With Obama Dropping Like a Stone, Liberals Are Replaying the Race Card in a Big Way

   Bookmark and Share As liberals begin to fear that Mitt Romney is proving to be a better leader and candidate than they once expected he could be, they have begun to make a noticeable shift back to their traditional tactics of divide and conquer by returning to an emphasis on playing the race card.  This disturbing reemergence of their ugly, disingenuous, racially divisive tactics is beginning to rear its ugly head again in every liberal narrative being offered in regards to the presidential election.   Evidence of this can best be found on cable television where two obscure media outlets occupy channels that have become  headquarters of liberal propaganda.  They are none other than the low rated MSNBC and Al Gore’s barely watched, ludicrous little cable venture, Current TV.

Current is a bastion of  liberal lunacy that promotes its propaganda with the help of third, fourth, and even fifth rate, failed, Democrat politicians like disgraced former New York Governor Eliot Spitzer and the mindnumbingly dense and over-dramatic, inept, former Governor of Michigan,  Jennifer Granholm, who both host hour long shows on Current.  The station also has another level of talentless liberal, wannabe politicians who have hosting responsibilities.  Like Cenk Uygur, an ignorant ass who thinks he’s funny and witty but consistently comes off as dumb and obnoxious.  Current recently expanded their vast wealth of political experience with the addition of political sage Joy Behar, a ditzy dunce whose fat rump  is usually spread out on the couch of  “The View” and whose claim to fame is a heavy a Brooklyn based, Jewish accent that supposedly lends itself to some kind of comedic genius that she is suppose to have but which most people just don’t see as particularly creative or funny.  Now in her sixth week at Current, Behar has hit her stride and offers an endless but consistent array of attacks, swipes, barbs, and downright dumb shots at Mitt Romney.  And in between spewing her own ignorant interpretations of political reality, Behar seeks guests who will offer their own interpretation of the opinions they share with Behar.

Over the past few days, as the stupidity that is this new Joy Behar show played itself out, Behar conducted two separate interviews, one the day before the second presidential debate and one the day after the debate.   Both of these interviews were truly disgusting.  (See video of the two interviews below)

They were reprehensible examples of the most despicable and disingenuous tactics that anyone could dare to employ in politics.  The first disgrace came in a one-on-one with actress Kathleen Turner.  In that interview, the manly voiced Turner states that she is tired of being told what to do by “rich white men”.

The comment was an upalling and totally uncalled for interjection of  racism, sexism, and class warfare that reeked of Hollywood hypocrisy and insincerity.  First of all, if that is how Turner really feels, how come she never told that to any of the “rich, white men”, she listened to do when they directed her in movies that packed her purse and pockets full of dough?  Secondly,  Mitt Romney never told her or any of her friends what to do.  He has however proposed a bunch of things that he will not have the government do if he is elected.  But here we have a case of the very limited mind of another liberal trapped in a world of politic al bigotry who finds herself with only one way to try and win people over to Barack Obama…. by playing the race card, along with the class warfare angle too.

The following day, Behar had another expert who offered up their opinion of Romney.  This time it was actor/comedian D.L. Hughley, a foul mouthed ignoramus who has more ill will and contempt for Caucasians than he has talent.  Like Turner the day before, Hughley also played the race card with Romney.  In this case he claimed that during the debate, Mitt Romney spoke to the President as if he was his servant.

Now I am not sure what debate D. L. Hughley was watching, but I am certain that I did not hear the disrespectful request by Mitt Romney for the President to shine his shoes or carry his bags that Hughley would have us think he heard. Nonetheless, Joy Behar responded to Hughley’s highly charged statement with glowing approval as her agreement with Hufghley gushed endlessly while claiming that she has been saying what Hughley said, on every show she’s on.  Unfortunately for Hughley and Behar though, their claim was not supported by any examples and why not?  Because they were lying.  Throughout both debates,  Mitt Romney treated Barack Obama with a great deal of respect.   What he didn’t do was ignore all that he disagreed with the President on.  But in Hughley and Behar’s parallel universe in liberal la-la land, any lack of support the president or disagreement with this President is an act of racism.

The sad truth though is that the remarks offered by Hughley, Behar, Turner and an increasing number of liberaltards, such as Chris Matthews, (see Mathew’s recent racist rant here) and the entire cast of clowns at MSNBC, are designed to do what Barack Obama has failed to do.  They are designed to motivate the black vote to turn out for the President in the same historic numbers that they did back in 2008.  It is becoming a critical element of the President’s increasingly desperate attempt to ge reelected.  As seen here, with his “they’re gonna put Y’all back in chains” remark, it is a strategy that Vice President Biden has been trying to employ for quite some time now Biden’s

No matter what, this election continues to be close but ever since the first presidential debate back on October 3rd, polls are signaling a decisive shift towards Mitt Romney.  It is so decisive that if it continues to build at the same rates we are currently seeing, by Election Day, Barack Obama will be looking at a defeat almost as resounding and embarrassing in the Electoral College as the one President George H. W. Bush  experienced in 1992.  While such a lopsided victory for Romney is not the most likely result, it is not out of question, especially if the President is unable to begin to first put a stop to Romney’s forward momentum and then begin to reverse it.

The problem is that with less than three weeks to go in the campaign liberals and the Obama-Biden campaign may not have enough left in their arsenal to overcome the rising Romney tide that is seeing the Romney-Ryan ticket’s numbers pick up across the board.  So far this tide has raised Romney’s numbers among practically every critical demographic  and every crucial swing state.  Be it women, Hispanics, independents, or undecided voters, Mitt Romney has gotten through to the very voters  that strategists once said he could not win the election without making significant inroads among.  At the same time, so far the Obama-Biden ticket has spent more than $234 million on attack ads that have tried to define Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan as evil robber barons who are waging a war against women, children, the environment, education, puppies, and fluffy little kittens.  On the flip side,  Mitt Romney has spent a mere $91 million on ads to help define himself and the President.  Given that Barack Obama has spent nearly two and half times the amount of money that Romney has on such ads, it would seem that the President’s strategy is not working and his ads are not doing the job they were supposed to.  After throwing everything from Sandra Fluke and the kitchen sink at Romney, the Romney-Ryan ticket continues to gain on the Obama-Biden ticket among every demographic that the President can not afford to lose to Romney.

I suggest that they might have been working until the first presidential debate when after most Americans really got a chance to take a good look at Mitt Romney for the first time, and realized that he is not as extreme, heartless, irrational, and irresponsible as President Obama made him out to be.  It is the same effect we saw in 1980 when the liberal narrative was that Ronald Reagan was a radical, war mongering, madman whose finger we could not allow anywhere near the nuclear button.  But after the nation’s first real introduction to Reagan in the one and only debate between him and Jimmy Carter, American’s came to see that he was not the evil, unreasonable, extreme person they were led to believe he was.  The same thing happened after the first presidential debate between President Obama and Governor Romney.

Liberals understand this and so now they are beginning to act on their fears instead of their hopes.  Now they have stopped trying to paint the President’s pathetic polices and revolting record as promising prospects for our future.  Instead they have begun to cut to the chase and target the one voting bloc that Romney can’t seem to make significant inroads into… African-Americans.   In the case of black voters, Barack Obama is not at risk of losing of his overwhelming support from them to Mitt Romney.  He is however at risk of not seeing blacks turnout to support him in the same historically large numbers that he saw in 2008. And without that same extraordinarily large turnout, Barack Obama is not likely to be able to win enough votes to win a second term from among the increasingly smaller share of votes that he getting from women, Hispanics, and independents.

The irony of it all though is that no one is willing to call a spade a spade here.

While the left is trying to fan racial tensions as a way to ensure that blacks come out to vote for President Obama, no one is calling them out for  their disgraceful and blatant attempts to incite racial tension.  And while the liberal liars who are trying to interject race in to the election are not being held responsible for their reprehensible words and conduct, no one is willing to admit that the most racist individuals of all here are the 90 to 95% of all African-American voters who are supporting President Obama.  Any other group of Americans who offer such near unanimous support would labeled a bunch of racists.  But because the people voting based on color here at African-Americans, the fact is ignored.

If America really wants to deal with the issue of racism, it can no longer ignore racism where it exists.  That means we should not be letting off the hook liberals like Chris Matthews, D.L. Hughley, Joy Behar, Kathleen Turner, or all of the others who are using race against Mitt Romney.  We cannot tolerate their attempts to cry wolf in regards to racism or their irresponsible attempts to incite racial tensions.   And it also means we should not be ignoring the fact that African-Americans are the people who are actually the ones basing this election on race and ignoring the issues that should lie at the heart of their decision of whom to vote for.  Instead of holding President Obama accountable to his dismal record, an overwhelming number of African-Americans have chosen to endorse Barack Obama simply because he is half black.  In doing so they are ignoring the basic facts which are that under this President, regardless of his color, African-Americans are suffering more than any other voting bloc in the nation.  African-Americans are now forced to rely on food stamps and government assistance for survival more than any time in US history.  As both a percentage and gross total, more blacks are now incarcerated than they were at  any previous point  in US history, and African-Americans are now also the most unemployed ethnic group in the nation and are the ethnic group that leads all others when it comes to the number of foreclosed homes being taken away from them.

Normally, such a record would result in a hemorrhaging of support for the person under whom a particular group of people  endured so much suffering.  Up to now, that has not been the case with African-Americans.  So far they remain blinded by color and loyal to the half of President which is black.  However; the Obama record is so undeniably bad that while liberals and the President are not necessarily worried about blacks actually voting for Mitt Romney, they are quite fearful that disappointment with President Obama will force far too many blacks to stay home and just not vote.  That is a harsh reality which has already cost the President the state of North Carolina.

In 2008, thanks to a relatively large African-American turnout for the President, he won that state, which is traditionally a large electoral rich state that Republicans can rely upon.   President Obama had hoped to again deny the G.O.P. North Carolina’s electoral votes in 2012.  They even held their national convention there in an attempt to keep the state blue in 2012.  But as polls have shown North Carolina is now solidly for Mitt Romney and the reason for this is simple.  Blacks in North Carolina arer not suddenly voting for Mitt Romney but they are not going to vote for Barack Obama in the same numbers they previously did, and without that support, the President is losing his edge and the election.

So get ready everyone, the left is about to start bluffing to a degree we have never seen before.  They will try to lead us to believe that they have a full house in their hand and that Mitt Romney is going down.  But as we are increasingly seeing, the only card Democrats have left which they can try do anything with is the race card.  And they are going to try to do everything they can with it.  Just ask D.L. Hughley and friends.

Bookmark and Share

Al Gore and Friends Blame Obama’s Poor Debate Performance on the Altitude

  Bookmark and Share After spending more than 4 years  blaming everything on George Bush, the left, under the leadership of liberal icon Al Gore has now turned to a new scapegoat…. the altitude.  (See video below this post)

After last night’s tragically disappointing debate performance by the liberal messiah, President Barack Obama, Al Gore claimed took the opportunity to to use his obscure, irrelevant, and barely watched cable network, Current TV, to the high altitude of Denver, the locations of last night’s debate, for President Obama’s losing debate performance.  Gore predicates his charge by making it clear that his opinion will be a controversial one but not so according to the cast of clowns gathered around Gore on the panel, who all agreed that the altitude was certainly part of the President’s problem.

The unintended result of this theory is that if President Obama has a problem with high positions, than he obviously is not capable of holding the highest position in our nation.

Bookmark and Share

#BarackWasSoPoor: Michelle Obama’s Speech Gives Birth to a Whole New Category of Jokes

Bookmark and Share  The first night of the Democratic National Convention provided liberals with a lot of Obam-like false hope for the reelection of their earth healing, sea slaying messiah.  From Newark Mayor Corey Booker, Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick and Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley, diehard Democrats were given plenty of red meat as they offered statistical half truths and downright distortions of history and the Obama record.  Then there was the Lilith Fair section of the night where a cavalcade of hypocritical liberal women took to the stage to deliver a hypocritically  anti-feminist message that essentially argued women are helpless without government in control of their lives and the lives of their families.

Then came the competitions.

While Republicans served up Hispanic speakers such as New Mexico Governor Susana Martinez, Nevada Governor Brian Sandoval, Texas Senate candidate Ted Cruz, Florida Senator Marco and other rising stars in their Party, Democrats did their best to upstage the G.O.P. with an even longer list of liberal Hispanic speakers.  In addition to Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa who chairs the convention, the DNC featured the young Hispanic Mayor of San Antonio, Texas, Julian Castro.

On it’s own Castro’s speech was a solid statement of Democratic dogma which nailed the left’s dependency on government by mixing it with the American dream and making big government the source of that dream.  For those on the left it was an inspiring articulation of their principles.  But for those of us who believe that the American dream is based not upon government but rather upon personal freedom and liberty and an opportunity society, Castro’s speech was a watered down version of the speech Marco Rubio delivered last week when he introduced Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney at the G.O.P. convention in Tampa.

Both men focussed on the plight of their immigrant parents and grandparents but coming after Marco Rubio’s speech, Castro’s keynote seemed to simply mimic Rubio’s.  The most notable occasion came when Julian Castro remarked that his mother held a mop so that someday he could hold the microphone that he was addressing convention goers from.  On Thursday night Marco Rubio put it this way;  “My father stood behind that bar in the back of room so that someday I could stand behind this podium at the front of the room.”

But after the DNC turned the night into a competition of which Party had leaders who came from poorer immigrant roots than the other, Michelle Obama took to the stage to deliver a speech that tried to take control on the market on which Party had the presidential candidate who was raised under the poorest conditions.

Last Tuesday, Ann Romney told listeners about how when she and Mitt were married they moved in to a small basement apartment where they ate off an ironing board that doubled as their kitchen table and how they sat at a desk that was a door which straddled atop two saw horses.  Last night Michelle Obama told listeners a story about how when she was first married, Barack Obama’s best pair of shoes were half a size too small, and how in their first apartment the two of them sat in front of a coffee table which Barack found in the dump.  She spoke of the two having a crushing college tuition debt and how in trheir first car she could see the tar  of the road pass beneath them.

From the onset it became quite obvious that the Obama’s did not want people to think that the Romney’s were ever poorer than them.  For the Romney’s the telling of the humble beginnings of their marriage was designed to convey a sense of a man who is self-made and who understands how people struggle with the responsibilities of life.  It was a necessary move to humanize Mitt Romney in the face of a liberal class warfare strategy being waged by the President and his supporters.  But the Obama’s were obviously threatened by Ann’s ability to portray Romney as a man who created his own wealth.  So Michelle told Americans a story about an impoverished young man who picked himself up by his own bootstraps to become a champion of the poor.

In the wake of Ann Romney’s speech, the rekindled Obama narrative was so pronounced that it sparked a new hashtag specifically for jokes about how Barack Obama was.  A visit to #BarackWasSoPoor on Twitter now show tens of thousands tweets mocking Michelle’s attempt to lay the groundwork for her husband’s next round of class warfare.  There you will find  such gems as #BarackWasSoPoor  He could only afford to date composite women”, and #BarackWasSoPoor that he is making up for it now spending your money”.  Another example of the creative spin on the theme came from LiberalsRdouchebags who wrote; #BarackWasSoPoor he wants to turn America into a 3rd world country so he feels at home”.

The reaction which led to this new line of political humor was a direct response to the utterly ridiculous premise that Michelle tried to create for her husband regarding his background.  Contrary to the Dickens-like portrayal we saw from the First Lady on Monday, both Barack and Michelle Obama were actually raised in conditions that were far from what could be described as impoverished.  Michelle attended a magnate school for Chicago’s rich and famous called Whitney Young.  At the same time, young master Barack was not exactly running around in the tough poverty riddled streets of Hawaii.  Instead, back when his mother was earning a $160,000 a year salary, he was hidden behind the sheltered walls of Punahou,  a private preparatory school comprised of Hawaii’s blue blooded elitists.    That is hardly a convincing argument when trying to demonstrate how in touch with the average middle class American the President is.  But they were also facts which were deleted from the First Lady’s speech last night.

Meanwhile as the spontaneous flow of the internet’s maze of social networks began to flood the web with a mix of negative and positive reactions to the introductory night of the Democratic National Convention, the mainstream media mainly gushed with praise of the entire first night of the convention.  Few if any news outlets produced true news stories that lacked any spin or featured “fact check” headlines which clarified the First Lady’s mischaracterizations of some kind of less than humble beginnings that she and her husband shared.  Instead what we saw from the lamestream media was unequivocal high praise for every word, distortion, and misleading message the left fed to voters.

The liberal dominated pre-fabricated news media even saw fit to attempt to proclaim that Democrats in Charlotte were much more enthusiastic and energized by their convention than Republicans who attended their own convention in Tampa.

CNN political reporter Peter Hamby, tweeted the following;

To which I replied ;

Other media outlets ranging from MSNBC and their merry masters of misinformation including Ed Schultz, Chris Matthews and Rachel Maddow echoed similar sentiments and so did those at Al Gore’s dyeing cable station Current, where disgraced former New York Governor Eliot Spitzer claimed the energy at the DNC far surpassed the energy level he believed that Republicans had at the RNC.   No one is quite certain what those assertions were based upon other than the wishful thinking of demoralized leftists who are in desperate search of good news for the President’s reelection effort.  But the truth flies in the face of wishful Democrats who would like us to believe that Republicans are not very enthusiastic about their presidential ticket.  As usual the fact indicate just the opposite of what liberals propose to be true.  Poll after poll has shown that Republicans are more enthusiastic about their presidential ticket than are Democrats with the Obama/Biden ticket.

And to add insult to injury for Obama boosters, political analyst Charlie Cook has demonstrated that Democrats are suffering from multiple enthusiasm gaps.  The two most noticeable manifestations of this problem for the President exists among Hispanic and young voters, two of the groups most responsible for President Obama’s 7% margin of victory in the popular vote during the 2008 election. That spells trouble for Democrats and it also explains the need for leftists media mouthpieces to argue that Republicans are not as supportive of Romney as Democrats are of President Obama.

Bookmark and Share

%d bloggers like this: