Posted on 08/17/2011 6:53:07 AM PDT by OneVike
When Obama won the election against John McCain in 2008; he did so with a majority of the white vote. That's saying a lot considering the United States is the only nation on the planet whose citizens willingly elected, as their leader, a man who hails from the very class of people that was once considered only 3/4 human.
So if we Americans have grown beyond our racist past, then why is the first black president going after communities across America because he believes they are racist for not having enough blacks and Hispanics living there? Why did Obama instruct his DOJ to stop pursuing civil rights violations committed by nonwhite Americans? Not my accusation, but that of a former leading prosecutor of the DOJ, J. Christian Adams, who resigned over the administration's refusal to prosecute black violators. Adams wrote in a commentary for the New York Times;
"Citizens would be shocked to learn about the open and pervasive hostility within the Justice department to bringing civil rights cases against nonwhite defendants on behalf of white victims. Equal enforcement of justice is not a priority of this administration. Open contempt is voiced for these types of cases.
If Obama really wants to be, as he said, the president of all Americans, then why has he not asked the DOJ to investigate the escalating black on white violence across America? After all, Obama claimed that hate crimes would not be tolerated by his administration when he signed the new hate crime legislation in October of 2009. I guess he only meant hate crimes against blacks, Hispanics, and gay people, because what is happening across America today is unconscionable.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsblaze.com ...
I've been saying this very thing for the last 3 years. Barack Hussein Obama may not be re-elected next November, but he's not leaving the WH either.
All I've gotta say is he better not fsck up my wedding next November, or I'll be pissed!
I intend on telling anyone who throws the race card out how it is.
Try
“Your race card is broken”
“Baiting with your racist comments might work with the fish but not me”
These are the nice comments. I have others, but I don’t want to be banned.
Folks best be prepared to stay away from major metropolitan and high density population areas, the night of and the day following the Presidential election in November 2012. Whether the false obamassiah loses the election in a close count or in a blowout, accusations will fly that racists have stolen the election. I fully expect the following violence, looting and destruction to be of such magnitude as to make the recent Great Britain riots look like a bingo game in a nursing home.
“most people think it 3/4”
When I learned the history of the Constitution it was referred to as the “Three Fifths Compromise”.
It is written right in the Constitution at Article 1, Section 2, Paragraph 3.
It’s a side issue to your main argument but you’re not correct. The fraction was a compromise during the Constitutional Convention over the counting of slaves as part of the population for congressional representation. The South wanted slaves to count as inhabitants—a full human beings—so you are just wrong. The anti-slavery delegates weren’t saying that blacks were only 3/5s human.
Your still getting it wrong.
Slaves counting 3/5’s for purposes of representation was a way of restraining the slave states by reducing their representation in Congress. It wasn’t about black’s status as human beings.
I think you are probably correct that, due to the woeful state of public education, people who even know about the three fifths compromise think it was intended to denigrate black people in racist America. In reality, its purpose was to reduce the power of the slave states and it was backed by the abolitionists.
Ask any black, and they will repeat the lies they have been taught. I was wrong on the percentage, but I sis not want to get into explaining the reason for the use of it.
If I tried to educate people on every point made in a column, then it would be 10 pages long.
That being said, I admit I was wrong on the percentage, It was 3/5 as you state.
We said that last time and it didn’t happen.
Still, I don’t live in an urban area, and I’m not planning to visit one, esp. during or after the election.
thank you, my point exactly.
Does your wedding registry include lots of arms and ammunition, maybe a few special order items like area denial weapons?
Hey, shouldn’t an editor have caught the 3/4 as apposed to 3/5 mistake I made before they published it?
I ask, because it seems like they pretty much published my column as it was when I submitted it.
CONGRATULATION on your upcoming nuptials!!
This is all part of Soros/obama/holder plan.
Right. This notion that blacks were considered only 3/5's of a person because the founding fathers were racists needs to be confronted whenever it surfaces. The fractional representation was put in the constitution to limit the political power of the southern states. The south wanted slaves counted as a whole persons, not fractional, so that they would have more political representation.
I agree, and America better wake up before they find themselves with a Castro/Chavez type dictator that destroy any vestiges of freedom we have left.
Good grief, you still don’t get why folks are correcting you. It’s NOT the number you stated, it’s because you perpetuate the myth that it was because the founders thought blacks were less than human.
My favorite, hands down is, "I don't like his white half, either."
My favorite, hands down is, "I don't like his white half, either."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.