29 October 2012

LL away on business.....

I will be out of the country for the next 2 weeks on business. I won't be able to blog so see you after the US elections....Go Romney!


Lite moments

28 October 2012

Still Thinking About Voting for Obama?

Anyone still sitting on the fence as to how to vote on 6 November should just stay there. If they haven't realised what Obama has done to the country by now then they're either an idiot or a liberal Democrat. For others, here's a reminder of why you need to vote Obama out of office. How America must miss the wisdom of Ronald Reagan. I wonder what he'd think of America today....

27 October 2012

Says it all really.....RIP

Former Top Defense Official: If Obama Gave Order to Protect Benghazi Heroes There’d Be Paper Trail

More bad news for Obama. Following on from the post I did earlier today, Obama has been caught out about giving orders to to 'secure our personnel'. Bing West, a former Assistant Secretary of Defense has said that there would be a paper trail if orders were given. Mr Obama, release proof of what you claim! Go on, I dare you. No use putting the paper trail where you keep your birth certificate and college transcripts! 

Obama Fiddled While Benghazi Burned–
Earlier today Barack Obama told Denver’s WUSA TV this in regard to the Benghazi 9-11 terror attack,
“I gave three very clear directives. Number one, make sure that we are securing our personnel and doing whatever we need to. Number two, we’re going to investigate exactly what happened to make sure it doesn’t happen again. Number three, find out who did this so we can bring them to justice.”
Tonight however, Bing West, a former Assistant Secretary of Defense, told Greta Van Susteren,
“If that actually happened the way President Obama said it happened, there’s a paper trail and I think people reasonably enough can say, “Can we see the order?” because hundreds of others supposedly saw this order.
Obama just got caught. He lied about his securing our personnel in Benghazi. And now the world will know about it.
There was no order to protect our men on the ground.

South Africa: Malema pals benefit from R1.7bn tender

Isn't it amazing and a fantastic coincidence that family and acquaintances of Julius Malema (Juju) just happened to have been awarded government tenders amounting to R1.7 billion for a school feeding programme? Well, according to Juju, that's all it is - a coincidence, nothing to see here, move along. Juju is the ex-ANC Youth League president, shunned by the ANC (haha if you believe that) and South Africa's own little Idi Amin. His claim to fame is shouting to anyone who wants to listen to him how racist Whites in South Africa are and how their lands and businesses should be taken away from them - just because. He barely passed his schooling and when he speaks he sounds like he's on drugs, but even with all these handicaps, Juju has done incredibly well for himself financially. He started out with nothing and today he's a multi-millionaire, rorting the South African tax payers via the ANCs tender process. The ANC tender process is only open to "Black entrepreneurs" - or rather, to any Black person who knows someone in the government who can return financial kick-backs to them in exchange for being awarded the tenders in the first place - or as we like to call them, tenderpreneurs. So Juju has made himself very rich by knowing the right people in the corrupt ANC government. This semi-literate person has dabbled in things like tendering to build roads  to interfering in tenders being awarded to friends and family. What could possibly go wrong? And now we hear that a school feeding programme has been rigged to financially favor people he knows - cousins, a part-time bodyguard and a former driver - all have fingers in this R1.7bn pie! What a lucky coincidence in a country of 40 million Blacks, that Juju's cousins and ex-staff members received these tenders! Why, they're so lucky that they should buy lotto tickets because how can they not win! Yeah right, pull the other one Juju, this Whitey isn't that stupid or gullible!

Julius Malema linked to fraudulent tender
Juju - I'm rich so FU Whites

Johannesburg - Former ANC Youth League leader Julius Malema is accused of rigging a R1.7bn school feeding programme in Limpopo to favour people close to him.

He allegedly presented a list of people - including two of his cousins, his part-time bodyguard and his former driver - that he wanted to receive a cut of the money, the Mail & Guardian revealed on Friday. 

The newspaper said five sources had independently told reporters how Malema had given the provincial education minister a list of favoured service providers for tenders providing school meals in Limpopo.

Tender details were then manipulated so that the people on the list could become beneficiaries.  

The seven school contracts were worth a combined R40m over two years.

Malema this week denied sending any list to the department and called for people to provide proof.   

Responding to the fact that people close to him had won big contracts, Malema said people shouldn’t be condemned for knowing him.

"I've always told them: 'Never be afraid to do business with government, but also never expect any favours from me.' They have a right to be economically active, but they must all comply with the law and if not then they must be charged."

The provincial education minister’s office also denied receiving any list or manipulating tenders. 


South Africa: Matric pupil shot dead by hijackers

Another young White person gunned down in South Africa - all for a car. As her father says, they didn't have to shoot her in the mouth, they could have just taken the car. But then, that defeats the purpose of all these attacks now, doesn't it? Because these attacks are meant to kill White South Africans. 

Johannesburg - A matric pupil from the East Rand, who was en route to friends to study for the final exams, died shortly after being shot in the face by hijackers, Beeld newspaper reported on Friday.

Minke Aucamp, 18, who was a pupil at the Jurgens High School in Springs, was shot in the mouth as she was leaving her parents' driveway in her Hyundai Atos on Thursday.

A domestic worker, who gave her name only as Ally, told police that she had heard a scream and two gunshots at around noon.

She ran to the garage, where she found Minke lying on the ground and saw the Atos being driven away.

Police and paramedics arrived on the scene shortly afterwards, and Minke was airlifted to hospital in Alberton, but doctors declared her dead on arrival.

She was the only child of Carol and Willie Aucamp, who told reporters on Thursday that they had waited ten years to have her.

"She was so young... they could have just taken the car," a devastated Willie Aucamp told Beeld.

CIA operators were denied request for help during Benghazi attack, sources say

As the days go by, more and more information - damning information for Obama - is being discovered about the attack on the Libyan US embassy on 9/11/12, where 4 Americans were killed, including the Ambassador Chris Stevens. Two ex-Navy SEALS died as part of the 4. Initially, Obama and his team blamed the attack on a 'spontaneous demonstration against a YouTube anti-Islam video'. How convenient. Except, that protest took place in Egypt, far away from Benghazi. Obama and Hilary Clinton continued to cover-up the real story - that it was an al Qaeda terrorist attack on America. Why would he do that? Well, apart from being in election mode and not wanting any scandals, he had also painted a picture back in America where he bragged that he had defeated al Qaeda and that they were on the back foot. So this attack was a tad inconvenient from his election narrative. Of course, people living outside of America can see the truth - that al Qaeda is today stronger and more active than ever before. So how did the Obama administration deal with this attack? Not very well. Communications released this past week show that Obama would have known within an hour of the attack. The attack lasted 7 hours, with the 2 ex-SEALS killed last, protecting the CIA offices in another building. And now we learn that one of these men had been in constant contact with the CIA and even had a laser on a target waiting for the US Special Operations forces to send support from the Spectre gunship. So Leon Panetta saying that he didn't want to send in support because of all the chaos on the ground, is lying. The laser would have allowed the Special Ops to see what the target was. These brave men died whilst Obama did nothing to help them, and they were repeatedly told to stand down. They were fighting for their lives whilst people in Obama's administration watched them die in real time. SEVEN HOURS under attack and Obama refused to send in help. Help was stationed in Italy, a mere one hour flight-time away if they chose to deploy them. This is sickening and a huge cover-up by Obama and his staff. The CIA has come out today to say that they didn't refuse help. So who did Mr Obama??? 

Rush Limbaugh received a call today from someone who obviously knows the standard operating procedures when an Ambassador is in strife. I've posted the YouTube video of the call where the person says that Obama would have known within 15 MINUTES that the Libyan Ambassador was in trouble. Can you imagine what a POS Obama must be to ignore his own representative and others help? And none of the media bully boys are reporting on this - ONLY FOX. How's that for protecting their little darling Obama?

Fox News has learned from sources who were on the ground in Benghazi that an urgent request from the CIA annex for military back-up during the attack on the U.S. consulate and subsequent attack several hours later on the annex itself was denied by the CIA chain of command -- who also told the CIA operators twice to "stand down" rather than help the ambassador's team when shots were heard at approximately 9:40 p.m. in Benghazi on Sept. 11. 

Former Navy SEAL Tyrone Woods was part of a small team who was at the CIA annex about a mile from the U.S. consulate where Ambassador Chris Stevens and his team came under attack. When he and others heard the shots fired, they informed their higher-ups at the annex to tell them what they were hearing and requested permission to go to the consulate and help out. They were told to "stand down," according to sources familiar with the exchange. Soon after, they were again told to "stand down." 

Woods and at least two others ignored those orders and made their way to the consulate which at that point was on fire. Shots were exchanged. The rescue team from the CIA annex evacuated those who remained at the consulate and Sean Smith, who had been killed in the initial attack. They could not find the ambassador and returned to the CIA annex at about midnight. 

At that point, they called again for military support and help because they were taking fire at the CIA safe house, or annex. The request was denied. There were no communications problems at the annex, according those present at the compound. The team was in constant radio contact with their headquarters. In fact, at least one member of the team was on the roof of the annex manning a heavy machine gun when mortars were fired at the CIA compound. The security officer had a laser on the target that was firing and repeatedly requested back-up support from a Spectre gunship, which is commonly used by U.S. Special Operations forces to provide support to Special Operations teams on the ground involved in intense firefights. 

CIA spokeswoman Jennifer Youngblood, though, denied the claims that requests for support were turned down. 

Read more here


Mark Levin - previous Chief of Staff to President Ronald Reagan - goes ballistic weighs in on this disgrace:

Obama defends calling Romney a bullshitter....new tone

Watch how Obama tries to defend his 'bullshitter' comment about Romney - you can see how his mind is searching for sound bites to defend his crass remark. Not only has he called Romney a bullshitter, but his website published a picture of Romney wearing a dunce cap. Who's the dunce here Mr Obama?? Someone who admits that he can't do math past Grade 7; who couldn't work out how to use a standard voting machine when he voted yesterday; who says he's been to 57 states with one left to go; pronounces corpsman as corpseman FOUR times in a speech; and who looked like a dunce in the first debate? Who's the dunce Mr Obama??? You or Romney who is a proven successful Governor and businessman, and who I'm sure can do math past Grade 7!

From the Obama website:


Gallup Releases Bombshell Survey

I'm trying not to get too excited about a Romney win. However, the signs are looking good, barring that voter fraud by the Democrats doesn't impact the results too much. Today, Gallup released a survey of likely voters. Bare in mind that all of the polls today are based on the voter turn-out in 2008, where Democrats outvoted Republicans by 54% to 42% (D+12). So, all the current polls are skewed favorably towards the Democrats, hence why some polls state +D9 or D+12 etc in favor of Obama. The Gallup survey published today is finding that 49% of voters will be GOP and only 46% Democrat - effectively a swing of 15-points towards the GOP - or, GOP+3 on polls. If this is true, then Romney will win decisively and the GOP should pick up the Senate. Some pollsters are predicting a huge win for Romney, but I'll remain cautiously optimistic for a Romney win. After all, I don't want to count my chickens before they hatch!

Embedded image permalink
The liberal Houston Chronicle endorsed Romney today - is the writing on the wall?

This morning, Gallup released a bombshell survey of likely voters this November. It wasn't a horse race poll, i.e. which candidate is ahead, but rather a look at the underlying demographics that will make up the electorate this November. They slap the survey with a very misleading headline, "2012 U.S. Electorate Looks Like 2008." While this is true in many respects, it obscures one very big difference. For the first time in a presidential election, more Republicans will vote than Democrats.

In 2008, 54% of likely voters identified as Democrat or lean Democrat. 42% of likely voters identified as GOP or lean GOP. In other words, the electorate, including independents who lean towards a particular party, was D+12. This year, however, the Democrat advantage has disappeared. 49% of likely voters today identify as GOP or lean GOP. Just 46% of likely voters are or lean towards the Democrats. This is a 15-point swing towards the GOP from 2008 to an outright +3 advantage for the GOP. By comparison, in 2004, when Bush won reelection, the electorate was evenly split, with each party getting support from 48% of likely voters.

If these numbers are within even a few points of what this survey suggests, then Romney will win decisively and the GOP will pick up the Senate. We are likely standing on the edge of another GOP wave election.

Keep in mind, the Gallup survey suggests that voter turnout among Obama's biggest supporters, i.e. minorities and young voters, will generally match 2008 levels. Obama's problem is that, relatively speaking, there just aren't that many of these voters. Voters under 30 will make up 13% of the electorate, one point below '08 and even with '04. Minorities will make up 20%, up 5 from '04 and only up 1 point from '08. 


USA: Over $60,000 in Welfare Spent Per Household in Poverty

So much money spent and wasted over the years on stamping out 'poverty'. Ex-Australian Prime Minister Bob Hawke famously said in 1988 that 'By the year 1990, there will be NO Australian child living in poverty!' Well, a report just published states that there are 600 000 children going to bed hungry each night in Australia. Politicians make these sweet-tasting promises one day and don't deliver the next - all to sound caring and to get the vote. Typical. Politicians, no matter how they try, will never get rid of poverty because the poor will always be with us. Even in the year 2012. If you read The Bible you will read about poverty in there, so what makes politicians think they can snap their welfare fingers at this constant problem and think that they are bigger than the problem? You see, one man's poverty is another man's riches. Compare the poverty experienced in America to the poverty in, say, Africa. It's a different level of poverty, yet the Americans think they're living in poverty. It all boils down to what your definition of poverty is. You can be rich even if you're materially poor. For example, people living on a piece of land tending chickens and growing maize and not earning a lot of money are considered poor, yet they have every need met. Yet a gang-banger landing up in hospital with a bullet in his side with $10 000 in his pockets, but still unable to live a civilised life and care for himself is regarded as 'poor'. Who is the one living in poverty? At the end of the day, poverty is all in the mind. And so governments constantly strive to be seen to be helping those living in their version of poverty. In America the 'poor' are thrown food stamps, health care, financial aid, free telephones, free housing, and yet they're still living in poverty wanting even more done to help them. In Africa? They are left to fend for themselves. Africa is right in this case, as the only way those living in poverty can get out of poverty is to do it for themselves. They need to discover the magic formula on their own and not be GIVEN it. But alas, Lefty governments can't have this, because when you teach a man to fish then you lose a voter. The short-term gain for the long-term pain. America is now living with the long-term pain of $16 TRILLION debt, most spent on welfare helping those 'in need'. They have nurtured generations of takers and the current generation has perfected the art. The article below proves that money is not the answer. Forcing people to help themselves is. Which politician is going to be brave enough to go there?

New data compiled by the Republican side of the Senate Budget Committee shows that, last year, the United States spent over $60,000 to support welfare programs per each household that is in poverty. The calculations are based on data from the Census, the Office of Management and Budget, and the Congressional Research Services.

"According to the Census’s American Community Survey, the number of households with incomes below the poverty line in 2011 was 16,807,795," the Senate Budget Committee notes. "If you divide total federal and state spending by the number of households with incomes below the poverty line, the average spending per household in poverty was $61,194 in 2011."  

This dollar figure is almost three times the amount the average household on poverty lives on per year. "If the spending on these programs were converted into cash, and distributed exclusively to the nation’s households below the poverty line, this cash amount would be over 2.5 times the federal poverty threshold for a family of four, which in 2011 was $22,350 (see table in this link)," the Republicans on the Senate Budget Committee note.

To be clear, not all households living below the poverty line receive $61,194 worth of assistance per year. After all, many above the poverty line also receive benefits from social welfare programs (e.g. pell grants).

But if welfare is meant to help bring those below the poverty line to a better place, it helps demonstrate that numbers do not add up.

As for the welfare programs, the Republicans on the Senate Budget Committee note:
A congressional report from CRS recently revealed that the United States now spends more on means-tested welfare than any other item in the federal budget—including Social Security, Medicare, or national defense. Including state contributions to the roughly 80 federal poverty programs, the total amount spent in 2011 was approximately $1 trillion. Federal spending alone on these programs was up 32 percent since 2008.

The U.S. Census Bureau estimated that almost 110 million Americans received some form of means-tested welfare in 2011. These figures exclude entitlements like Medicare and Social Security to which people contribute, and they refer exclusively to low-income direct and indirect financial support—such as food stamps, public housing, child care, energy assistance, direct cash aid, etc. For instance, 47 million Americans currently receive food stamps, and USDA has engaged in an aggressive outreach campaign to boost enrollment even further, arguing that “every dollar of SNAP benefits generates $1.84 in the economy… It’s the most direct stimulus you can get.” (Economic growth, however, is weaker this year than the two years prior, even as food stamp “stimulus” has reached an all-time high.)

Here's a breakdown of the welfare spending:


26 October 2012

Afterburner with Bill Whittle: Running on Empty

Don't get cocky America! Vote like your life and the lives of your children depend on it, because it does. Hopefully Bill Whittle is right and this is his last opposition video he posts before a new President is elected in 12 days time!

America's Third-World Streak

A thought-provoking article to read. The author hits several nails on their head, the most important one being that Obama was elected as President of the US (POTUS) on the back of an ongoing issue: Black rage and White guilt. 

America is importing third-world Blacks into the country at a rapid rate, and with them they bring their anti-White hatred. They also bring with them their hunger for American money, but not their hunger for being a true American. They don't care about the Constitution, or what's made America great. They are the new takers and destroyers and the new White-guilt tormentors. This explains how a low level community organiser - Obama - was voted in as POTUS. This article is also a sad reminder as to how White countries have destroyed themselves by rushing to embrace the Socialist ploy of multi-culturalism. These new immigrants are your new baby factories, funded by those who work and pay taxes and who think twenty times before having another baby they can't afford. These new Black immigrants have no such worries, paid as they are to produce by the generous welfare entitlements they receive for having contributed nothing to the money-pool. In short, White's are committing race suicide. Americans need to start waking up and smelling the coffee. This article links nicely to the one I posted below regarding Obama having 95% of the Black vote. White people need to realise that Blacks vote for Blacks because they are anti-White racists. They are very sensitive to being the  inferior race and so anything that is anti-White is to be celebrated. Think I'm exaggerating? I speak from experience. I lived surrounded by them to the tune of 10:1 for 37 years and I know the hatred they have towards Whites. They suffer from a huge inferiority complex, so they must destroy those who make them feel this way. Whilst Whites just want to get on with living, providing and improving, Blacks fall on their victimhood to explain away their recessive habits. And America and other Western countries celebrate their demise as they allow thousands of these people into their countries. There is no explanation needed as to why Africa is known as Dark Continent. And it has nothing to do with skin color. 

Reports are surfacing which claim that many black Americans will go ballistic if Barack Obama loses the 2012 presidential election.  This is not surprising, given how and why he was elected in the first place.

Being America's first viable black presidential candidate does not tell the whole story of Barack Obama's lock on 95% of the black vote, which helped to him to win in 2008.  The real story behind his support from this group is being completely ignored.

Barack Obama, unlike any other president in United States history, has been able to create a hyper-ideologically polarized America by means of an ideology that most Americans don't even understand.  He is nothing more than a post-colonial demagogue in elitist, postmodern progressive clothing.  Period.  And that's really all that there is to it.

Mainstream pundits can slice, dice, and serve him up any way that they want in order to sound interesting, but they are all wrong.  He is not an intellectual.  He is not a pragmatist.  He is not a man of the people.  He is in fact the opposite of these things.  He is an anti-intellectual extremist who, along with many of his diverse ethnic supporters, holds a peculiar and convoluted grudge against the United States of America.  

He is a great browser and plagiarizer of debunked ideas on race and society-building, which, besides golfing at tony resorts and flirting with Hollywood's glitterati, happen to be his two exclusive fixations.  Indeed, Barack Obama is a man against the people, believing only in his own manifest destiny as he seeks to thwart and destroy every shred of political credibility that this nation has ever had at home and abroad.  Anyone with a post-colonial clue knows this.

There is no other credible way to explain how a virtual nobody in American politics, a mere eighty-week-old U.S. senator, began campaigning for the presidency in 2006, his only claims to fame being that he was elected as the president of the Harvard Law Review after numerous ballots, and that he at times organized huge swaths of intellectually lazy welfare addicts into protesting mobs.  There is no other way to explain how this less than obscure mob organizer managed to wrangle the Democratic nomination from the most well-known woman in American politics, whose husband, a former president himself, was once lauded, by blacks and whites alike, as America's first black president.    

Sarah Palin, never having backpacked in the south of France as a teenager, had nothing to do with it; John McCain, being as old as dirt, had nothing to do with it, nor did the stock market disaster of 2008 have anything to do with it.  George W. Bush didn't even have anything to do with it.  I mean, how does an adjunct lecturer of constitutional law (with nary a piece of published scholarship to speak of), grassroots anarchy sympathizer, and a part-time state legislator come to be trusted to handle all of the great American crises bequeathed to us by the diabolical Bush administration?  This defied common sense.

If the country did not want another Republican, then the Democrats should have nominated Hillary.  Crappy campaign, exposed cleavage, turquoise catalogue pantsuits with matching costume jewelry to boot or not -- in 2008, she, at the very least, had the experience.  Barack Obama had nothing.

To propel himself into the White House, the president needed the supernatural aid of America's most persistent and injurious twin demons: black rage and white guilt.  Barack Obama was allowed to strut into the highest temple of American government because he was particularly adroit at harnessing the full power of these double forces, to carve for himself an "unprecedented" moment in time.  This is what the great political agitators and demagogues of world history do.  America fell for it hook, line, and sinker.

This all happened because we are a deeply politically divided nation.  Some of us understand the ideal that America is supposed to represent, and some of us do not.  Barack Obama was able to sharpen this existing divide and then conquer.  That divide has now turned into an irreconcilable rift among the people of this nation.  Barack Obama has simply called the bluff on our "united we stand, divided we fall" nonsense, and he has won.  

He began winning and we began losing in 2004 during his keynote speech at the Democratic convention, when he looked America straight in the eye and said:
There is not a liberal America and a conservative America - there is the United States of America. There is not a Black America and a White America and Latino America and Asian America - there's the United States of America.
Mind you, he never said that he believed in any of this; he just suckered Americans into cheering for what they wanted to hear.  When America stood up and applauded him, Barack Obama knew right there and then that he had found his mark.  He and his most devoted supporters knew what most who applauded him did not: America's deepest divide is especially a result of a third-world streak that Americans have been too spineless to acknowledge for the threat that it is.

As a result, new definitions for the word "racist" have been allowed to take over our national consciousness.  Racism in America can mean almost anything -- someone who believes in voter identification laws, for example

This is all very silly but, at the same time, serious stuff.  Democratic politicians in immigrant-dense American cities have been using this type of labeling tactic to win elections forever -- and this is what Barack Obama used to win the presidency.  Almost singlehandedly, Barack Obama has turned the most fundamental sound bite of the American mystique -- "we are a nation of immigrants" -- on its ear.

Regrettably, mainstream conservative pundits don't like to talk about race and culture in a meaningful way.  It's too bad, because, if they did, conservative politicians would probably be winning more elections in more of blue America hands down.  When they do talk about it, they know only how to make room for the tired old talking points regurgitated by black anti-intellectuals like Tavis Smiley, Cornel West, Al Sharpton, and the Jesse Jacksons (Senior and Junior).  The pundits do not know how to deal with the issue, so they either ignore it or stick to dubious and insipid narratives that pacify their audiences.  I live for the day when this mind-numbing insanity will end.

Here's where I wish the pundits would go, even though doing so would mean career suicide: America's newest black urban immigrants, especially those from the West Indies, West Africa, and Latin America, pose the biggest problem because they underscore a political conundrum that America has never prepared itself to deal with.  Urban America has become a place of refuge for all sorts of post-colonial third-worlders, and they, more than any other group, have been redefining the social and political landscape in cities like New York, Philadelphia, Chicago, and Los Angeles for decades.  And the problem is spreading.

With fingers crossed behind their backs, many of these immigrants might be swearing allegiance to the flag for the sake of becoming "American," but in reality, they see this country as a land for economic opportunity and nothing else.  The Constitution means nothing to them, nor, ironically, does the 1960s Civil Rights movement.

Having emigrated from countries with political systems that parallel what Barack Obama envisions for America, they not only are quite comfortable with this president, but see him as a key to their own success especially against whites.  For many of them, it's all about gettin' paid here in America (through both massive government subsidies and work), and then throwing this wealth back into the faces of the whites whom they feel still control everything in their home countries.  Get back at one white, and you get back at them all.  This is Obama's real 47% -- the people whom he claims that Governor Romney, heartlessly, continues to dismiss.  These people have a very real and vested interest in Barack Obama as president.

I'm talking about the scores of Jamaican, Guyanese, and Dominican nannies who care for the children of Manhattan's elite Upper-West-Siders, who bank enough to build three-story, jacuzzi-on-every-floor mansions "back home."  I'm talking about the fifteen-hour-a-day Ghanaian cab driver who lives on the first floor of a broken-down row home in west Philly, but who owns three car-importing businesses in Accra.  I'm taking about the Liberian novelty shop owner in downtown Newark who somehow manages to support all six of his children in the best private schools that West Africa has to offer.  This is not to mention those of them who work as middle-income civil servants in American school systems, social welfare agencies, or in left-wing phantom government institutions like the U.N., but who live like virtual kings and queens when they travel back to their hyper-materialistic and politically schizophrenic, corrupt countries. 

This is the new face of black rage in America.  But mainstream America, including its useless media still feeling guilty over the likes of Harriet Tubman, has been too stupid to notice.

According to this 2007 report, third-world (black) immigrants to America, once an overlooked part of this country's urban immigration pattern, are becoming an increasingly more visible and socio-economic contributory part of the United States.  But what the report omits is that where the diversity of the skills, experiences, and rich cultures of these immigrant populations have been a positive talking-point focus for liberal and conservative politicians alike, their post-colonial political ideologies have been often under-scrutinized.  Most if not all of these immigrants come from the former territories of 19th-century European colonial powers.

This is a big deal, because along with their "rich cultures and traditions," many bring with them a deep and fundamental antipathy towards whites; belief in big socialist-style governments existing as a means for solving issues of ethnic discrimination and civil strife; and belief that government is there to protect not the rights of individuals, but the rights of the various social groups that make up their mosaic multicultural societies.  This, especially, is what they love and will continue to support about Barack Obama.  And they will do so no matter what, because he believes in all of this.

And in the last decade, it seems that this third-world streak, once confined to the various inner-city ethnic ghettos, is widening and rapidly seeking suburban westward expansion.  The Population Bulletin:
At first the new black immigration was little noticed out­side a few cities-especially New York and Miami-where communities of West Indians, Haitians, Nigerians, and other black immigrants flourished. But that has changed in recent decades as Somali communities have grown up in Columbus, Ohio; Lewiston, Maine; and Minneapolis; Ethiopian churches may be found in suburban Virginia and Washington, D.C., hosts a Caribbean carnival each year. Immigrant blacks and their children are gaining prominence in many fields, raising their visibility and at­tracting attention among the general population.
The challenge as I see it is that there is no way to sound-bite post-colonial ideology.  Many have tried and failed.  Understanding all that it entails requires a more than satisfactory attention span, which is something that our political culture is desperately lacking.

Also, with the exception of a few notable conservative commentators, there have been too many intellectually lazy, in-the-public-eye far-righters, who have successfully stymied what should have been four years' worth of public discourse on post-colonial ideology, which could have given mainstream America a deeper understanding of Barack Obama's archaic and completely un-American political motivations.  Instead, they restrained talk of this political paradigm and its links to the president by wrapping it in the straitjacket of boilerplate socialism and trying to link this easy counter-narrative to the president.  Most unsuspecting Americans were bound to laugh this off, which is exactly what they did.

The post-colonial black third-world immigrant is now very much a part of the fabric of American society.  There is simply no denying this.  And yes, this is a problem.  I certainly do not propose traditional Americans engaging in modern witch hunts to root these people out, but I do propose more nuanced conversations on this topic.  Whether Mr. Obama wins re-election or not, the problem is not going away.

Come to think of it, perhaps conservative Americans should have taken Mr. Obama's community organizing résumé more seriously.  He's obviously pretty good at it.


Obama team plays down profane jibe about Romney

Obama called Mitt Romney a bullshitter. Yes, seriously. Can you believe the gall of this man to call someone else a BS'ter when he is the biggest one going? And now Obama's campaign is urging reporters not to get 'distracted' by the word used by the President of the United States in describing his opponent. I wonder what would have happened had Romney said this about Obama? The media would have peed their pants to report it over and over up until the elections. Romney would have been labelled a red-neck racist slave owner! But because Saint Obama said it the press have received their marching orders to ignore it. Is it ANY wonder that media outlets are fighting for survival and newspaper after newspaper shows loosing profits? People are getting really sick and tired of the press protecting instead of reporting.

Embedded image permalink

US President Barack Obama's campaign team urged reporters not to get "distracted" by a word after he was quoted using a profane term to tag rival Mitt Romney as dishonest.

Obama communications director Dan Pfeiffer did not deny Mr Obama had used the word "bullsh****r" in a conversation with journalists from the magazine Rolling Stone, and insisted: "Trust is a very important part of this election."

An advance copy of Rolling Stone's Obama interview, due on newsstands next month around the time of the November 6 election, recounts a chat at the White House between the president and the reporters.

"As we left the Oval Office, executive editor Eric Bates told Mr Obama that he had asked his six-year-old if there was anything she wanted him to say to the president," the story recounts.

"After a thoughtful pause, she said, 'Tell him: You can do it'. Mr Obama grinned. 'That's the only advice I need,' he said. 'I do very well, by the way, in that demographic. Ages six to 12? I'm a killer.'

"Thought about lowering the voting age?" Bates joked.

"You know, kids have good instincts," Mr Obama offered. "They look at the other guy and say, 'Well, that's a bullsh****r, I can tell'."

US politicians - especially presidential candidates - usually refrain from using strong language in public, and Mr Obama's reported use of a profanity quickly sped around news websites and social media.

There was no immediate reaction from Mr Romney's campaign.


USA: 2012 voters: The deepest racial split since ’88

White people are dumb. And White people in America are the dumbest. They KNOW that 95% of the Black population voted for Obama in 2008, with an average of 80% of non-Whites voting for him. If that isn't a racist voting strategy then what is? And amazingly (not!) that number hasn't changed for this election, with 80% of non-Whites still indicating they will be voting for Obama (95% of Blacks included). In comparison, the number of White voters supporting Obama has dropped with increased numbers of White males and White Independents indicating they'll vote for Romney this time around. If you look at the graph below, then there are still 43% of White voters still voting for Obama. How bloody stupid can they be? Whites need to catch a huge wake-up call here. How can they ignore the blatant racist voting of the non-Whites and think nothing of it? I've seen interview after interview of Black 'intellectuals' (!) saying how they will still vote for Obama even though they don't think he's done a good job as POTUS, just because he's Black and he deserves another chance. And then they have the cheek to say that White's voting for Romney are racists. Bugger that Obama's stuffed the country; is the least transparent president - ever - ; that's he's weakened America internationally; that he's put the country at record debt levels; that he's lost record numbers of jobs. That doesn't matter to these Black voters - they'll still vote for him because he's.......Black. Blacks are the most racist race on earth - and the stupidest on average IQ. Make no mistake. When you have 95% STILL voting for Obama it's because of his skin color and not his competence. Whites need to seriously wake up.

The 2012 election is shaping up to be more polarized along racial lines than any presidential contest since 1988, with President Obama lagging behind Republican Mitt Romney among white voters by 21 percentage points, a steep drop in support from four years ago.

As he did in 2008, Obama gets overwhelming support from non-whites, who made up a record high proportion of the overall electorate four years ago. In that contest, 80 percent of all non-whites supported Obama, including 95 percent of black voters, according to the exit poll. In the Washington Post-ABC News national tracking poll released Wednesday, Obama wins 79 percent of non-whites, and support for his reelection is nearly universal among African Americans.

But among whites, Obama is currently doing much worse than he did in 2008. At this stage four years ago, Obama trailed Republican John McCain by eight percentage points among white voters. Even in victory, Obama ended up losing white voters by 12 percentage points.
Obama’s current 21-percent-deficit — he trails Romney 59 to 38 percent — would be far harder to overcome, as this year may break a string of increasingly non-white electorates. In 2008, whites made up a record-low 74 percent of all voters; in the latest Post-ABC poll, they made up a similar 75 percent of likely 2012 voters.

In 2004, John Kerry lost white voters to George W. Bush by a similarly wide margin, 58 to 41 percent — and he also lost the election.

Compared with four years ago, white voter support for Obama is now lower among white men and white independents. (See the latest Post-ABC tracking poll on The Fix at 5 p.m. every day through Nov. 5.)

The clearest loss for the president is among white men. In 2008, Obama lost white men by 16 points, according to the exit poll. This year, Obama trails Romney double that margin — 33 points — larger than any deficit for a Democratic candidate since Ronald Reagan’s 1984 landslide win over Walter Mondale.

After splitting their votes 47 percent for Obama and 49 percent for McCain in 2008, whites who identify as political independents now favor Romney over Obama, 59 to 38 percent. Nearly half of all of those who supported Obama in 2008 but Romney in 2012 are white independents. (Overall, whites make up more than 90 percent of “switchers.”)

A key element of Romney’s advantage among all whites is that by 55 to 39 percent, more white voters say he, not Obama understands the economic problems people in this country are having. Among whites without college degrees, Romney is up 58 to 35 percent on this score, expanding what was a narrow gap just a few weeks ago. This advantage comes even as 44 percent of white voters say Romney, as president, would do more to favor the wealthy; 38 percent say he would do more to for the middle class.

Most non-college and college-educated whites alike see Obama as doing more to favor those in the middle, not the wealthy.


25 October 2012

Lite moment....

Pity Obama didn't do some research before he made the stupid 'bayonet and horses' comment during the third debate - seeing as the military still uses both!

Horses and Bayonets

Pew Research: Republicans More Knowledgeable Than Democrats

Who would've thought! Republicans are more intelligent than Democrats....No matter how the media try to paint Republicans as racist red-neck sexists, they know the truth - that the Democrats are a party for the gullible and less intelligent. You can see the proof during this election campaign as Obamabot after Obamabot make fools of themselves defending the indefensible Obama. It's also the reason they've been quick to paint anyone supporting the Tea Party as racists. The only problem is that as America goes browner, the Democrat Party will become more powerful....

So Republicans are more knowledgeable than Democrats, contrary to what many would like to believe. 

According to whom?  None other than the Pew Research Center, a left-of-center organization.  Moreover, Pew’s latest survey only reaffirms previous surveys demonstrating the same result. 

In fact, the results weren’t even close. 

In a scientific survey of 1,168 adults conducted during September and October of last year, respondents were asked not only multiple-choice questions, but also queries using maps, photographs and symbols.  Among other subjects, participants identified international leaders, cabinet members, Supreme Court justices, nations on a world map, the current unemployment and poverty rates and war casualty totals. 

In a 2010 Pew survey, Republicans outperformed Democrats on 10 of 12 questions, with one tie and Democrats outperforming Republicans on just 1 of the 12.  In the latest survey, however, Republicans outperformed Democrats on every single one of 19 questions. 

Amusingly, the Pew report attempted to soften the stark partisan knowledge disparity: 
“Republicans generally outperformed Democrats on the current quiz.  On 13 of the 19 questions, Republicans score significantly higher than Democrats and there are no questions on which Democrats did better than Republicans.  In past knowledge quizzes, partisan differences have been more muted, though Republicans often have scored somewhat higher than Democrats.”  
“Generally outperformed?”  “Somewhat higher?”  That’s a curiously charitable way to describe the surveys, which went from previous blowouts to a complete shutout in the latest edition. 

Those Pew results are confirmed by some surprising other sources.  According to a New York Times headline dated April 14, 2010, “Poll Finds Tea Party Backers Wealthier and More Educated.”  Shattering widespread myths, that survey revealed that Tea Party supporters were more likely to possess a college degree than their counterparts (23% to 15%), and also more likely to have completed post-graduate studies (14% to 10%).  Tea Partiers were also more likely to have completed “some college” by a 33% to 28% margin, and substantially less likely to have not completed high school than non-supporters (3% versus 12%), or to possess only a high school degree (26% versus 35%). 

Those results will probably come as a rude awakening to supporters of Barack Obama, but it won’t to anyone paying attention.  As just the latest example, consider the cheap laugh line that Obama keeps repeating on his current reelection tour thinly disguised as an energy policy apologia.  As gasoline prices continue to rise due in part to his agenda, Obama likens anyone critical of his failed energy decisions to a modern-day “Flat Earth Society” in speech after speech. 

The problem for Obama is that his attempted slur betrays historical illiteracy, as summarized nicely by conservative blogger Clayton Cramer: 
 “Now, if you attended high school, or college, you would know (or should know) that there was no educated European who thought the Earth was flat.  None.  The dispute that made it hard for Columbus to get funding was that he insisted the Earth was 18,000 miles in circumference, so the Indies were a plausible voyage west from Spain.  The experts who told the various governments of Europe that Columbus wasn’t going to be successful thought the Earth was closer to 25,000 miles around – and sailing west to the Indies was going to be a failure.  Had there not been the Americas in the way, Columbus and crew would have died of thirst.”  
On his current tour, Obama also inaccurately maligned former President Rutherford B. Hayes as disdainful of the telephone.  As Mona Charen also noted this week, Obama also “told us that America invented the automobile and that John F. Kennedy had met with Nikita Kruschev when we were on the brink of nuclear war,” when in fact the automobile was invented in Germany and Kennedy actually met Kruschev one year prior to the Cuban Missile Crisis. 

This is the same President who referred to “57 states,” misstated the Citizens United decision in an address to the nation, pronounced Navy “corpsman” as “corpse-man” and blatantly misrepresented that Japanese automobiles now average 45 miles per gallon to our 27.5 standard. 

Meanwhile, gas prices continue to break records while the Trash-Talker-in-Chief trots out fraudulent “flat earth” and “Rutherford B. Hayes” rhetoric. 

None of this disparages anyone of any educational pedigree.  It does, however, once again debunk the notion among preening liberals that they collectively maintain a knowledge or educational superiority. 

Libya--The Real Story

Glenn Beck has a knack of getting to the guts of a story. Sure, he goes off on tangents sometimes, which is to be expected when you're in the news cycle every day and have to come up with something new continuously. However, having watched him at Fox, most of his predictions were often proved right more than they were proven wrong. Many a time people would scoff at his predictions, or how he tied certain groups to others, outlying who was in bed with whom. And usually those predictions were proven correct months later. Through him we became aware of just who and what George Soros was and the role he was playing in America and the rest of the world. Van Jones was exposed. The Muslim Brotherhood was revealed, as well as how Iran's dictator Armindinnerjacket belonged to an extremist Muslim sect which believed that there had to be world chaos and lots of blood shedding in order for his prophet to return to earth. Yeah, Beck was made fun of by the Left, but who's laughing now? Only those dumb enough to still believe that Obama is a competent POTUS. In the video clip below, Beck shows how Libya, Turkey and Syria all join up and how weapons have been smuggled into Syria via Libya. The only thing that isn't really clear is why. Beck doesn't quite answer it other than to say that Assad is a bad man. Turkey and Iran have a relationship. Turkey hates Syria, but Syria and Iran are friends. And then there's Russia's involvement as well. It doesn't quite add up. Anyone got any ideas? 

And here we have Fox News confirming a lot of what Beck has said. WHY, WHY, WHY America??? Obama and Hilary Clinton have a lot of explaining to do when they're caught funding and supporting the Muslim Brotherhood with weapons. The Muslim Brotherhood is America's number ONE ENEMY! I can't honestly believe the Obama is this dumb. 

24 October 2012

Where do liberals get their news from?

This is extremely painful to watch. These Obama supporters rely on people like Rachel Maddow, Chris Matthews and comedian Jon Stewart for 'unbiased, truthful' political reporting. Anyone but Fox News! No wonder America is in a world of pain.

USA: UNC drops term ‘freshman’ in favor of ‘gender inclusive language’

Yes, this is how pathetic our lives have become. The University of North Carolina has decided to remove the word 'freshman' from documents so as to be more 'gender inclusive'. So, no longer will a first year student be known as a freshman, but as a first year student.Apparently, this decision was made back in 2009, but was only made public after a TV documentary on Fox. I really give up. The ongoing gender preciousness is getting out of hand. Please save me!

The University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill has removed the word “freshman” from official university documents, citing as their reason an attempt to adopt more “gender inclusive language.”

We are “committed to providing an inclusive and welcoming environment for all members of our community,” reads a statement administrators sent to Campus Reform on Monday.

“Consistent with that commitment, gender inclusive terms (chair; first year student; upper-level student, etc.) should be used on University Documents, websites and policies,” it continues.

A spokesperson for UNC declined to further elaborate on the university’s reasoning for implementing the language change.

Some students, however, expressed discontent over the change in policy.

Brandon Hartness, Executive Vice Chair for the school’s college Republicans chapter, told Campus Reform he feels the university is allowing political correctness to drive their decisions.

“I feel like they are making a big deal out of nothing,” said Hartness. “Girls are not going to deem the word [freshman] as sexist.”

“I feel like most people don’t even think about it,” he added.

Karen Moon, Director of UNC News Services, did note that the policy change occurred in 2009. It has recently garnered attention after the libertarian news personality, John Stossel, highlighted it in his show earlier this month.


Ellen DeGeneres: Mitt Romney is scary

Romney doesn't have a choice but to win the election, because we'd all love to see the collective celebrity faces of those who have publicly endorsed Obama. Can you imagine? The latest scare from one of these dumb celebrities is that if you're a woman, you should be VERY VERY scared if Romney becomes president. Not sure what they're afraid of will happen when President Romney takes office, apart from no longer having Obama's website sending them to Planned Parenthood if they require 'women issues' advice. This phony 'war on women' by the Democrats has run out of steam (hopefully) and it seems more and more women are worrying about real issues like cost of living and jobs, and aren't too worried about their birth-control pills. Obama and his campaign have missed the mark. Their entire campaign was based on painting Romney as a women-hating uncaring ogre, and the first debate effectively flushed over $100 million in false-advertising down the drain. Romney went from being a made-up person to a real person within 90 minutes - something the Obama campaign clearly didn't count on. That's the reason Obama miscalculated the first debate - he believed his own media and lies. 

Ellen DeGeneres weighed in on the upcoming election while in Washington to accept the Mark Twain Prize for American Humor on Monday.

“Well, I am certainly hoping our president stays put,” DeGeneres said on the red carpet before the Kennedy Center event.

And what if Mitt Romney wins instead? “If you’re a woman, you should be very, very scared of that, for many reasons,” she said. “And obviously as a gay person he doesn’t believe in me having the same rights, so of course I’m not happy about that.”

DeGeneres added that “as a woman who wants to have the choice to do what she wants to do with her own body,” she’s especially concerned about Obama losing.

During the show, which airs on PBS stations next week, various comedians including Jimmy Kimmel, Lily Tomlin and Jane Lynch toasted DeGeneres for her career accomplishments.

“Because of Ellen, this is my story, in 1998, I mustered the courage to come out of the closet — despite the fact that I’m not gay,” joked Kimmel.

Lynch called DeGeneres one of her role models and a “sterling example of how to be a force for compassion, good and understanding in the world.”

Taking the stage last to accept her prize, DeGeneres thanked her colleagues and took another swipe at Romney.

“Thank you to PBS,” she said. “I am so happy to be a part of your final season.”


Lime Lite Tweet makes it onto Twitchy website

LL is becoming famous I tell ya, famous! LL tweeted a response to a tweet by Obama apologist and fierce defender, Andrew Sullivan, and it made it onto the Michelle Malkin website "Twitchy" today. Sullivan tweeted today that "Mitt Romney belonged to a white supremacist church for 31 years of his life" and linked it to a dumb biased article he wrote. Lime Lite quickly tweeted a response and made it onto Twitchy.

Lime Lite is new to Twitter - not sure what took so long to discover the joys of pissing off liberals using their own medicine and tactics! Anyone wanting to follow LL on Twitter: @limelite001

Black woman set on fire in alleged KKK attack

On Australian radio this morning, this story was reported and discussed. Tsk, tsk went the presenters in disbelief, that the KKK was STILL active in America's south. Of course my BS-meter went to high alert when it was reported that some woman was claiming that she was set on fire by 3 men dressed in KKK costume and her car vandalised with racist slurs in toothpaste. The sheriff investigating called the attack 'horrific' and they would seek justice. If you Google the article you'll see numerous entries and webpages reporting this story. I wonder if they'll print a retraction too?

And isn't it amazing how this story got international coverage, yet all the 'youth' attacks on Whites and Asians go unreported?

The family of 20-year-old Sharmeka Moffitt says 60% of her body was burned in the horrific attack, which is being investigated by the FBI as a hate crime: Black woman set on fire in alleged KKK attack

Sharmeka Moffitt was exercising alone on a walking trail in a city park in Winnsboro, Louisiana when three men wearing white hoods allegedly attacked her.

The men doused her in a flammable liquid and set her on fire causing third-degree burns.
Miss Mofftitt had put out the flames using water from a spigot before police responded to her 911 call.

Miss Moffitts’ sister Michelle told the Shreveport Times: “She called 911, then she called me. She said she had been burned, she had been set on fire. I stayed on the phone until I got (to the park) even though she wasn’t able to say anything.”

The letters “KKK” - in reference to the white supremacist group Ku Klux Klan - were spray painted on the hood of her car as well as a racial slur.

Miss Moffitt could not recall what race her attackers were. The place where the attack took place has no surveillance cameras but the crime lab is analysing multiple pieces of evidence.
The FBI is investigating the attack as a possible hate crime but no arrests had been made as of late Monday according to Louisiana State Police spokesman Lt. Julie Lewis. Speculations that the victim was wearing an Obama-campaign t-shirt hen the attacked occurred were denied by her mother.

Franklin Sheriff Kevin Cobb called it "a horrific event" and said authorities would "follow the facts and seek justice".

Miss Moffitt is at the LSU Medical Centre Shreveport in critical conditions.

Her mother said: “They want to take the dead skin off and place other skin there if they can. I have no idea who did it…I want them to pay for what they did to her.” She also said that on “both of her arms, there are third degree burns down her chest and legs-first degree. Basically her arms are real bad.”



Shreveport Times: Police Believe Winnsboro Woman Set Herself On Fire

The Shreveport Times is reporting that police are expected to announce that a Winnsboro woman set herself on fire and made up her story about being the victim of a hate crime.

Sharmeka Moffitt (pictured) told police she was attacked while walking in a park in Winnsboro Sunday night. She claimed three men doused her with a flammable liquid, set her on fire, and wrote racial slurs on her car.

Moffitt, 20, is in critical condition at a hospital in Shreveport with burns covering 60% of her body.