ideology has captured 80 or 90% of the race(s) in question, but it is STILL a AN IDEOLOGY and NOT a "race" that this comic book attacks.... Cartoonists have historically drawn "the enemy" in a negative light... Please search cartoons of Reagan and Bush for instance ( and please see my caracature of Janet Napolatano in Tea Party Comix #2!)..... Think, and you will have to admit there was NO LIMIT placed upon these depictions.... But somehow, ANY negative drawing of Presient Obama is automatically "racist"... Be honest with yourself, if it is possible. ....Think. And maybe admit that you have an advantage that you are taking advantage OF..... In Tea Party Comix #1 there is a strip in which a person handing out Tea Party Comix #1 has an ALAN KEYES tee-shirt... Did you upload THAT strip?? Not that it would matter to people who think that RACE is more important than IDEOLOGY, but I would think that a fair-minded person might include that strip....

You can edit this and make me into any monster you like, that's up to you. We'll see what a moral person you are, and you can live with that. I'm sure you will be safer than I feel tonight, either way......

The undergrounds of the sixties WERE "allowed". Apparently "Tea Party Comix" are NOT allowed.... To any reasonable man, well, this miight give him something to think about, about how far we have "come"..... Is it truely a BETTER world?? You tell ME! - [name redacted ]

So his serious defense is that his Hate Inspired books aren't "racist" because they only show his anger at a group of people, not because of their skin-tone, but because they share a particular common cultural trait? (ie. Liberals)

How is Hating people who generally agree with Noam Chomsky that different from Hating a groups who believe in the teachings of Mohammad, or Buddha, or Bahia, or Jesus of Nazareth?

Is that not still BIGOTRY?

And for the record the fact that he features someone in an Alan (The Neo-Con Steppin Fetchit) Keyes T-shirt as a "Good Guy" after having a "Big nosed" image of Rahm Emmanuel's (more than a bit jewish) brother is not really convincing.

The funny thing about this is that I pretty much predicted this new strain of racism & bigotry four years ago when I declared Liberal Bashing : The New Racism

John Lennon once sang that "Woman is the Nigger of the World". In the last few weeks, something has become increasing clear to me. Times have indeed changed from the bad-old days of the Civil Rights movement and women's suffrage. No longer is it women who are the chief second-class citizen of this nation. It's not the gays. It's not the immigrants. It's not minorities, be they Black, Brown, Red or Yellow.


Granted, there are an increasing number of issues which affect each of them, but the one method for getting a full on smash-mouth whack at all the above - without being called nasty names, and being accused of being incivil, impolite, or basically a Fucking Dick - is to attack just one group.

Liberals.

You don't have to say you hate "Black People" anymore, all you have to say is you believe in a "Strong Work Ethic" (unlike those Lazy Black people) and you oppose "Socialism" and "Marxism" (especially from people like that Martin Luther King Jr. guy) and you believe in American Exceptionalism (because everyone else from every other Country is Inferior) - but it has nothing to do with disliking other people from other races and backgrounds, it's all "Ideology".

Not getting the "Message"?

All you have to do is listen to the "Heroes" of the Right to hear the message.

Glenn Beck: Liberals want to rape immigrants by denying them social security!

Joe Klein: No doubt "solutions" was a slip--but the notion that "Democratic ideas" might not be an oxymoron represented one small step forward for the perpetually benighted Donkey party

Rush Limbaugh : Let me tell you something, the Democrats are more fearful -- and I've told you this too -- they're more fearful of Christians than they are of Al Qaeda.

And our all time favorite potty-mouth girl, Ann Coulter : I think the government should be spying on all Arabs, engaging in torture as a televised spectator sport, dropping daisy cutters wantonly throughout the Middle East and sending liberals to Guantanamo.

Is this over-the-top hateful rhetoric really all that different from this argument from "Birth of a Nation"?

The white men were roused by the mere instinct of self-preservation -- until at last there had sprung into existence a great Klu Klux Klan, a veritable empire of the South, to protect the Southern Country.

See, they just wanted Their Country Back Too...

Yet somehow this douch-nozzle thinks what he's done is in some way NOT as vile, hateful and destructive as what D.W. Griffith did with "Birth of a Nation"? It's not as distorted, twisted and bigoted as the Yellow Peril Comics of the 1930's, 40's and 50's?

Is it not raw naked bigotry?

One could argue that the left has been just as verbally and visual biting with those on the Right, however I would include this one caveat - the Left didn't have Make Shit UP about the Right - all they had to do was accurate document them and let the painful truth burn. We didn't have to Lie about Bush exploding the Deficit, Crashing the Economy or falsely invading Iraq or Abu Ghraib, or Gitmo, or Warrantless Wiretaps or Torture and ignoring Bin Laden until it was too late - all of that HAPPENED. But the Right has to Turn Obama into a Characatured SUPERVILLIAN and still none of their criticisms stick because they aren't based on fact or reality (there are NO Death Panels, the Goverment didn't TAKE OVER the Auto Industry or Wall Street, BP wasn't SHAKEN DOWN to create a Slush Fund, there are no FEMA CAMPS, Financial Reform will not take your Bank Account Away) it's all nothing but BUllSHIT and Irrational HATE.

Yet again, Denial is not just a River in Egypt.


One more point: What would happen if the Tea Party held a "Uni-Tea" Diversity rally and nobody but the White People came? Was it because of the Ideology or the Hatred?

Vyan
Twitter - http://www.twitter.com/Vyan1
Blog - http://vyan.blogspot.com
Facebook - http://www.facebook.com/Vyan01

Mi Fullride Contest Begins Today

Share

The Musicians Institute Fullride Contest Begins Today, allowing YOU to put in your vote on who may have a chance to be become the next Music Superstar! (Fans can Vote Once per Day until August 15th)

MI is one of the premier Music Schools in the nation and includes great musicians such as Rivers Cuomo of Weezer, Jeff Buckley, Scott Travers of Judas Priest, John Frusciante and Chad Smith of Red Hot Chili Peppers, Paul Gilbert of Mr. Big and Racer X, Jennifer Batten (Michael Jackson) and Dave Kushner of Velvet Revolver..


To put your two scents in all to help grant the next MI Superstar with a $10,000 Fullride Scholar Ship all you have to do is Listen and VOTE for your favorite artist at http://fullride.mi.edu

(Which Includes Me -Vyan)

http://fullride.mi.edu/contest.php?sid=185&rid=1980&aid=63715&mid=65854&mtype=1

Semi-Random Riffing



Tumbling Down Video



Vyan

Heartless Fracking Monsters!

You will know them by thier Votes...

I don't like to generalize and lump a wide swath of people into one big homogenous pile, but this week we've had two huge examples of exactly the kind of completely heathless self-aggrandizing inhuman monstrous Ass-Bandits that Republicans can be.

First we had the House Vote Against the 9-11 Responders


As if the fracking procedure really matters all that much when people who Risked their Lives to Save the Lives of Others are on the line.

It's just bloody Insane!.

Then after all of this posturing that "Tax Cuts Don't Have to be Paid For" - and blocking of Unemployment Benefits in the Senate, we have an updated Jobs Bill which is both Paid For and includes mostly Tax Cuts for Small Business and the Republican Filibuster IT!!!

Senate Republicans yesterday “rejected a bill to aid small businesses with expanded loan programs and tax breaks” even though several GOP lawmakers helped write it and it had been backed by conservative business groups such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. The procedural blockade underscores “how fiercely determined the party’s leaders are to deny Democrats any further legislative accomplishments.”

What. The. FRACK are these people ON??

And it's not like we didn't get a warning about this from Al Franken when he said "They Don't Want the Jobs to Improve before the Election".

Franken: And Republicans sort of take this stance that the best thing we can do is slow everything down so as little can happen as possible, so that we can both blame Democrats for not having stuff happen, like jobs bills and stuff like that. And so that, you know, I mean sometimes it’d be a legitimate difference of opinion on something, but sometimes it’s been ridiculous. But I do think that this whole approach of slowing everything down, in many ways I think it’s so that, they don’t want a jobs bill because they don’t want people to get jobs before the election. It’s a harsh thing to say, and I don’t want to impugn the motives of my colleagues, but I don’t get what they’re doing otherwise.

When he said this I thought he was going a little over the top, now I'm like...

That's exactly what it is - they don't want people to get jobs before the election so that Democrats will get the credit for it. They don't CARE how many people are out of work, need assistance and are losing their homes. The first stiumulus wasn't as large as it should have been, because of Republicans and their FETISH for Tax Cuts THEY DON'T CARE who it hurts, they just want the President to FAIL. They want the Democrats to FAIL. The want the Country to FAIL.


I can't believe we're seriously looking at losing seats to These People. Who the Hell can TRUST THEM?

Their entire mantra is "Government Sucks" - so why do they want to be part of something that Sucks, to make it Suck More?

They like to pretend that the Government Doing anything, particularly giving things away is such a horrible thing. Oh yeah? Well, what about the Homestead Act which gave away LAND!!!

You don't have to read History - just pay attention to Tom Cruise's Movie "Far and Away" and this scene which is "Land Race" where Settlers rush to the plot of land that will become their home, as provided by the Government!



Don't ever say the government didn't give white people something for nothing (after stealing it from Native Americans that is - talking about "Spreading the Wealth Around" this Land Race was preceded by the Horrific Trail of Tears).

It's not like Capilistic Ingenuity built the Interstate Highway System, or developed the technology that eventually became the Internet. That was Government! Our Government. But Republicans don't believe in America, they don't believe in the ability of American Government to help us lift ourselves up.

All you have to do is look at the Republcan "Battle Plan" - wherein they promise to...

Raise Taxes on the Poor and Middle Class by Eliminating nearly ALL Tax Deductions, Offsets and Credits.

Lower Taxes on the Rich by yet another 12-15%

Raise Social Security Taxes, while Decreasing Benefits for those under 55 by "Personalizing" up to 1/3rd of it on the Stock Market

Increase the Eligibility Age for Medicare to 69 and Cut Benefits

Replace Medicaid with Medical Savings Accounts

Completely Ignore Climate Change, Stall Green Energy Policies, Environmental Concerns, Safety and Health Regulations

This is America with Republicans in Control Again. One for All and All for Nobody but their Damn Self.

We can't let these crazy power-drunk people back behind the Wheel of Government - Not Again. We may have our problems with how Democrats have governed, we may be disappointed that they left out a provision here or the Public Option there - but Seriously - This. Can't. Happen.

It's past time to get up off the mat people, and start fighting BACK!

Vyan

Analyzing the Case of Sherrod v Breitbart

Although many pundits openly admit that Shirley Sherrod deserves her day in court against Andrew Breibart, few seem all that willing to openly say whether she has a chance of winning or not. Herein I take a basic look at the case and the law, and invite practicing attorney's to weigh in...

Let's start with the original post and video.



Much of the media has portrayed Breitbart's own commentary on the video as being rather minor, but it is not. It's actually quite extensive, going on to lay out the entire background for the dispute between the Tea Party and NAACP.

In his view, the Tea Party is completely and totally innocent of the charge of Racism. He claims that Democratic Congressmen staged their walk through the crowds inside the Capital Building - it's not like they WORK THERE OR ANYTHING - in an attempt to provoke Tea Partiers, which he also claims failed.

But it got even more blatant when Congressmen Andre Carson and John Lewis and other Congressional Black Caucus members staged a walk through the Tea Party crowd in front of the capitol the day before the health care vote. They claimed they were threatened by a violent mob and were subjected to the vile N word slur fifteen times. With the unpopularity of the toxic health care bill that the majority of Americans did not want, the Democrats needed a November strategy. Neutralizing the growing Tea Party movement with charges of racism was clearly its post-health care reform vote priority.

See, the only accusation of bigotry on the part of the Tea Party was the "N-World" during that one moment even though there were witnesses, it had nothing to do with this...



Or Mark William's "Colored People Like Slavery" Letter.

The core of his argument, to cut to the chase, is that the "Real" Racists are the Congressional Black Caucus and the NAACP.

The NAACP and the Congressional Black Caucus do not want racial harmony. They want political victory, and the race card is their Stradivarius.

We are in possession of a video from in which Shirley Sherrod, USDA Georgia Director of Rural Development, speaks at the NAACP Freedom Fund dinner in Georgia. In her meandering speech to what appears to be an all-black audience, this federally appointed executive bureaucrat lays out in stark detail, that her federal duties are managed through the prism of race and class distinctions.

In the first video, Sherrod describes how she racially discriminates against a white farmer. She describes how she is torn over how much she will choose to help him. And, she admits that she doesn’t do everything she can for him, because he is white. Eventually, her basic humanity informs that this white man is poor and needs help. But she decides that he should get help from “one of his own kind”. She refers him to a white lawyer.

Sherrod’s racist tale is received by the NAACP audience with nodding approval and murmurs of recognition and agreement. Hardly the behavior of the group now holding itself up as the supreme judge of another groups’ racial tolerance.

As we all now know Mrs. Sherrod was not speaking about something that occurred within her "Federal duties" and this actually is indicated within even just this excerpt when she says "I thought the Department of Agriculture had sent him to me". Why would she say that if she was working for the Department of Agriculture?

This clip also includes her saying "It was revealed to me that it wasn't about Race....it was abut haves and have nots" which also shows that she was actually making a point that was broader than race. Also part of the reason, as she describes it, that she didn't want to work with this particular farmer was because "He was trying to show that he was superior to me"... in other words, he was being a bit of a prick, her negative reaction to hm and reluctance to "give hm the full force of what I could do" wasn't just because he was white - he was being an asshole.

She doesn't refuse to help him, she just gave him a reference to an attorney she thought would give him a fair shake. The point of the story was that he didn't, but what's even more interesting about Breitbart's post is that he didn't stop there.

He posted a second video.

The NAACP which has transformed from a civil rights group to a propaganda arm of the Democratic Party and social-justice politics, supports a new America that relies less on individualism, entrepreneurialism and American grit, but instead giddily embraces, the un-American notion of unaccountability and government dependence. Shirley Sherrod, a federal appointee who oversees over a billion dollars of federal funds, nearly begs black men and women into taking government jobs at USDA — because they won’t get fired.




It’s unfortunate that the NAACP’s recent resolution and false accusations have forced us to show you video 1 when video 2 is the bigger problem. That’s not to say video 1 is not a problem, but this country can ill afford, in this time of economic peril, to waste our time poking and prodding at the racial hornet’s nest that was supposed to have been removed with this post-racial presidency. But now President Obama and the modern-day Democrat party reveal they are anything but post-racial.

The emerging Tea Party nation understands that the media has focused on the manufactured racial schism while intentionally ignoring the schism between free market thinkers and government expansionists, that the latter of which is brazen in its desire to transform America into a European-model welfare state with a healthy dose of socialism.

All Sherrod says in the second clip is that it's difficult to fire a Federal Employee, and that's true due to Civil Service rules unless they happen to be a political appointee as Sherrod herself was, at which case they serve at the "Pleasure of the President" and can be removed without any reason or cause at all - just ask David Iglesias. What's so sinister about this statement I can't quite fathom, other than the idea that "black people are using the Government as a Jobs Program paid for on the backs of hard working Whites" or something...


The basic Legal issues are these... did Breitbart commit Libel?

LIBEL AND SLANDER occur when a person or entity communicates false information that damages the reputation of another person or entity. Slander occurs when the false and defamatory communication is spoken and heard. Libel occurs when the false and defamatory communication is written and seen. The laws governing libel and slander, which are collectively known as DEFAMATION, are identical.

A plaintiff who wishes to sue an individual or entity for libel or slander has the burden of proving four claims to a court: First, the plaintiff must show that the DEFENDANT communicated a defamatory statement. Second, the plaintiff must show that the statement was published or communicated to at least one other person besides the plaintiff. Third, the plaintiff must show that the communication was about the plaintiff and that another party receiving the communication could identify the plaintiff as the subject of the defamatory message. Fourth, the plaintiff must show that the communication injured the plaintiff's reputation.

Even as a layman, this appears to be a slam dunk. But was it truly Defamation?

Any intentional false communication, either written or spoken, that harms a person's reputation; decreases the respect, regard, or confidence in which a person is held; or induces disparaging, hostile, or disagreeable opinions or feelings against a person.

So the crux here is that the statement has to be intentionally false and that the defendant has to be aware of the falsity of the statement. Truth is an absolutely defense, but then so is ignorance. If you don't know that your statement is false, then it is not intentional defamation.

In the case of the New York Times v Sullivan (1964) the Supreme Court established the Actual Malice Standard for the Defamation of Public Figures.

Actual Malice is defined as "knowledge that the information was false" or that it was published "with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not." Reckless disregard does not encompass mere neglect in following professional standards of fact checking. The publisher must entertain actual doubt as to the statement's truth Actual malice is different from common law malice which indicates spite or ill-will.

Larry Flynt attempted to invoke the Actual Malice standard in his case Hustler Magazine v Falwell but was rejected since his case involved a parody and satire, not an intentionally false statement - even though Flynt did ultimately prevail in that case.

It's pretty clear that Breitbart fits the definition of "common law malice" including spite and ill-will when it comes to Democrats, the NAACP, the President anyone associated with the - including Shirley Sherrod - and anyone who would challenge the Tea Party. He does show a blatant disregard of the facts, even of the scant information shown within the truncated version of the video - and makes clearly disprovable claims about them and about Sherrod.

But is that just intellectual laziness on his part or willful and malicious disregard for the truth?

I think it might be difficult to meet the "Actual Malice" standard if the only evidence is just this one post, but if a pattern of delibeate malice can be shown by - for example - bringing in the evidence of the Full Length ACORN tapes which were reviewed by the Brooklyn DA and California Attorney General showing that nearly all of Breitbart's claims about them were just as false and malicious as his claims about Sherrod I think Andrew might find himself in a fairly hot kettle for fish.

Update:There's also the fact that even after the full tape was released, Breitbart was still calling Sherrod "A Racist" - showing that even when he does have the facts, he continued to Defame Her.



What say you attorneys?

Vyan
Twitter
Facebook

Obama Admin Increases Deportations by 10-25%

As Chris Hayes Reports, the Obama Administration has been breaking records on Deportation of suspected Illegal Immigrants, increasing the rate by 10% of Bush final year, and 25% greater than his first year.



From the Washington Post

In a bid to remake the enforcement of federal immigration laws, the Obama administration is deporting record numbers of illegal immigrants and auditing hundreds of businesses that blithely hire undocumented workers.

The Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency expects to deport about 400,000 people this fiscal year, nearly 10 percent above the Bush administration's 2008 total and 25 percent more than were deported in 2007. The pace of company audits has roughly quadrupled since President George W. Bush's final year in office.

The effort is part of President Obama's larger project "to make our national laws actually work," as he put it in a speech this month at American University. Partly designed to entice Republicans to support comprehensive immigration reform, the mission is proving difficult and politically perilous.

...

The Obama administration has been moving away from using work-site raids to target employers. Just 765 undocumented workers have been arrested at their jobs this fiscal year, compared with 5,100 in 2008, according to Department of Homeland Security figures. Instead, officers have increased employer audits, studying the employee documentation of 2,875 companies suspected of hiring illegal workers and assessing $6.4 million in fines.

So yet again the reality on the ground is completely at odds with the type of rhetorical we've been hearing about immigration from Administration Critics. Particularly those who support measure like horribly bigoted measures like SB1070. Case in point, Rep. Lamar Smith and Constitution Party Candidate for Governor of Colorado Tom Tancredo who argues that Obama has come close "violating his oath of office" by not enforcing immigration laws.

Eleven years ago, like every citizen elected to serve in Congress or any person appointed to any federal position, I swore an oath to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic.”

I’ve always thought it significant that the Founders included domestic enemies in that oath of office. They thought liberty was as much at risk from threats within our borders as from outside. ... Mr. Obama is a more serious threat to America than al Qaeda. We know that Osama bin Laden and followers want to kill us, but at least they are an outside force against whom we can offer our best defense. ...

Mr. Obama’s most egregious and brazen betrayal of our Constitution was his statement to Sen. Jon Kyl, Arizona Republican, that the administration will not enforce security on our southern border because that would remove Republicans’ desire to negotiate a “comprehensive” immigration bill. That is, to put it plainly, a decision that by any reasonable standard constitutes an impeachable offense against the Constitution.

A more serious threat than al Qeada? I mean really.

With his increased crackdown on illegal workplace hirings of undocumented immigrants (levying a over $6.4 million in fines this fiscal year) as well as sending over 12,000 U.S. National Guard Troops to the Border it seems to me that President Obama is doing more to secure our borders than just about any other President in History.

Yes, it might be fair to say that hasn't completely ended the flow of illegals across our border, but then 30 Years of the War on Drugs hasn't really ended the illicit drug trade either has it?

What needs to be done, is the creation/restoration of a blue color worker visa, particular since the primary visa available for immigrant workers (H1B) now requires a college degree or special skills like being Neurosurgeon or Biochemist. The reason why have so many people coming here illegally is simply the fact that they the immigration laws are grossly biased against blue color workers and the poor (There is an H2B visa for person who do not quality for the "Special Occupations" within the H1B visa, but it only allows for about 66,000 visitations per year on a seasonal or "One-Time" basis - which is clearly deficient for the wide variety of businesses who are currently employing immigrant workers who literally have no legal path to try and better their lives or escape abject poverty.

To Qualify for the H1B Visa Program, you must work in a 'specialty occupation': The core Specialty Occupations include: IT, Computing, Finance, Accounting, Banking, Marketing, Advertising, PR, Sales, Recruiting, Engineering (all types), Teaching, HealthCare/Medical, Legal, Lawyers, Networking, Telecoms, Business, Management and Hospitality.

An H1B visa is typically valid for up to six (6) years and entitles your spouse (husband/wife) and children (under 21) to accompany you and live in the USA on an H4 visa. The H4 dependent visa does not allow your spouse/children to work (unless they get their own H1B visa).

Of course the idea of allowing manual labor workers to legally come here and compete fairly with American Workers - pay them above the table, providing them workers compensation and health care, while removing the anti-competitive advantage for their employers - is exactly what the Screaming Xenophobes on the right don't want.

But one thing they can't say, without sounding like a fracking idiot, is that Obama isn't protecting our borders.

He most certainly is.

Vyan