adana escort

Since you’re not allowed to say this in a New York subway station anymore, we’d better say it here.

Ace of Spades

Roger Simon and Lionel Chetwynd may have changed my mind. In a recent Poliwood webcast, they discussed the unfortunate remarks of Morgan Freeman and the response to those comments by Herman Cain.

I’ve been pretty keen on Cain lately, despite the fact that my preference so far in the primaries has been Rick Santorum. But Simon and Chetwynd make a great case here that were Cain to get the Republican nomination, there would be no serious way for Democrats to throw the racism charge at Republican voters, because their own candidate would share that same lack of pallor.

This isn’t a new idea for me, but in this race I was trying not to let it be my default position. You have to agree with the folks at Poliwood however, that without that card to play, the race would devolve into a discussion of… (shock and horror!) the issues. With Occupy demonstrators marching the streets, and Tea Party pressure squeezing Republican candidates like a vise, and so much of the rest of the country sitting the middle of the road waiting for to get run over by the paddywagon, it’d be nice to know there might be a real debate for the country to watch next year.


UPDATE: Aaron begrudgingly comes to the same idea.

Meet Tim Scott: Conservative Republican.

Just read this wonderful article over on American Thinker.

I now part ways with the classification of African American because I hold no allegiance to Africa. I embrace the American qualities of freedom to worship, freedom to have my own opinion, freedom to express my views, freedom to achieve whatever it is God has created me to achieve. I hope that I will find others like me who are willing to break ties with the things that divide us, and embrace the timeless principles that have made this country the greatest nation on earth. That is why, when the next U.S. Census occurs, I will be making a new category just for me, the classification of being an American.

For over a year now, I have refused to classify myself as anything other than American. If there is no option for American on a form, I either check “Other” and write it in or have created my own option (this one only works on paper forms) and checked my own box. Over the telephone or in person, it’s really quite fun. Most people love it and agree with me when I insist that I am just American, some poor souls get confused.

So, Mary, you are not alone in your classification. I, too, will be classifying myself as simply American on the U.S. Census. I hope millions of Americans will stand up with us and do the same.

Take the following with a grain of salt, considering I’m doing very little blog-reading lately.  First, for the dirt, check out:

Glenn Beck vs. Charles Johnson

and as usual, don’t forget to read the comments, both at Ace’s and the blogs he links to.

I was a big fan of Charles Johnson and LGF for a long time.  I admired the fact that a passive liberal was seeing a little bit of the light when it came to politics, and a lot of the truth in the fight against jihadism.  Heck, when it came to the latter, Charles was one of the first to try rallying support for the war using a blog.  LGF was really the first blog I’d ever seen, and along with Best of the Web, I gave credit to Johnson in the dedication post as being an inspiration for this blog.

But like Dean Esmay, LGF has taken a few left turns that I can’t say I’ve admired.  I parted ways with Dean following his drift back to the political middle during the most recent presidential election.  In Johnson’s case, I’ve been trying to ignore the fact that the anti-jihadist is now on a crusade against ALL religion by tarring everything in sight with a label that defines it as either anti- or pro- in relation to the most burning debate in America today… creationism.

Creationism? Are you kidding me?

I don’t want this post to devolve deeply into that discussion, so let me just say this much: I believe in God, and I believe He created everything.  And I believe that His methodology for creating everything probably involved something a little more complex than the snapping of giant omnipotent Fingers.  St. Anselm said that God is that being greater than which none can be conceived, so the theory we call “evolution” is probably a lame oversimplification of how it all came to be.  But notice that “oversimplification” implies it’s not untrue.

Put more succinctly, with respects to Heinlein: God is Deep. You can’t grok Him.

With that in mind, I do not fear those who attempt to teach “Intelligent Design”.  I agree with their overall premise, but the details of their methodology are just plain silly.  C’mon guys, you lost this fight 80 years ago in Tennessee, and you’re sounding like those who insist on calling it “The War of Northern Agression.”  The South will NOT rise again – at least not under your terms.  It’s over.  Find a different tack.

That all said, Charles is paranoid and more than a little bigoted against those of us who care to respect an Intelligent Designer.  When he goes after Glenn Beck and belittles those friends of mine attempting to hold the IRS at bay with nothing but bags of tea, he’s just too far gone in misunderstanding who the enemy is and what the fight is about.

So, I’m sorry to say, LGF is being reassigned to “Copperhead” status.  The separating of the wheat and the chaff moves on….

Addendum: I just noticed that when I did the site redesign and added links to places I never would have linked before had it not been for The Civil War Blogroll, I missed a few people that I had to de-link years ago. Daily Dish has been put into Blockade Runners, and Hot Air has been added to Copperheads.

If you are a supporter of “a woman’s right to choose” please read this article. I ask this of you because, once you have read it, I need to ask you a few questions. If you are not supporter of abortion,  please pass this along to any friends or associates that may be  “pro-choice” and have them answer the questions.

Eighteen and pregnant, Sycloria Williams went to an abortion clinic outside Miami and paid $1,200 for Dr. Pierre Jean-Jacque Renelique to terminate her 23-week pregnancy.

Three days later, she sat in a reclining chair, medicated to dilate her cervix and otherwise get her ready for the procedure.

Only Renelique didn’t arrive in time. According to Williams and the Florida Department of Health, she went into labor and delivered a live baby girl.

The complaint says one of the clinic owners, Belkis Gonzalez came in and cut the umbilical cord with scissors, then placed the baby in a plastic bag, and the bag in a trash can.

Williams’ lawsuit offers a cruder account: She says Gonzalez knocked the baby off the recliner chair where she had given birth, onto the floor. The baby’s umbilical cord was not clamped, allowing her to bleed out. Gonzalez scooped the baby, placenta and afterbirth into a red plastic biohazard bag and threw it out.

OK… now the questions: 1. Does this story bother you? 2. Is the clinic owner guilty of murder? 3. Do you believe Sycloria Williams has the moral standing to sue the clinic? Answer these questions in your heart, but – whether anyone is around you or not – please verbalize your answer, so that the words become real. And after each, ask yourself if the words coming out of your mouth match what you feel in your heart.

1. If you answered “Yes” that this story did bother you, an avowed pro-choicer, then I must ask why? Sycloria Williams walked into that clinic and paid $1,200 to terminate a pregnancy – and that is exactly what happened. Perhaps, you are disturbed by the manner in which the termination occurred? Again I must ask why? Oh, wait… that’s a inconvenient question. We’ll move on for now.

2. I assume, again since you are an avowed pro-choicer, that you believe the clinic owner is not guilty of murder, because in your view, abortion is not murder. Right? But the baby was actually born – she had air in her lungs – she was alive! Isn’t causing the death of a living, breathing child … Oops! Another inconvenient question. Next!

3. As for whether Ms. Williams has the moral standing to sue the clinic, I’ll bet you are really conflicted on that one. On the one hand, you probably agree that she is the victim of a morally bankrupt and evil corporation’s malpractice and greed. Ergo, she does have the moral high ground to claim that the clinic didn’t kill the fetus she was carrying before it became a baby. On the other hand, it’s an abortion clinic… a Temple of modern liberalism that frees women from the shackles of motherhood. Ergo, their moral authority is sacrosanct and unassailable. My oh my, what is a progressive to do with a Morton’s Fork like that?

Questions too tough? Need help? Maybe you could look to popular opinion for an answer. After all, isn’t that what the liberal politicians do?

“The baby was just treated as a piece of garbage,” said Tom Brejcha, president of The Thomas More Society, a law firm that is also representing Williams. “People all over the country are just aghast.”

Even those who support abortion rights are concerned about the allegations.

“It really disturbed me,” said Joanne Sterner, president of the Broward County chapter of the National Organization for Women, after reviewing the administrative complaint against Renelique. “I know that there are clinics out there like this. And I hope that we can keep (women) from going to these types of clinics.”

Does that help?

I believe that if you really answered those questions honestly, the story really did bother you (though you may not understand exactly why), you do think that poor baby was murdered (or allowed to die), and that as horrific as the experience must have been for her, Sycloria Williams has no right suing a clinic for doing exactly what she really wanted – “getting rid of” the baby she was carrying. Combine that with the fact that the National Organization for Women want’s you to help keep (women) from going to these types of clinics (would that be Abortion clinics?) and you’ll find that what it comes down to is that you who are pro-abortion really just want the right to kill what the rest of us consider to be a baby, before you start thinking about it as a living being.

The Inconvenient Truth here is that the science and technology you prize above all else keeps moving the line you draw, between when it is a lump of cells and when it is a living being, closer and closer to the point of conception. And I believe that while your intellect may be able to handle that, your conscience cannot. As a progressive thinker, the type of person that often personifies animals, plants, and even the Earth itself (Gaia), you must have real trouble not personifying an embryo – which, if left alone, would have an excellent chance of actually becoming a real person. I think your intellect may even be betraying you, because you have to know that at one point you – your living, breathing, thinking, caring, thriving, progressive self – was just a “lump of cells,” and look how far you have come. You must wonder if any person, given the chance, and with help from progressives like yourself, couldn’t grow and thrive in the same way – no matter how initially unwanted or unloved.

Well, here’s something else to wonder about; what if one of those millions of babies that were disposed of was the next Jonas Salk, Albert Einstein, or would have invented the cure for AIDS or invented an alternative fuel to replace our dependence on oil? Tired old pro-life argument, you say? Ok… what if, now that you approach your golden years, one of those discarded lumps of cells was around to love you, call you mom, give you grandchildren who would think the world of you, and help take care of you as your body and mind failed? Ever think about that?

You know, for a bunch of folks known as the “Free Love” generation, you have just about guaranteed that as you grow old, many of you will do so alone. How profoundly sad.

We may disagree with the current Democratic leadership on a number of issues (okay, quite possibly every issue), but like others in the conservative blogosphere, we here at The Black Republican have always believed (as John McCain put it) in putting “Country First”.

The divisiveness of the last eight years – fueled in large part due to some juvenile behavior by a few on the Left after their men lost in 2000 and 2004 – must not be repeated by the Right. Firm disagreement and resolute refusal to concede our differences on principles are fine, but our opposition must be loyal to the Constitution and the political process, and a message of congratulations for the winner of last night’s election is the very least we can do to show our commitment to basic courtesy.

So, in the spirit of bipartisanship, would like to extend a laurel…

and hearty handshake to our new…

Read more

Dear “Brother X”,

And I do mean “dear”, because even though you are a pathetic loser, your life is precious, and I don’t want to give up hope that someday you might learn to grow a brain.

I know you’re long gone and will never see this post, but here’s a simple response to your inane and long-winded comment (in a fairly unrelated thread) that I have summarily deleted so as not to make everyone else in the country “dumber for having read it”.

When I saw the lengthy comment, complete with bullet-point list, I decided to peruse just the first bullet-point, so as to jump to the chase. For the benefit of my readers, I will only post that much, and hope their heads are fully wrapped with duct tape so as to prevent irreparable injury:

The Republicans historically have been bitter opponents of the following Democratic initiatives:

• The 13th Amendment that abolished slavery in 1865

(For the information of those who were fortunate enough not to have read the rest of the comment, it continued much like that for several pages. Although I did not read the rest of the comment, I can feel enough brain damage that I have probably lost several years off my life expectancy. Back to “Brother X”…)

You sir, are a complete and utter moron, and I find it amazing that you were even capable of using a keyboard to tap out those words. So as not to force your brain to handle any further stress, I will provide detailed instructions as to what you need to do next.

Your computer is supplied with something called a “mouse”. It’s that little oblong thing that rolls around on the desk next to the keyboard. You’ll notice that as you move the mouse, a little arrow or a little hand (depending on the type of computer you own) moves around on your monitor screen. Move the arrow or the pointing index finger of the little hand to this long string of letters, numbers, and (what I am sure for you are) bizarre punctuation marks:

The next thing you do will take you away from my site, and send your “web browser” (the computer program you’re using right now) to the editorial page of a famous and influential newspaper. I know you probably think that the newspaper in question is run by a bunch of money-grubbing New York crackers who do nothing but work to suppress “the brother”, but trust me, this is the truth – unlike just about everything you wrote to me.

Press the button on your mouse, or the button on the left side if you have more than one, and have a nice day.

I’m not talking about the American Dream this time, but the King variety.

I’ve continued staying away from the floor speeches and most of the other political pablum on TV, but during dinner tonight my elderly mother had the convention coverage on. They were doing the nomination counting, and just as we finished, Hillary came out and called for an end to the real counting and a voice proclamation “for Unity”. Yah, whatever. History had been made: a major party nominated someone generally regarded as “black”.

For a few minutes I felt a pit in my stomach, and at one point a strange thought passed through my head: “Stupid Democrats really did it – nominated a black man.” Immediately, I wanted to take it back, and I’m sure I blushed as I realized what I’d said. Because it certainly felt like a racist thought.

After some time to reflect however, I’m pretty sure my subconscious was making a far different point from the obvious one you might (and I did) assume. I’m not complaining – I’m mourning.

“Only Nixon could go to China” the old saying goes. We all know the reasons why: Nixon was so virulently anti-Communist, you could trust that whatever he was up to, he wasn’t intentionally setting out to give away the store. You could debate the merits either way, but it was above regular politics. But what if a Democrat had tried it? Republicans would have assumed on its face that it was either liberal naïveté or outright treason, then proclaimed it was a Communist plot at every microphone in America. And I, for one, would have grown up with never a thought that it could have been otherwise.

On a similar level, I have advocated (and indeed – “Dreamed”) that only the Republicans could nominate a black man to the Presidency. The Democrats are now traveling a road counter to their own best interest.

As I type, there are Democrats laying the groundwork for a liberal response to an Obama defeat. And though I’m not one to buy the illogical arguments of the likes of Jacob Weisberg, I happen to feel in my gut that he’s right on one level: there are just enough prejudiced people in America to prevent Barack Obama from being our next president. So they’re racists? Not necessarily, because the slide from opposing Obama’s ideology to opposing his skin color is such a short trip.

Were the Republicans to nominate a black man – let’s say Michael Steele for argument’s sake – as our next nominee, it would be just as obvious as the Nixon trip to be a gambit beyond the boundaries of normal politics. People would assume by his party affiliation that he’s “safe” to listen to and give him a chance. Some Americans – too many, I believe – would say, “He’s a Republican, so I’ll listen to him despite the fact that he’s a black man…” That’s not unfair enough to be called “racism”, but it’s surely prejudice.

So what will those people say about Barack Obama? I’ve heard many people I respect, like Laura Ingraham, say that it’s foolish to underestimate Obama. Intellectually, I agree. The political winds are at his back, and he has managed to dethrone the Queen of the Democratic Party – no small political feat. But I’m having a real hard time believing that those same people I thought would give Michael Steele the benefit of the doubt won’t act reflexively toward Obama: he’s black and he’s a Democrat, ergo he’s the epitome of liberalism and I won’t listen.

Just as Taranto would point out, this is “an invalid argument can lead to a conclusion that is either true or false.” Within the word “ergo” is just as much prejudice as the Steele example, even if Obama really is the most liberal Senator in Washington.

My gut is telling me that the Democrats have not put racial politics behind us – they’ve set us behind in the race to the Dream. A man like Michael Steele running as president would force America to look past its own prejudice. But a man like Barack Obama will give prejudiced Americans plenty of cover to wallow in it for years to come. And that’s enough to put a pit in anyone’s stomach.

Wow. It’s a good thing Thomas Sowell is Black, otherwise the MSM would have labeled him a riacist, a bigot, and maybe even instigated a high-tech lynching protest for daring to say such things in public:

William F. Buckley’s wife once mentioned in passing, at dinner in her home, that she had been involved for years in working with a school in Harlem. But I never heard her or Bill Buckley ever say that publicly.

Nor do conservatives who were in the civil-rights marches in the south, back when that was dangerous, make that a big deal.

For people on the Left, however, blacks are trophies or mascots, and must therefore be put on display. Nowhere is that more true than in politics.

The problem with being a mascot is that you are a symbol of someone else’s significance or virtue. The actual well-being of a mascot is not the point.

Read it all. It’s worth it.

Ironic, isn’t it, that on authoring articles with subject matter such as this the MSM seems to have an unwritten rule… No Whites allowed.


In early December the case of the “Jena Six”–the six African-American high school students in Louisiana accused of viciously beating a white classmate in 2006–collapsed dramatically with a felony guilty plea by one of the defendants. As something that was going to trigger “America’s next great civil rights movement” (to quote National Public Radio) and grassroots protests against the “new Jim Crow” and the systematic discrimination against blacks in the criminal justice system, this was quite a letdown. The Jena Six were supposed to be the new Scottsboro Boys, the nine black youths railroaded to death sentences by all-white juries in 1930s Alabama on charges of raping two white women.
I guess it’s not surprising that the race rats managed to scurry from that sinking ship without one squeak from the press!
But the fact remains that the Jena Six case climbed to its rickety position as a national symbol of racial injustice largely because a lot of people, some professional activists and many members of the press, wanted it to do so.
Go read the whole thing!

Funny how those same brave race rats managed to run onto the ship with a screaming chorus so loud that was heard all across the country, but we didn’t hear a word from the MSM about how fast the charges of racial prejudice in Jena from the the race-baiters “professional activists” Rev. Jessie and Rev. Al (and this Pastor Bean) fell apart. I thought this was going to be protested and made headline news for months. Isn’t that what we were told? What happened to “no Justice, No Peace”? Where are the headlines now? Where are the protests? More importantly, why were you in Jena when you thought these boys had been wronged, but are nowhere to be found now that there are real lives and real racial tensions that need to be healed? How can any of you call yourselves Reverends when it seems that all you do is divide and never seem to have the desire or ability to unite. Or is there just no money in that?

I guess it didn’t help that the center of the whole contrivance admitted that he is actually guilty, did it?

And to the media, where were the stories about how the citizens of Jena – both black and white – sought to come together, before this whole thing blew up, to resolve this issue themselves with civility and decorum? Seems that just didn’t fit the narative you had already written, did it?

Don’t you people think you owe the people of Jena an apology at least? Or do you think you have done no wrong here?

I am so sick of the efforts by these race-baiters and their MSM sycophants to foment division and anger between members of different races and religions. I wish you folks would just get a life, and dissuade yourselves from the notion that you are part of the solution, because you are not! You are, in fact, the biggest part of the problem, and actually are standing in the way of progress. If it weren’t for the national media and these “professional activists” feeding the monster, us ordinary folk would have let racism die the starvation death it so richly deserves years ago.

Read more

I got the following in my email today, unsolicited, from someone named Andre Bright. I don’t see anything previously in my email from this gentleman, and a check of the site indicates we’ve never gotten a comment from anyone named Andre. (I do delete a rare few comments, usually for vulgarity or racist remarks, sometimes for just being remarkably stupid – neither of which fits the style and tone of this email.)

Why are you not speaking out and challenging Mayor Giuliani, Senators Fred Thompson, Mitt Romney & John McCain to show up for the All-American Presidential Forum on September 27, 2007 at Morgan State University in Baltimore, MD?

This is why many African-American voters, myself included, do not take the Republican party seriously as a political option. In the words of Tavis Smiley, “how can we take them seriously, if they don’t take us seriously?”

First the GOP presidential candidates fail to commit to Hispanic voters for a debate sponsored by UniVision, and now the top four candidates pull a no show for a forum geared at speaking to issues that affect African-Americans?

How can the Republicans continue to ignore the many Black and Brown voters of this country, and expect to be taken seriously as viable options by minority voters?

My first reaction – tongue planted firmly in cheek – was: “How can we take Tavis Smiley seriously, if he seriously expects us to believe he’d ever take Republicans seriously?”

We can take this ad infinitum. Who wants to play the chicken and who wants to be the egg? To the tune of some 90% per presidential election, blacks have made known their opinion that the Republican Party doesn’t care about them. Public opinion polls, boundless anecdotal evidence, and regular references in popular culture indicates most blacks (and liberals) think we’re racists. And so Republican elected officials and candidates make no effort to fight the losing battle. When they dare to believe, despite the benefit of past experience, that they can try to fight the battle, and then go to a function sponsored by “black leaders”, they’re usually ambushed by left-leaning propaganda skillfully woven into “black-themed” issues. Worst of all, large portions of the Republican base, jaded by that past experience, sometimes look at such attempts as pandering to blackmail perpetrated by those who wish to perpetuate the cycle – which is, of course, what it is.

The email goes on to hint at a sad truism in today’s society – the only people who can make efforts to resolve this are the people who don’t have the power to resolve this.

This forum, by many accounts, has been regarded as the fairest and most balanced of all of the presidential debates. This was addressed by former Vice Presidential candidate Jack Kemp just a few weeks ago in an editorial he wrote for the Washington Times and on Mr. Kemp also spoke about the wonderful opportunity this will be for the GOP to reach out and express their ideas to an audience composed primarily of people of color.

I was even more impressed to hear that Newt Gingrich, former Speaker of the House, also spoke favorably about the forum and the opportunity for the GOP to reach minority voters.

Count me among those who will continue to beat our heads against the wall of black disenfranchisement in the our-way-or-the-highway Democratic Party. But when the only people who can afford to speak out are people not running for office, and the perceived lack of attention from people running for office is used to further the con run by the other side, it does not bode well for our future success.

I fear all we can hope for is patience, that the continuing rise of the black middle class and the gradual erosion of strict definitions of black vs. white, amid the growth of interracial marriages and integrated suburban neighborhoods and schools, marginalizes not “the black community” per se, but only those who think there ought to be one separate from whites.

Overrated: Barack O’McNabb

“You know what, folks? I think it’s time for a new name for Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama, and until it changes, until the way he’s being treated by the Drive-Bys changes, ……….there is such a desire in the Drive-Bys that Obama do well, like there is in the NFL for people like McNabb to do well, that we’re going to call him “Barack O’McNabb.”

Rush is right again, and this time the usual suspects aren’t even trying to make a buck by denying the truth. Perhaps ESPN will fire him again.

Also, note the slam by Mrs. O’McNabb against Mrs. Bill Clinton:

‘Our view is that if you can’t run your own house, you certainly can’t run the White House,’

Girl fight! Of course Michele O’McNabb is right; Mrs. Bill Clinton can not run her own house, and even when we had “two for one” Clintons they could not run the White House. But, the men who oppose her for the Democratic nomination remember how Rick Lazio lost because he picked on the girl, so they are sending their wives out for girl fights instead of standing up to Mrs. Bil Clinton themselves.

OK, I’ve been on vacation the past week and a half and am just now trying to do some catch-up. To that end I have compiled a list of some observations over that time:

Read more

Today was one for the books.

It began with a vote in the Senate that beat, throttled, and mutilated the hotly contested immigration bill before it finally died. Good riddance. I can’t help but wonder if we’ve seen a life preserver thrown to the Republican Party.

You can continue to follow the spectacle on the thousand-or-so blogs covering the action, but make sure you hear about Sam Switchback and MSM Dimwittery from the WSJ, both via HotAir.

FULL DISCLOSURE: As someone who has clicked occasionally on the “Those Shirts” ads on HotAir, I am apparently involved in the plot.

That would have been a full day’s news, but we’re not finished.

SCOTUS decided to get into the action by offering its final ruling (yet another 5-4 with Kennedy siding with the Originalist/Textualist half of the court) [ SCOTUSBlog] on affirmative action in public schools. We’ll need time to really digest this mammoth ruling; I’ve only managed to skim the Chief Justice’s opinion for the court. But, as widely reported, the CJ has offered a statement in conclusion that I trust will become one of the great catchphrases of Supreme Court jurisprudence:

The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.
Can I hear a Hallelujah?

Next, Mike Pence’s preventative measure banning the UnFairness Doctrine thundered out of the House, 309-115. Expect the Senate to pass it on a voice vote some Friday night in July.

To finish off a tumultuous day with a little comic relief tonight, the Dems had a debate, where they discussed the evils of resegregation being forced on America by the Supreme Court. The event was held at Howard University.

Next Page →

porno fuck tube sex hikayeleri seks hikayeleri mobil porno POV porn gay porn