Why I Do Not Like The Obamas

[Skulnik]

Why I Do Not Like The Obamas

By Mychal Massie on January 5, 2013in Daily Rant


The other evening on my twitter, a person asked me why I didn?t like the Obamas? Specifically I was asked: ?I have to ask, why do you hate the Obamas. It seems personal not policy related. You even dissed their Christmas family pic.? The truth is I do not like the Obamas, what they represent, their ideology, and I certainly do not like his policies and legislation.

I?ve made no secret of my contempt for the Obamas. As I responded to the person who asked me the aforementioned question, I don?t like them because they are committed to the fundamental change of my/our country into what can only be regarded as a Communist state.



I don?t hate them per definition, but I condemn them because they are the worst kind of racialists; they are elitist Leninists with contempt for traditional America. They display disrespect for the sanctity of the office he holds; and, for those who are willing to admit same Michelle Obama?s raw contempt for white America is transpicuous.
I don?t hate them per definition, but I condemn them because they are the worst kind of racialists, they are elitist Leninists with contempt for traditional America. They display disrespect for the sanctity of the office he holds, and for those who are willing to admit same, Michelle Obama?s raw contempt for white America is transpicuous.

I don?t like them because they comport themselves as emperor and empress. I expect, no, I demand respect for the Office of President and a love of our country and her citizenry from the leader entrusted with the governance of same. President and Mrs. Reagan displayed an unparalleled love for the country and her people. The Reagans made Americans feel good about themselves and about what we could accomplish. Could you envision President Reagan instructing his Justice Department to act like jack-booted thugs?

Presidents are politicians, and all politicians are known and pretty much expected to manipulate the truth, if not outright lie; but, even using that low standard, the Obamas have taken lies, dishonesty, deceit, mendacity, subterfuge, and obfuscation to new depths. They are verbally abusive to the citizenry, and they display an animus for civility.

I do not like them because they both display bigotry overtly: as in the case of Harvard Professor Louis Gates when Obama accused the Cambridge Police of acting stupidly, and as in her code speak pursuant to now being able to be proud of America. I view that statement and that mindset as an insult to those who died to provide a country where a Kenyan, his illegal alien relatives, and his alleged progeny, could come and not only live freely; but he could rise to the highest, most powerful position in the world. Michelle Obama is free to hate and disparage whites because Americans of every description paid with their blood to ensure her right to do same.

I have a saying, that ?the only reason a person hides things is because they have something to hide.? No president in history has spent over a million dollars to keep his records and his past sealed. And what the two of them have shared has been proved to be lies. He lied about when and how they met; he lied about his mother?s death and problems with insurance; Michelle lied to a crowd pursuant to nearly $500,000 in bank stocks they inherited from his family. He has lied about his father?s military service, about the civil rights movement, ad nauseum.



Get The Daily Rant in Your Inbox100% Secure. No spam allowed.
He lied to the world about the Supreme Court in a State of the Union address. He berated and publicly insulted a sitting Congressman. He has surrounded himself with the most rabidly radical, socialist academicians today. He has fought for abortion procedures and opposed rulings that protected women and children ? that even Planned Parenthood did not seek to support. He is openly hostile to business and aggressively hostile to Israel.

His wife treats being the First Lady as her personal American Express Black Card (arguably the most prestigious credit card in the world). I condemn them because as people are suffering, losing their homes, their jobs, their retirements ? he and his family are arrogantly showing off their life of entitlement as he goes about creating and fomenting class warfare.

I don?t like them, and I neither apologize nor retreat from my public condemnation of them and of his policies. We should condemn them for the disrespect they show our people, for his willful and unconstitutional actions pursuant to obeying the Constitutional parameters he is bound by, and his willful disregard for Congressional authority.

Dislike for them has nothing to do with the color of their skin; it has everything to do with their behavior, attitudes, and policies. And I have open scorn for their playing the race card.

It is my intention to do all within my ability to ensure their reign is one term. I could go on, but let me conclude with this. I condemn, in the strongest possible terms, the media for refusing to investigate them as they did President Bush and President Clinton and for refusing to label the Obamas for what they truly are. There is no scenario known to man whereby a white president and his wife could ignore laws, flaunt their position, and lord over the people as these two are permitted out of fear for their color.

As I wrote in a syndicated column titled ?Nero In The White House? ? ?Never in my life, inside or outside of politics, have I witnessed such dishonesty in a political leader. He is the most mendacious political figure I have ever witnessed. Even by the low standards of his presidential predecessors, his narcissistic, contumacious arrogance is unequalled. Using Obama as the bar, Nero would have to be elevated to sainthood?Many in America wanted to be proud when the first person of color was elected president, but instead, they have been witness to a congenital liar, a woman who has been ashamed of America her entire life, failed policies, intimidation, and a commonality hitherto not witnessed in political leaders. He and his wife view their life at our expense as an entitlement ? while America?s people go homeless, hungry and unemployed.? (WND.com; 8/8/11)

Oh, and as for it being personal, you tell me how you would feel if a senator from Illinois sent you a personally signed card, intended to intimidate you and your family because you had written a syndicated column titled ?Darth Democrat? that was critical of him. (WND.com 11/16/04)







Be nice - share this article!






About Mychal Massie
Mychal S. Massie is an ordained minister who spent 13 years in full-time Christian Ministry. He was founder and president of the non-profit ?In His Name Ministries.? He is the former National Chairman of the conservative black think tank, Project 21-The National Leadership Network of Black Conservatives and a former member of its parent think tank, the National Center for Public Policy Research. In his official capacity with this free-market, public-policy think tank, he has spoken at the U.S. Capitol, CPAC, participated in numerous press conferences on Capitol Hill, the National Press Club and testified concerning property rights pursuant to the ?Endangered Species Act? before the Chairman of the House Committee on Resources. He has been a keynote speaker at colleges and universities nationwide, at Tea Party Rallies, as well as rallies supporting our troops, conservative presidents, and conservative causes across the country. He is an unapologetic supporter of our right to own and carry firearms. Read the entire Bio here
View all posts by Mychal Massie →

 

[THE KOD]

will you like the Clintons better

:0corn

 

[THE KOD]

Former Vice President Dick Cheney responded Monday night to the Obama administration?s proposal to cut the U.S. Army to its lowest point since before World War II.

Calling into Fox News? ?Hannity,? Cheney declared the proposed cuts to be ?absolutely dangerous? and ?just devastating.?

?I have not been a strong supporter of Barack Obama. But this really is over the top. It does enormous long-term damage to our military,? Cheney said. ?They act as though it is like highway spending and you can turn it on and off. The fact of the matter is he is having a huge impact on the ability of future presidents to deal with future crises that are bound to arise.?


Cheney also said America?s allies are losing confidence in the United States and that the president?s budget reflects his priorities.

?The other thing I now for a fact too, Sean, from keeping in touch with some of my old friends that I used to deal with in the Middle East ? they no longer have any confidence at all in American security guarantees,? he said. ?They?re absolutely convinced that they can no longer trust the United States to keep its commitments ? that includes the Israelis, Saudis, a lot of others in that part of the world.?

?They peddle this line that now we?re going to pivot to Asia, but they?ve never justified it,? he added. ?And I think the whole thing is not driven by any change in world circumstances, it is driven by budget considerations. He would much rather spend the money on food stamps than he would on a strong military or support for our troops.?
...........................................................................................................................


this is one man that really cant stand not to be in power.

His vision is war and more of it. Haliburton forever.

making his millions year after year for killing all around the world.

cut it back. We can always nukey the shit out of anyone that gets in Americas way. The GOP would
be down for that.

 

[Lumi]

?Negotiating with Obama is like playing chess with a pigeon.
The pigeon knocks over all the pieces, shits on the board and
then struts around like it won the game.?

 

[Duff Miver]

Calling into Fox News? ?Hannity,? Cheney declared the proposed cuts to be ?absolutely dangerous? and ?just devastating.?

The Secretary of Defense all all the Joint Chiefs think this is a good idea...

But what do they know compared to a pair of draft-dodging shit eaters like Hannity and Cheney?

Cheney does know, however, where the WMD in Iraq are. Maybe some day he'll tell.

 

[THE KOD]

The Secretary of Defense all all the Joint Chiefs think this is a good idea...

But what do they know compared to a pair of draft-dodging shit eaters like Hannity and Cheney?

Cheney does know, however, where the WMD in Iraq are. Maybe some day he'll tell.

exactly


while we are at it , cut out about 50 military bases around the world and save another 2-3 trillion


the war machine and being able to get into a skirmish immediately is really not necessary anymore.

 

[THE KOD]

WASHINGTON -- Senate Republicans are dragging the upper chamber to a halt in an effort to force a vote on a bill that a wide cross section of observers warn will bring the U.S. closer to war with Iran.

The bill, which would tighten sanctions on Iran in the midst of delicate nuclear negotiations between that country and several Western powers, was originally supported by the leading pro-Israel lobby in the U.S., the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. AIPAC has since backed off amid a torrent of opposition. Senate Republicans, however, are pushing forward.

On Monday, Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Kan.), who heads the GOP's Senate reelection effort, blocked votes on military sexual assault legislation by demanding that an amendment on Iran sanctions be added to the bills.

On Tuesday, Senate Republicans pulled the same move with different legislation. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said that Iran sanctions would be included in the Republican alternative to a military veterans bill offered by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.).

"We've been trying for months to get a debate and a vote on the Kirk-Menendez Iran sanctions bill. That will be a part of the Burr alternative," McConnell said, referring to the alternative measure from Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.). "This is a very time-sensitive matter," he added.
..........................................................................................................................



GOP beating the war drums again over and over.


Oh Cheney would love to be involved in a war with Iran. It makes him giddy thinking about it.

how pathetic

 

[Skulnik]

Scooter, Harry Reid is the LOSER that's fucking up the Senate.

Just so you know.

:0074

 

[Skulnik]

Cherokee genealogist to Elizabeth Warren: ?Your Native American issue has not been put to rest?
Comments Permalink



Posted by William A. Jacobson Friday, September 21, 2012 at 2:30pm
Cherokee genealogist Twila Barnes, whose group of researchers has done more than anyone to document Elizabeth Warren?s false claims to be Cherokee, was incensed at Warren?s continued insistence that she is Native American:

Let me make one thing clear. Your Native American issue has not been put to rest.

You say your ?ancestry? played no roll in your hiring. That is not the only issue. You were listed as a minority in diversity reports. That is an issue. You admit you made the schools aware of your ?heritage.? They counted you as a minority in their reports to the federal government when the criteria to list you as such had a two part requirement ? you had to have both the ancestry and maintain tribal ties. Something you did or said led the two schools in question to believe you met those requirements despite the fact you didn?t?.

You continue to skate around the issue by repeating the same story you heard growing up. You say you didn?t ask for documentation because you were a child. Excuse me, but you were not a child when you started ?checking the box?; listing yourself in law directories as a minority; or were counted as a Native American for diversity reports.

You were instead, an adult, 37 years old, and a lawyer, when you professionally ?became? Native American. To make matters worse, your mother was still alive. Maybe children don?t ask for documentation, but adult lawyers should?.

As of today, you still refuse to release your personnel records from the University of Pennsylvania and Harvard Law School. If there is nothing to hide, why? ?

No one really cares about your family or the stories you were told growing up, but we do care about your integrity. The ?Cherokee flap? is important because it shows what you have done when you thought no one was watching. It is important because it shows what you have done when you thought you wouldn?t get caught. And it is important because it reveals you still think you can get away with it now that you have been caught.

Michael Patrick Leahy explains how Warren repeated old lies about her Native American ancestry:

In repeating her old claim that her parents were ?forced to elope? because her mother had both Delaware and Cherokee Native American ancestry, Warren retold a story Breitbart News debunked in June with an article that showed her parents were married in a religous ceremony twenty miles from their hometown. Subsequent reports showed that their hometown paper proudly announced the wedding within days after the ceremony was performed on January 4, 1932.

In the debate Thursday night, Professor Warren also claimed that ?the people who hired me for my jobs have all made clear they didn?t even know about it until long after I was hired.? In fact, she admitted to the Boston Globe in May that she herself had told both Penn and Harvard she was a woman of color prior to her hiring as a full time professor by Harvard.

In addition, she self identified as a ?woman of color? in an article published by the Harvard Women?s Law Journal in 1993, two years before she joined the Harvard Law School faculty as a tenured professor in 1995.

Last night was a debacle for Warren. The Native American issue and how she reported it to federal authorities through Harvard is not going to go away.




RightSide | September 21, 2012 at 3:02 pm
I counted at least six Warren signs were missing from a short bit of road I travel here in Essex County, Mass. They were there the day before. Far more Brown signs around in my view as we?re a bit more conservative up here. I take that as a very good omen.

The state can be uber liberal but when a candidate lies right to your face and then sticks to a proven lie even the kool aid drinkers take notice.

All I can say is good work and keep up the pressure.


Mark Michael | September 21, 2012 at 3:12 pm
Scott Brown needs to find a way to make Warren?s actions w.r.t. her Indian ancestry important to independent and moderate D voters in Mass. Brown in the debate barely even told the viewer what she had done to get hired at Penn and Harvard. People have gotten so used to minorities and women getting favored treatment they no longer think it?s so bad. (Yes, we conservatives recognize how it undermines society, but many don?t.)

MY IDEA: Brown should describe in general terms how affirmative action works at elite U?s such as the Ivies. They were & remain under pressure to hire a quota of minorities and women. A ?twofer? is really cool, since you can add to two quotas! There were very few minorities & females at Penn & Harvard when she applied. Both institutions publicly affirmed their intense desire to hire more of both. (Establish motivation & desire.)

Describe in general terms how lawyers who practice before the bar and how U.S. Senators who make our laws need to be scrupulous abiders by the laws themselves. They need to be held to a higher standard. Lawyers who violate the law run the real risk of being disbarred (excepting minor things like traffic tickets, etc.). This also applies to TEACHERS of the law ? convey the importance of rule of law, abiding by the law, centrality of it to newbie lawyers.

Build the case for applying ?GUILTY UNTIL PROVEN INNOCENT? for Warren & her behavior w.r.t. affirmative action, a lawyer in good standing, & a U.S. Senator. And further, how it reflects on her character that she refuses to reveal what she & these two Ivies did in her past.

She would know as a highly trained lawyer what the legal niceties are for such a generic requirement for the practice of affirmative action at any university.

2ND IDEA: Brown could offer up a ?compromise?: Let 2 or 3 objective, neutral highly knowledgeable experts go over her personnel file at Penn & Harvard, go over both U?s complete file of applicants for those 2 positions for which Warren was hired, and determine what the facts are for Warren & her application. Next the full & accurate context of all of the applicants for those 2 positions. Were women & minorities given favored treatment? How many applicants were male WASPs with stronger credentials on paper than Warren? Better Law Schools, more papers published, etc.


dmacleo | September 21, 2012 at 7:49 pm
IMO a PAC should do this with no directions from him.
I think that would work better.


Mark Michael | September 21, 2012 at 9:45 pm
Re: A PAC doing it

I like your suggestion. Then Brown wouldn?t be directly associated with it. Hmm. It shouldn?t take a lot of funds. Just enough to pay 2 or 3 experts the time to go over her 2 sets of personnel files (Penn & Harvard) + the files related to those 2 openings for which she applied and won the gig. A PAC could put up the money to pay the fees/per diem to do it.

Of course, Harvard?s and Penn?s law schools might balk. Then I?d suggest Brown directly go public with it himself. Call a press conference & invite the Boston media outlets. Have the 2 or 3 experts at his side. Be very professional and detached. Say these nonpartisan experts are willing to go over the relevant files. Invite the Warren campaign to propose an expert to join the team so that they can be sure it?s done properly.

Now, I?m guessing the Warren campaign will demur. But, at least Brown will have succeeded in getting some more attention to the matter. Keep putting it before the public.

There is a lot of public information about Harvard?s push for minority & female law prof hires in that period. It could be gathered together as part of the package these 2 or 3 experts would have before they even start. Brown could use it at his press conference if the 2 schools refuse to cooperate.

It just occurred to me, Barack Obama was at the Harvard Law School from 1988 to 1991. He was big into pushing for more minority hiring of law profs. He was elected prez of the Law Review. I wonder if that was part of the reason Harvard pushed so hard to hire minorities/females ? Warren was hired in 1994? 1995?


windbag | September 21, 2012 at 3:41 pm
If Brown held a press conference and introduced Ms. Barnes, that would certainly get some press, especially on the heels of the debate, right? Warren has no shame to have that directed at her and not come clean. Oh yeah, she?s a Democrat.


I R A Darth Aggie | September 21, 2012 at 4:00 pm
I always hesitate a little bit when there?s a ?Race? check box that includes ?Native American?.

I was born here. My parents were born here. I don?t know how much more native I can be.

Now, if they come up with a check box for Texican, I?m there?


Estragon | September 21, 2012 at 4:07 pm
Paleface squaw speak with forked tongue.


stevewhitemd | September 21, 2012 at 4:36 pm
I can?t be sure about this but I?m guessing that Prof. Warren thought this would be over and done before the first debate.

Heh.

I like the idea of Senator Brown having Twila Barnes with him at a campaign stop or ten. Brown wins by keeping Warren on the defensive.


rangered | September 21, 2012 at 4:37 pm
Ms. Barnes arguments fail because of one immutable fact: Elizabeth Warren is a self proclaimed and self identified Democrat. If she was a Republican then Ms. Barne?s arguments would be devastatingly en point and unanswerable by Elizabeth Warren.

But just as Bill Clinton?s being a Democrat eliminated his guilt of rape, molestation and repeated ungentlemanly behavior, Elizabeth Warren?s party identity also excuses her from such crimes and misdemeanors and legal requirements which Ms. Barne?s has the mean-spiritness to bring up.

After all, Elizabeth Warren MEANT well, which legally is not accepted as a defense, but damn well should be, because its most important to mean well-much more important that actual deeds-but again, only if you are a Democrat.


Sally Paradise | September 21, 2012 at 4:55 pm
Massachusetts will become another Illinois if Warren is elected.


secondwind | September 21, 2012 at 5:05 pm
Leave Warren aside for a moment. Harvard and less so Penn. have dirty ,abettor hands in all this. They had a quota to fill and this obviously white woman presents herself spouting all the proper liberal nonsense and they did no due diligence to make sure her story was true? Benifits to Harvard accrued in the fed. , fill in the box game of payouts for meeting certain requirements. A true candidate was shortchanged. Lizzy and her hubby now recieve 3/4 of a mill a year rooted in part on a scam. Harvard has deep pockets , some of you are lawyers ; could not some class action lawsuit be brought for some aggreved Native Americans? Cherokees , Deleware?


jakee308 | September 21, 2012 at 5:53 pm
She lied to gain an advantage for herself.

That she has no proof and has changed her story many times and has attempted to stonewall the situation is an indication (to me sitting on a jury) of guilty knowledge.

She may have been told those stories growing up. She may have believed them and acted on them in good faith but at some time, she became aware that they were false or not verifiable and she has made a concerted effort to cover up that knowledge and her lie. Even if I believe I?m correct but give someone false information which benefits me at the expense of that person/entity or harms a different person/entity then I owe some compensation to those affected. (I think. All you Lawyers out there feel free to correct me)

It?s not the act that is coming home to roost so much as the attempted COVER UP.

Of course, she may know her constituency too well and believe she will weather the storm. It?s possible in MA.

It?s up to Brown to deliver the final blows. He?ll have to be very, very measured in his assault.


stevewhitemd | September 21, 2012 at 6:34 pm
Secondwind makes an excellent point that was discussed a while back at LI but not likely ?

Prof. Warren wasn?t the only beneficiary of her ethnic fraud.

Harvard at the time was some desperate to have more ?minorities? at the Law School. They had promoted several white (32/32 as far as we know) faculty to tenure, and there had been protests by law students and others over the lack of minorities. Then Prof. Warren came along, and her ?Cherokee? status allowed them to say that they had promoted a qualified minority. They wrote of it. They talked about it. They claimed it to the Feds and they claimed it to the community.

Harvard benefitted from Warren?s ethnic fraud.

Question is, did they aid and abet it? We won?t know unless and until the relevant files come out, and (as we all might guess) will be around the Twelfth of Never.

Note also that at some point after she arrived both she and Harvard quietly dropped the whole minority recruitment gig.

We can ask the same questions about Penn.

So far the two universities have managed to deflect the attention; it?s easier to go after the candidate than the institutions; the various deans and administrators can stonewall in a way that a candidate for political office can?t.

The real shame for Ms. Warren: if she had not run for office this never would have come up. She could win appointments to the executive branch, serve on the university faculty, do the sweet consulting and TV gigs, and all this would have stayed buried. Once she ran for Senate it all came out. I wonder why she never considered that, or thought she could manage it.

 

[Lumi]

65000 Foreign Born Warriors
Currently Serve in the 4 branches of the military
US Military Recruiting offices dot the globe
Outside the US and it's territories
Americans have grown tired of this 14 year war on terror

I am not an officer, not a DC Warrior
I was a Senior NCO

My take on this reduction in strength is this,
Our Military Capability being reduced can possibly
Lead to reinstating the draft when the next phase
Of the War on Terror calls for it
Whatever action that is?
It's going to be a Holy Shit Situation

 

[THE KOD]

In the first half of fiscal 2013, however, those eligible to shop in military commissaries -- which include disabled veterans and others with military identification -- cashed in nearly $53 million in food stamps, according to data provided to The Huffington Post by the Defense Commissary Agency. In 2011, more than 5,000 "active duty military? relied on the government aid.

A September report by nonprofit think tank Center on Budget and Policy Priorities estimated that at least 900,000 veterans received Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program assistance, or food stamps, each month.

On Feb. 7, Obama signed the farm bill into law, cutting $8.6 billion from food stamp funding over the next 10 years.
.............................................................................................................................


yeh cut the military out cheney

good thinking

 

[Duff Miver]

My take on this reduction in strength is this,
Our Military Capability being reduced can possibly
Lead to reinstating the draft when the next phase
Of the War on Terror calls for it

Re instituting the draft is a great idea. If you're one of the high and mighty who wants to start some shit, maybe YOUR kid goes.

And no deferments. Cheney would have served. Maybe he could have downed some VC with his quail gun.

 

[Lumi]

Duff,
I do appreciate your replies
However...
A topic like reduction of Military Readiness
Should be a Major Butt Pucker
Reinstating the draft?

The Protests will get ugly
It will make Kent St, Tianamen Square, Kiev....
Look like a rock fight

I know that you have the intellect to provide
A well thought ou response
Sometime you have to leave the Snark at the gate

 

[THE KOD]

Re instituting the draft is a great idea. If you're one of the high and mighty who wants to start some shit, maybe YOUR kid goes.

And no deferments. Cheney would have served. Maybe he could have downed some VC with his quail gun.

would George W have had to go ?



or Maybe the Mittster instead of France for a bible outing

 

[Duff Miver]

would George W have had to go ?



or Maybe the Mittster instead of France for a bible outing

GW did actually serve, in thew Air National Guard. Some say he signed up but never showed up. I don't know.

Mitt would have been in a VN foxhole instead of a Paris bistro. However Mitt did become fully fluent in French, a fact which he now tries tio hide as it doesn't fit in with his right-wing "Speak English, Goddamnit!" stance.

 

[Skulnik]

GW did actually serve, in thew Air National Guard. Some say he signed up but never showed up. I don't know.

Mitt would have been in a VN foxhole instead of a Paris bistro. However Mitt did become fully fluent in French, a fact which he now tries tio hide as it doesn't fit in with his right-wing "Speak English, Goddamnit!" stance.

Obama wore the uniform.

 

[THE KOD]

Just a day after raising eyebrows by calling Johnny Manziel an "arrogant little prick" on a St. Louis radio station, Barry Switzer is back in the headlines, this time for saying he would never recruit a white quarterback.

The former Oklahoma and Dallas Cowboys coach made the comment during an interview on WNSR in Nashville on Thursday as part of a response to a question about whether he would want Manziel in his backfield.

Specifically, the question was, "If you are a coach in the NFL at this point in time ? we know your opinion on Johnny and his mental state on and off the field, but we also know how much you think of him as a football player ? is this a guy, in Johnny Manziel, that you would draft or you would want your team to draft, and would you have him as your starting quarterback on your roster?"

Switzer started by saying that he'd have to have a long talk with Manziel, then got into the comment in question.

"I love his ability; Johnny can play," Switzer said. "I've always said I'd never recruit a white quarterback. The only way I'd ever recruit a white quarterback to play for me was if his mom and daddy would have to both be black, and that's the only way I would do it."

"My offense is a quarterback-fullback offense," Switzer continued. "I'd have to have a Jamelle Holieway, J.C. Watts [or] Thomas Lott. Those guys are gonna be my quarterbacks, they're great runners, they're great ball carriers and ... able to pass, complete some, and those guys could. Those guys could throw and run."
..................................................................................................................

barry big time GOP man .

going senile on us now

 

[Lumi]

KOD
You receive an A + for cherry picking your news

Who gives a fuck what Barry Switzer has to say?

Didnt BS boot Troy Aikmen out of Oklahoma
For Jameel Holloway?

How many Rings does JH have now?
What is he doing now?

Oh
And about your Hilary worship
Spike Lee: Hillary, 'Massuh Clinton' 'would lie on a stack of Bibles'

April 07, 2008

The filmmaker Spike Lee, in New York Magazine, weighs in on the presidential race:

What do you think of Obama?
I?m riding my man Obama. I think he?s a visionary. Actually, Barack told me the first date he took Michelle to was Do the Right Thing. I said, ?Thank God I made it. Otherwise you would have taken her to Soul Man. Michelle would have been like, ?What?s wrong with this brother?? ?

Does this mean you?re down on the Clintons?
The Clintons, man, they would lie on a stack of Bibles. Snipers? That?s not misspeaking; that?s some pure bulls***. I voted for Clinton twice, but that?s over with. These old black politicians say, ?Ooh, Massuh Clinton was good to us, massuh hired a lot of us, massuh was good!? Hoo! Charlie Rangel, David Dinkins?they have to understand this is a new day. People ain?t feelin? that stuff. It?s like a tide, and the people who get in the way are just gonna get swept out into the ocean.

I wonder if Spud Lee will
Soft shoe out of his comments in 2016

My comments were taken out of context
The White Media is the Devil