Herman Cain Introduces Cain TV And Sets Race Relations Back By Twenty Years

" The Cambridge police acted stupidly " and so are you, if you don't
find the racism here and this merely set the tone.
PLEASE give us the rev.wright , out of context quote , PLEASE.

Any questions on that one ?

Give me a break . They made more nasty comments about Bush, burned
him in effigy,


threatened by a serial adulterer who

had much support from the dimocratic electorate and on and on. Try

as you may you CANNOT find as much disrespect shown to one president

that was more than that shown to GWBush.

The tea party accusations have been proven to have been fabricated

but we'll just say it was a he said / she said matter ( which it was ) and

leave it at that. Sticks and stones may break my bones...

How ironic that you would close by coming eerily close to quoting

a line used by GWBush ( " either you are with us or against us " ).

Unfortunately the community organizer( nor his wife ) is not afforded

special treatment because he is half black , or the first half black to reach

the white house or because he used hope and change as a slogan to

get elected. What he is , however , is fair game to the criticisms and

unfortunately slander , that goes along with being the highest ranking

elected official in our country. All the others have endured it as will he.

But for you to attempt to deny those with an unfavorable opinion of

this president , the right that is covered in the FIRST amendment to

our constitution , is , well purely liberal progressive, When it comes

to yelling " racism " , the yeller is more times than not , the feller.

Your responses exemplify it, so keep talking .

The Cambridge Police DID act stupidly, as everyone knows by now. A racist cop decided that black people couldn't possibly live in an affluent neighborhood so he decided to harass a man INSIDE HIS OWN HOME because he believed he must be a burglar even though he had his driver's license with his address IN HIS HAND when he was assaulted. Then the same cop falsified his police report to say that someone had reported "a black man breaking into a house" when no such report was made. President Obama, as always, took the high road and tried to turn the incident into yet another opportunity to bring this nation together, but people like you are unredeeemable.

As for food stamps, it is people like you who think that only black people are on food stamps, and it is even more moronic to criticize President Obama for more people being on food stamps when most of the increase occurred under Bush. Your own chart shows a steep increase under Bush policies and then a leveling off once President Obama's policies started to kick in. You re so blind that even your own posts prove your ignorance.

As for the video, in classic Breitbart style you've completely ignored what he actually said. According to you, Edwards (who had AN affair, is not a serial adulterer, and never tried to pick up men in airport bathrooms or assault underage male Congressional pages like your heroes seem so fond of) said "We're going to hang George Bush and Dick Cheney". Pretty rough stuff, right? Except that what he ACTUALLY said was "We're going to hang George Bush and Dick Cheney around the Republican nominee's neck." Not exactly the same, don't you agree? I swear, if Andrew Breitbart or anyone as depraved and hateful as he was were to write the ten commandments, they would say

"Thou shalt .... kill"
"Thou shalt... steal"
"Thou shalt... have other Gods before me"
"Thou shalt ... take the Lord's name in vain"

and so forth.

Speaking of depraved and hateful , how about third in line to the
presidency.

House Speaker Pelosi Calls Bush "a Total Failure"
Friday 18 July 2008
by: Laurie Kellman | The Associated Press
Washington - President Bush has been a "total failure" in everything from the economy to the war to energy policy, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Thursday. In an interview on CNN, the California Democrat was asked to respond to video of the president criticizing the Democratic-led Congress for heading into the final 26 days of the legislative session without having passed a single government spending bill.

Pelosi shot back in unusually personal terms.

"You know, God bless him, bless his heart, president of the United States, a total failure, losing all credibility with the American people on the economy, on the war, on energy, you name the subject," Pelosi replied. She then tsk-tsked Bush for "challenging Congress when we are trying to sweep up after his mess over and over and over again."

White House spokeswoman Dana Perino defended Bush.

"What the president said is a fact - this is the longest a Congress has gone in 20 years without passing a single spending bill, so it's clear that the speaker is feeling some frustration at their inability to do so."

Pelosi's outburst was a departure. Her usual practice in public has been to call Bush's policies a failure - not his presidency or him, personally. Pelosi's remarks are the latest evidence of the Democrats' throw-caution-to-the-wind approach to Bush in the waning days of a presidency weighed down by an unpopular war and soaring gasoline prices.


Please attempt to to extract yourself from the president's anal
orifice long enough to go to the polls on November 6 so I can
at least have the pleasure of cancelling out your vote.

You're right about "what has taken place in DC since Jan 2009". The election of a black President energized the racists among the Right Wing like nothing else. Despite accomplishing more positive progress for this nation that almost all of his predecessors, all you do is attack him no matter what the issue and no matter how your position damages you personally.

LBJ never said that. What LBJ DID say, presciently, was that when he signed the Civil Rights Act the Democrats would "lose the South for a generation". And he was right. The signing of the Civil Rights Act, which you folks are STILL trying to repeal, drove the racists out of the Democratic Party and into the waiting arms of the Republicans, where they have not only taken root but are now the core of the party.

LBJ's signing of the Civil Rights Act also gave birth to the "Southern strategy" that Nixon used in 1968 and every Republican since has tried to repeat - let the public know you're a racist, and the votes you'll lose from black voters will be more than offset by the number of racist votes you gain. It worked in five of the next six elections (the only exception being Gerald Ford, who only lost because he pardoned Nixon), but then when Clinton came along and energized black voters, the Republicans had to add voter suppression and ballot manipulation - hence George Bush.

Finally, the attempt to rewrite the history of the Civil War is a little pathetic at this point. The South started the civil war and tried to secede in direct violation of the Constitution for one reason - to preserve their right to own other human beings. It was only about one states' right - the "right" to own slaves.

No dice
0bozo was anointed by special interests that have been grooming him for years to supposedly hit cleanup after Gore. Given the fact that FMD is his biological father, he's Mulatto.
He enjoyed a 65% approval rating on day one so there went your racist argument, right out the window.
He took the opportunity of a century and miserably blew it out his ass.... although he did it on purpose.

LBJ hijacked Eisenhower's civil rights policy while he was the Senate majority leader. He allowed certain aspects to make it through Congress but was certain the DNC would give him the nomination in 1960 and wanted the brass ring for himself . We all know that didn't happen so he aided the many others who wanted JFK gone.
Yes, he did say those words and there were many present who heard him say it.
That will most likely and hopefully be revealed when his records are unsealed, shortly ... although I'm not quite sure what year that happens.

We could go back & forth for weeks on the true reasons of the Civil War but the bottom line is that it directly involved state's rights and their ability to govern themselves as the Constitution allowed. There is no clause in the Constitution that prevents secession and any state is free to rescind their decision and do so at any time of their choosing.

Lincoln wanted the war at all costs and knew by aiding Anderson at Ft. Sumter would provoke the attack he needed. Anderson occupied Sumter because the fort he and troops were at hadn't yet been outfitted with canons. He was given months of warnings and under orders or his own choice decided to stay. Bummer.

Fact is, Had Lincoln not forced the issue, the USA would have fell in behind other countries who were in the process of abolishing the slave trade or had already done so.
They had a 600 year head start on us. Instead, he sabotaged the efforts of Congress to avoid a Civil War.

He's not the great emancipator and hero he's been painted as in the history books. It was Mary Lincoln who coaxed him into writing the proclamation. She is the one who had the relationship with those who were in servitude of one form or another. Contrary to ignored history, there were many in the north who joined in the practice and there were many black slave-owners as well - north & south.

Lincoln is on record many times stating he didn't feel blacks were equals and knew there would be hell to pay after 1/2 a million brothers, fathers, uncles, & friends were killed. He wanted to relocate newly freed peoples to Central America and repatriate them to Africa.
He was in communication with the UK in 1863 because they owned the territory now known as the country of Belize. Of course, that never happened but after the war, many did go back to Africa and settled in what is now, Liberia (Liberty)

I didn't think it was possible, but you've actually become more misinformed in the last ten minutes. President Obama received more votes for President than any man in history. He was not "appointed" by anyone, unlike his predecessor. And the birther racist bullsh*t isn't even worth addressing.

Lincoln desperately wanted to avoid war. Just as the Right Wing has come up with all these vast conspiracy theories that uneducated people like you buy into without hesitation regarding President Obama (like "he's going to take everyone's guns away"), the Southern secessionists waged a similar campaign against Lincoln ("he's going to free the slaves"). Lincoln NEVER intended to free the slaves. He believed that he lacked the authority to do so under the Constitution, and the only reason he signed the Emancipation Proclamation (which, incidentally, only freed the slaves in states which had seceded) was that he felt it was a legitimate exercise of his war powers as Commander in Chief. He didn't do it because he felt sorry for the slaves (though of course he did), he did it because he felt it would weaken the South's armies by depriving them of labor and forcing many confederate soldiers to go home to take care of their plantations. (And by the way, Mary Lincoln had nothing to do with it. She was more concerned with her wardrobe than slaves.)

Lincoln gave the orders to defend Fort Sumter because Fort Sumter was the property of the United States government and the state of South Carolina had threatened to take it illegally. The South fired the first shot, and Lincoln had no choice but to defend the nation.

Lincoln wanted to form a new colony in Africa because he believed that most freed slaves would WANT to return to their mother country. He did not "want" the freed slaves to leave nor did he want them to stay. He wanted them to make the choice for themselves. That's what freedom means.

And yes, secession is unconstitutional. Texas v. White, 74 U.S. 700 (1869):

"When, therefore, Texas became one of the United States, she entered into an indissoluble relation. All the obligations of perpetual union, and all the guaranties of republican government in the Union, attached at once to the State. The act which consummated her admission into the Union was something more than a compact; it was the incorporation of a new member into the political body. And it was final. The union between Texas and the other States was as complete, as perpetual, and as indissoluble as the union between the original States. There was no place for reconsideration or revocation, except through revolution or through consent of the States."