Barack Obama The Stereotypical white guy!

David Duke, Robert "sheets" Byrd (D VA) and many other notorious politicians are owed an explanation or an apology. After Barack gave his rousing throw grandma under the bus speech, he should just go ahead and buy his membership in Robert "KKK" Byrd's organization or that of the equally hateful group the New Black Panthers. He is both black and white. This must cause some conflict in him but because it is easier to pick on the whites as opposed to the blacks (as Bill Cosby found out) he now has told us that he has upped his standards and you should "up yours." Just food for thought in case you still were unsure about him.

As the Supreme Court contmeplates gun control.

Is gun control really racist?
By Jason Hall
First of all, I believe that guns have never harmed or killed a single individual. Having said that, I believe that it is the Nimrods who have misused this great tool to do harm and hurt others. A gun is no more dangerous than a very sharp butcher knife (which, by the way, does not make a sound when used), a metal baseball bat or any other items that can be used in the commission of a crime.
Guns are a tool and have been around for a very long time. Gunpowder was put into reinforced bamboo and ignited with a projectile inside; this was an ancient Chinese secret up to about the 16th century. Guns were a way of making the weak strong and able to protect themselves. Guns provided food, kept the wolves away from our cattle and helped us start a country. My point is that guns are a tool and not a problem. This brings me to the premise of this article.
Do gun control laws have a root in racism?
Now on to how all of this started.
Racist arms laws predate the establishment of the United States. Starting in
1751, the French Black Code required Louisiana colonists to stop any blacks,
and if necessary, beat "any black carrying any potential weapon, such as a
cane (you knew the French were involved some how). The Haitian Revolution in the 1790’s really upset the French folks in the Louisiana territory. They enacted laws that prohibited slaves and free blacks from owning a firearm or any other weapon at that time. For the slaves, a weapon would have been a TOOL used to gain their freedom, forcefully or otherwise. The free blacks needed weapons to provide for their families in the frontier and to protect themselves from animals and stupid people (don’t we all). The stupid people that I refer to, were the folks who would kidnap freed slaves and sell them back into slavery (it was difficult for the KKK to instill fear into the populace, with the populace returning fire). Even Native American Indians were not immune from the laws. Between 1630 and 1640 (not sure of exact date) Connecticut passed laws that only “friendly Indians” should be allowed to have firearms. Indeed only the friendlies. This thinking spilled over into the slave owning states in later year. Because of the threat of slave uprisings, these states enacted laws prohibiting blacks both free and slave from owning any weapons, including dogs. The whites thought that the free blacks and slaves would turn these dogs on them as a weapon. In Maryland, unlicensed dogs owned by free blacks were to be killed. Mississippi went one further and outlawed dog ownership by blacks altogether. Talk about harsh; I love my dogs more than I do my guns. On the other hand, a gun will not lick its butt and then your face. To prevent free blacks from moving to Savannah from other parts of Georgia, they decided to tax each person of color $100 per year. All because the establishment was afraid of freed blacks. This would explain why there were more free blacks that fought for the North as opposed to the number (which was small in comparison) of those who fought in the South.
There were still more laws enacted against blacks in America after the Civil War. Black Americans were prohibited from carrying firearms or bowie knives without a license. Although laws for both white and blacks were passed they were unequally enforced (guess who paid for that). Here is one blaring example of this unequal application of the law in the 20th century. Florida Supreme Court
Justice Buford's concurring opinion in Watson v. Stone (1941), in which a
conviction for carrying a handgun without a permit was overturned, because
the handgun was in the glove compartment of a car:
I know something of the history of this legislation. The original Act
of 1893 was passed when there was a great influx of negro laborers in
this State drawn here for the purpose of working in turpentine and
lumber camps. The same condition existed when the Act was amended in
1901 and the Act was passed for the purpose of disarming the negro
laborers and to thereby reduce the unlawful homicides that were
prevalent in turpentine and saw-mill camps and to give the white
citizens in sparsely settled areas a better feeling of security. The
statute was never intended to be applied to the white population and in
practice has never been so applied.
Condoleezza Rice opposes gun control and even gun registration because Bull Connor Birmingham police commissioner could have used it to disarm her father and others in 1963 as they protected themselves from the segregationists during the marches and protests. The Sixteenth Street Baptist Church bombing killed a classmate of Condoleezza Rice, who at the time was only 9 years old. If anyone understands that human dignity needs to be defended even with the barrel of a gun it would be Dr. Rice.
There are other instances in which the white population was to be protected from the people of color having firearms. I am convinced that the best way to control a population is to take away their ability to stop a group of people from controlling them. A gun is a tool that has stopped a lot of violence from occurring to innocent people of all races. Guns truly are colorblind and equal. To empower people is giving them the ability to control their own destiny. Think of this article what you will but the bottom line is there will always be someone out to control another and with out the proper tools to defend your freedom with you will be enslaved. As an end note the dreaded NRA is opposed to gun control and registration also. Makes you think does it not.

Ralph Nader is Unsafe In Any Election!

2/28/08 at George Washington University Washington DC
Ralph (unsafe in any election) Nader (I) Presidential Candidate.
Excerpts from his speech at this institute for higher learning (I think we all know who was high here.)
Corporations need to be held accountable to law enforcement actions for greed and waste and the corporations are supposed to be our servants and not our masters. We need to amend the constitution to make them work for us. They cook up deals with dictators around the world for mining rights and other such agreements. What about the all mighty government and the deals that we have made with dictatorships in the name of alliances to fight wars or to secure our national interests, how about that. The trust and faith that Nader is willing to put into our government is a little too blind unless of course he is the head of that government. He went on to pontificate that we the people own the lands and we own the technologies, not the corporations. The government through our tax dollars gave the research “freely” to the corporations and now they charge us the “people” money to stop and treat diseases, that the government gave them the research to begin with “freely.” That is like Al (messiah) Gore taking credit for the internet. Yes the government does pour money into research that helps to better our lives but it does not create the things that we need to have in order to live. The only thing that government creates is a lot of red tape and more government. Government this and government that, it is this, the benevolent government idea, that has created the great Socialist and Communist states that have ever existed, oh wait, those governments abused power, stifled creativity, killed innovation (and people) because some bureaucrat did not like an idea or wanted it for themselves.
Micromanagement does not a good government make. For example, do you not like having independent thought at work, the freedom to make decisions on your own that will actually help a company or do you want to have some idea stealing hack (who takes credit for others work) looking over every decision you make and critiquing all. This form of intrusion is not only uncalled for but against the very nature of the innovative spirit of this country’s very founding. The Founding Fathers or The Framers (in new speak, thanks Orwell) were tired of being regulated from afar and not being allowed to think for themselves. The King and select bunch of crown cronies were into anything with regulations and tax happy. They were more worried about how something might affect the King (including speech Mr. McCain) rather than creating a good government that works for the people.
Ultimately the government is the source of all good in the known universe to Mr. Nader. And when our Representative form of government fails, we need to implement a direct democracy. This is what we would call “mob rule” of course this mob would not include you and me but rather those that we would choose to “represent” us the people in the “people’s house”, you can see where this is going, right? We will replace One form of government abusing bureaucrat with another but call it “direct democracy” representing the “will of the peoples”, I am sure when China “liberated” Tibet they told them the same thing. We have to keep in mind that this government only exists because we say so. That is what is so unique about it. But we can also give our government all the power if we so choose. But remember when that happens there is no going back, they will stop you, with force if necessary!
Now here is something else that Ralph claims, the Democrats and Republicans do not have health care for all on the table (does he not watch the Democrat debates.) I understand the thought about the Republican party, but the Democrats, I dunno, maybe I missed something or is he getting his news from…MARS! Hey Ralph, you should really lay off the BONG WATER. At least this explains the hair cut that he has been sporting lately.
Here is a really good bit of wise and well thought out wisdom from the Ralph Meister. Students are the ones who are disenfranchised by voter registration (those who are from out of state I am assuming) and the voting age should be lowered to 16 because “ if you can drive and work then why not vote?” I know I really trust a 16 year old behind the wheel of vehicle let alone our government. Hey why not lower the age to run for senate to 16 or the president to 16. We all know at 16 you are not prone to influence from others and can definitely think on your own with out any bias at all. And this is why I maintain Ralph Nader is “Unsafe in any Election.” Just thought you should know!

Barack Obama enslaving the working poor!

One of the points that I have been making for years is that raising the minimum wage is just a vote buying gimmick; and a way to enslave a large population of unskilled workers to the plantation of government welfare.
Economists and at least one president have for years stated that raising the minimum wage was not a way to help the poor out of poverty.

The Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke on 2/15/06 during his first semi annual report to Congress stated. "I think it (a higher minimum wage) does lower employment," Bernanke told lawmakers. "However, I note that the literature is very controversial on this subject. "One might consider alternative ways of helping working-class Americans -- for example, the earned income tax credit which delivers money to working families without necessarily affecting the employment."
“Raising the minimum wage is the wrong way to raise the incomes of low-wage earners." President Clinton, as quoted in Michael Kramer, "Minimum Wage, Minimum Sense," Time, Feb. 6, 1995. Still does not explain why he raised it anyway, oh yeah, that’s right were talking about Billy boy.

Does the old saying “a rising tide lifts all boats” come to mind, and with NAFTA who in this country (the manufacturers) is going to continue paying the increased wages and sell cheaply priced goods; while having the understanding that the rest of the world especially China, can do it for so much less. Again thanks to NAFTA, these increases are going to create a “wage bubble” and then POP! We will reach a point where there will be very few jobs mainly because the cost of doing business in the US is too expensive. Are we going to become a nation of consumers and not producers; oh wait, we will not be able to afford anything because we have priced our selves out of our jobs! Now that you are out of a job, you need a place to stay, food to eat and help for your family. Guess what, the government will step in and in the name of compassion will help you meet your needs (say hello to a socialist society) and punish those eeevvviiiillll corporations for firing you. But back to our aphorism, all boats will be lifted, and I do mean all boats this includes, the USS cost of living and the USS price of goods. What business is going to just eat the cost of increasing wages and not pass that cost on to you, the consumer in the price of the goods? If they do just eat it, then they will eventually go out of business or they will start “downsizing” workers. Forget about getting a job especially if you are not skilled and say goodbye to entry level work. Again NAFTA will offer a way out of the increased minimum wages by shifting production to poorer countries where labor is really, really cheap.

Excerpted from Barack Hussein Obama book Keeping Americas Promise! Ensuring Living Wages and Improving Working Conditions Raise the Minimum Wage: Even though the minimum wage will rise to $7.25 an hour by 2009, the minimum wage’s real purchasing power will still be below what it was in 1968. Obama will further raise the minimum wage to $9.50 an hour by 2011, index it to inflation and increase the Earned Income Tax Credit to make sure that full-time workers can earn a living wage that allows them to raise their families and pay for basic needs such as food, transportation, and housing – things so many people take for granted.

This guy and others like him (both republicans and democrats or just REPUBLICRATS) are going to create a third world atmosphere and economic condition if we do not stand up and say NO (unless McCaine completely destroys the rest of the 1st amendment.)
You know we could spread this misery evenly for other countries and just annex all of Mexico and Latin America, just a thought.
Now to those of you who are just salivating to run me down as some one who does not care about the “working poor” (there is an oxymoron) and I am some kind of heartless wealthy man, well I am not. In the same vain I would say that you care even less for the “working poor” because you would let politicians destroy our working base and send more jobs out of the country. You are a bunch of heartless hacks take that!