
Question: If Only 14% Of White Louisianans Voting For Obama Is RACIST What Do You Call 96% Nationally Who Did?
Subtitle: Thank You Michael Medved For Using Facts To Refute The Black Inferiorist That Called Into Your Show
This was a piece of masterful piece of argument that I heard today.
On the "Michael Medved" syndicated radio show the subject - what else(?) was "Is Jimmy Carter's claims that racism is driving the opposition to President Obama?"
Medved took calls from a number of Blacks that claimed a "Soft Tissue injury", forcing Medved to prove to them why these are not racist acts. In between there was the White caller that argued the case of racism as well.
Then we got the call to end all calls.
The caller, a White male, made the case that it was racist and shameful that Barack Obama only received 14% of the White vote in Louisiana. He used this as proof that the protests against Obama had a more sinister background to it.
Then Michael Medved did what I have heard no other radio or television host has done to my knowledge. He asked the caller to tell him: "What do you call the fact that only 5% of the Black voters around the nation DID NOT vote for Barack Obama".
I recall attending a college socialists meeting in which I asked one guy a question he had clearly never been asked before: "Could you tell me which country in existence today most closely represents your socialist ideals?". I received the "deer in the headlights" look from this guy. This is the same look that I imagine the caller had when Michael Medved asked him this same question.
Medved did not stop there.
He went on to compare the election results garnered in 2004 by President George W Bush versus John Kerry. If the RACIST VOTER theory was to stand then John McCain should have received stronger majorities in the "racist South" than did George W Bush in 2004 - who was running against a WHITE MAN. Instead the data shows this was not the case. George W. Bush won most Southern states with a higher margin than did McCain against "the Black guy".
WHAT OF THE BLACK VOTER?
I was most happy with Medved's line of argument because I have been asking the question about the Black Voter Nullification and "Inelasticity" that is abundant in our community.
It should not be called "racism" that is driving the Black vote for the Progressives and Democrats. Instead it is more accurately called "Ideological Bigotry". Despite having total domination of every single institution where we live in our highest concentrations - the Black voter "looks past the failures of the local Democrats" and votes to oust the state or federal Republican from office. The 9P's Of The Black Establishment work at a feverish pitch to make sure that the Black voter is focused upon the external Conservative threat than he is focused upon the INCUMBENTS that are in control over the institutions - just as the people voted for.
This is all a means of stultifying the Black community. The Black voter is not seen as EQUAL to the White voter. Instead we are seen as a permanent "special interest group".
The key problem with this strategy is rarely considered.
WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE PROGRESSIVES DOMINATE THE LOCAL ENVIRONMENT AND THUS YOUR IDEOLOGICAL ADVERSARIES HAVE SEPARATED THEMSELVES FROM YOUR COMMUNITY?
The answer is clear. In as much as "Progressivism is Not Organic" -when they are all alone by themselves and forced to field a workable system to provide a certain Standard Of Living - they simply "Expand The Police Tape", telling the next higher element of government about their SOCIAL JUSTICE RIGHTS to have certain entitlements.
Thus their STRUGGLE is renewed. They begin to keep the troops unified by focusing upon those higher forces that resist their confiscation and redistribution attempts.
I hope that people do not recoil from these claims of RACISM.
The "Racism Chasers" and the "White Liberal Snarling Foxes" are not going to retreat from these calls.
The best thing that will result from all of this is that the racism chasing is going to be so diluted over time that it will be discredited as a weapon.
No comments:
Post a Comment