Whatever one may think of Rush Limbaugh, the controversy surrounding his attempts to participate in a consortium buying the Rams has made for some strange bedfellows. Apparently Limbaugh was falsely accused of making racist statements he did not make. Juan Williams of FOX News stood up for the truth and was told he should “get back on the porch.” Understandably, Mr. Williams was furious. While he has at times been critical of President Obama, it is not his habit. Imagine his horror when he realized that if he dares for once to tell a truth that is not “politically correct,” he too will be thrown under the bus by race baiters.

Mr. Williams interviews commentator Tammy Bruce and the Rev. Ken Hutcherson, PhD, a former NFL player, conservative pastor and African American who is close friends with Mr. Limbaugh. This 7:45 video is well worth your time…*

This segment speaks truth to power. What do you think?

But then, my fellow NQ writer/friend, LisaB, alerted me to a story I missed in my own home town paper while I was out of town, which she found at Michell Malkin’s site. Now, you may recall that I have no love lost for this man who repeatedly stabbed the Clintons in the back before our primary last year, painting them as racists for stating actual facts (like that it takes a president to sign a bill into law - one would THINK a US Representative would be aware of that, but apparently, Rep. Clyburn does not know that). So, I was not at all surprised that he claimed in a recent Post and Courier article that Michelle Obama won’t come to SC because we’re all a bunch of racists and too hostile. Oh, how I wish I was making this up:

U.S. House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn said Friday that a conversation with White House staff left him with the sense that a hostile environment in South Carolina is keeping the first lady from visiting.

The high-ranking South Carolina Democrat said he has received more than 100 invitations for Michelle Obama. But this summer when he brought one of those requests to her staff on behalf of his alma mater, South Carolina State University, Clyburn said her security was an issue.

The conversation came after former Richland County GOP activist Rusty DePass suggested on Facebook in June that an escaped zoo gorilla was not harmful because it was probably one of Mrs. Obama’s ancestors. DePass’ comment was coupled with a remark in July from U.S. Sen. Jim DeMint, a Republican. DeMint said that beating the president’s health care plan would be a ‘Waterloo’ moment for Obama.

Congressman Joe Wilson’s ‘You lie!’ outburst during Obama’s joint address on health care reform last month didn’t help either, Clyburn said.

‘A lot of it has to do with the fact that the climate in South Carolina just is not good, and that’s a shame,’ Clyburn said at a roundtable discussion at his Columbia office.

‘I do believe it is keeping her away from this state,’ he said.

The congressman said the first lady’s family connections in South Carolina and her fond childhood memories from Georgetown County left many excited at the possibility that the Obamas would vacation on the coast here. Her security must be guaranteed before that could happen, Clyburn said.

DePass said Clyburn’s comments were off base.

‘The idea that people in South Carolina are hostile to the Obamas is poppycock,’ he said. ‘That’s utterly ridiculous.’

I concur. Just more race baiting from Rep. Clyburn. Oh, I am so proud that he speaks for me - NOT. But there’s more:

DePass apologized before the South Carolina Conference of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People for his Facebook comment, and reiterated that apology

Friday. He also said that his history with the Republican Party included reaching out to minority voters and trying to remove the Confederate battle flag from the Statehouse dome.

Wilson’s office also said Clyburn was wrong.

‘Congressman Wilson respectfully disagrees with Congressman Clyburn’s assumption,’ Wilson spokesman Ryan Murphy said in a statement. ‘He believes the people of South Carolina would welcome the president and the first lady should they decide to visit our great state.’

Neither the first lady’s press office nor the Secret Service provided comment for this story. DeMint’s office also did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Pat Caddell of Hanahan, an expert on public opinion polls and a Democratic strategist, said South Carolina surely has racists among its residents, but racism isn’t the prevailing sentiment. ‘The Democratic Party will blow itself up if it keeps assigning things as racist,’ Caddell said. (Reach Yvonne Wenger at 803-926-7855 or ywenger@postandcourier.com.)

Sigh. I have to tell you, I am pretty damn sick and tired of being called a racist because I live in South Carolina for starters, but for any, ANY, questioning of President Obama’s policies (or lack thereof). For Rep. Clyburn to claim that the First Lady isn’t coming here, even though she has FAMILY here, because it’s “hostile” just makes me, well, “hostile!”

I had to read some of the comments at the end of the article to see what some of my fellow Palmetto State residents had to say. Three in particular caught my attention. The first is obviously in response to another comment:

treasured wrote:

regulardude…Please give us a break!

Was Obama’s negative remarks about the US to other countries patriotic?You get respect when respect is earned.

Just because he is the President does not mean that we have to agree with him and like you, we can voice our opinions and our concerns.

There have been many concerns about this President and they have not just been from SC.You are just reading articles from a SC paper.What is the difference in your remarks accusing us of not respecting the President and you obviously not respecting your own state that you insist on living in?Must be something you like about it.

I have grown children and I have a young child. As it stands right now, they and their children will have to pay back for many years all the money that Obama has dished out in his so called stimulus plans.

Now, if you want to sing his praises, well and good, but don’t call the rest of us unpatriotic if we don’t agree with what he is doing.That is our right as Americans.

And this one:

caberchucker wrote:
Yeah, that makes sense that she’s “scared” of the hostility in SC. Oh wait, didn’t the Obamas and Oprah have to move their rally to USC’s stadium while campaigning, so they could accomidate all the people? Nevermind, I guess that never actually happened.

Uh yeah, evidently not.

And finally, this one, which I think really hits at the core of this charge by Rep. Clyburn:

wonderdog wrote:
Clyburn is embarrassed because he got snubbed by the Obamas, so he made up this nonsense to make it appear that it’s somebody’s fault. If he can get enough people to buy into that BS, maybe he can convince himself, too.

Now that the Obamas have no more use to them after he played his role as patsy during the campaign, why should they deign to do anything that might help him in some way? But yes, so much easier - for Rep. Clyburn, that is - to blame it on the very people who sent him to D.C. Nice, really nice. Can’t wait to see what he calls us next!

But here’s the problem for me. I had really liked President Carter. I had a lot of respect for him, in fact. I was young and naive when he was in office, but certainly the work he had done AFTER leaving the White House was commendable. For instance, the work he and his entire family did for Habitat for Humanity has helped numerous people, including in my home town. I have experienced firsthand seeing the joy and pride the new homeowner as she looked at her house, and talked about what it meant to her. And the group of university students with whom I was working, all female, becoming more empowered, more sure of themselves, because they were helping to build someone a HOUSE, and the sense of pride and accomplishment that gave them.

The work Carter has done in Africa, helping to eradicate a horrible disease of worms that infiltrate too many areas there, doing horrible damage to the people they infest. Or his work in monitoring elections. Heck, even his recent decision to leave his church of many years because they will not ordain women.

My partner and I have visited the Carter Presidential Library in Atlanta, GA, a beautiful place in a calming and serene environment. I walked through that buildung filled with a sense of awe, seeing what he gave up, and subsequently his wife, when he left his commission as a Naval officer behind to go back to Georgia and help out the family. As I saw photographs marking historic moments, actual papers from events I had read about, or seen on tv. I was in awe as I saw his actual Nobel Peace Prize. And with pride, we have supported the Carter Peace Center for years now with monthly contributions…

(Photo by rachydachy)

But, things have been changed now. It began with some of his statements about Israel. Then President Carter inserted himself into the Primary Campaign, making some unkind remarks about my hero, “>Hillary Clinton. And now this. Being called a racist because I oppose the way by which Obama became President, but even more, because I oppose his policies. When someone calls me a racist, I gotta say (as we do down here in the South, “Them’s fightin’ words.” And so, I have written this letter to send to the Carter Center when my next payment is due:

Dear Carter Center,

Sincerely,
The Rev. Amy

What a sad day, for me personally, but also for this nation, when a former president makes such a grievous, and unfounded, charge against over half of the population. Because we have the audacity to judge the president by his CHARACTER, rather than the color of his skin, as Martin Luther King, Jr., charged us to do, we are called a heinous name. How sad, and how infuriating.

President Carter, as respectfully as I can muster after being called a racist, I would suggest it is time for you to go into retirement, and leave off sharing your political opinions. You are not doing yourself or your legacy any good, to be sure. Even more, you are not doing this nation any good. Rather, you are fanning flames that divide us, not unite us, all to provide cover for a man who, had he been properly vetted in the first place, and had the DNC followed its own rules, would never have gotten this far. Speaking for me only, I am judging Obama on the merits, not the color of his skin. I suggest you do likewise.

In honor of that (in)auspicious occasion, I would like to share this happy little tune with you, one I am sure you will be singing the rest of the day (H/T to NQ writer Ani for this), to celebrate a different kind of Happy Hour:

Now, don’t you just feel better about everything that as been going on for the past 7 months? Make that 17 months? I knew it would. Go have a drink of Kool Aide, and I am sure you WILL feel better in no time!

By the way, Sgt Crowley avoided the rays of Hope and Change emanating from President Obama. He said that they “agreed to disagree.” Hmmm - I wonder if he has some kind of antidote to the Kool Aide? Now THAT would be a study on which I would be willing to have my tax dollars spent, wouldn’t you??

Consider this an Open Thread. Have at it!

By now you’ve heard about the arrest of Henry Gates. But did you hear that Obama, while admitting he didn’t know the facts, said the Police acted “stupidly”. How the hell does he know? He doesn’t even know the facts! Heck, he doesn’t even have the story right. Check out all the stories on memorandum.

Wow, another race card. And Obama said, “I think it’s fair to say any of us would be pretty angry.” Why would ANYONE be angry if someone saw two men trying to bust down a door and called the police? I would be glad neighbors were looking out for my home. WHY why why would that make anyone angry? The police come and you show your ID. End of story.

Sgt. James Crowley was doing his job, responding to a 911 call of a possible B&E and was attacked, called a racist, and now is being told he acted “stupidly” by the President of the United States. By a President who doesn’t even have his facts straight. Witnesses support Crowley.

View this video here.

A woman who was walking past, on her way to work - who lives five miles away - saw the two men breaking in to a home. She called 911 and reported two black men with backpacks trying to force entry into a home. People kept asking why this neighbor didn’t recognize Gates, as if the fault is hers that she didn’t recognize him.

One comment I read, “How much will anyone bet that the so-called “neighbour” is a white person who doesn’t much like this Black guy living in his/her neighbourhood.” Wow, another race card. A woman, 40-year-old Lucia Whalen of Malden, was passing a house on her way to work, saw two men trying to break down the front door and called 911. Now she is racist? She wasn’t a neighbor. She worked nearby and she did see two black men trying to force open a door.

Sgt. James Crowley arrived on the scene and saw Gates inside the front door. The witness was on the sidewalk and was waving and pointing at the home telling the officer the men were in the home.

Crowley approached the front door and asked Gates to step outside. According to the police report, and Gates himself, Gates refused and demanded to know who he was (a fully dressed police officer?) Crowley says he was responding to a call about a possible B&E and Gates responds, “Why, because I’m a black man in America?”

Gates continued to berate the officer, and refused to step outside, nor would he provide ID. He called the officer racist. He threw out “do you know who I am” and “you haven’t heard the last of me”. Gates also picked up the phone, called someone, and demanded to speak to “The Chief” then asked what the Chief’s name is.

Read the entire police report here, and the second report by Carlos Figueroa. (The Boston Globe has scrubbed the police report from their site)

This is the statement issued through Gates’ lawyer.

Gates refused to exit the home, he did not show his ID until he had made a phone call, yelled repeatedly at the officer, and accused him of racism. There were several witnesses, and his story was corroborated in a second police report.

The police officer knew that there were two men, per the 911 call. Crowley was following protocol by asking Gates to step outside. He also asked Gates if there was anyone in the house and Gates told him it was none of his business.

Gates opened up the door at some point, and Crowley entered the house, and Gates then walked into his kitchen where he retrieved his Harvard ID. He continued to insult Crowley and call him a racist.

Gates has now admitted to saying, “Are you not giving me your name and badge number because I’m a black man in America?”

It seems to me he is now creating stories to explain the phrases he was heard yelling, as quoted in the police report. I have listened to witnesses, see photos, and read numerous articles, including his statements, and the police depts.

Can people honestly believe that when the officer asked for Gates to step outside, and for his ID, had Gates obliged and explained the situation he would have been arrested? Seriously? There is no chance that Gates was pissed off at his door being jammed, pissed that the cops showed up, and acted irrational, which led to the arrest?

It’s just automatically racism on the part of the officer? Sounds to me like it is elitism *you don’t know who you’re dealing with!* From everything I have read Gates had major attitude, and pulled the elitism and racism cards. The police have a job to do, and I can’t imagine it does anyone any good to scream at them while trying to do it.

There has been an increase in daytime robberies in Gate’s neighborhood, he should have been thankful they were protecting his home. Not indignant because he was asked for ID.

A 55-year-old neighbor said he witnessed the entire episode - from the squeal of police brakes in the initial response to Gates’ uproar. “The police did their job. He should be thanking them, but they shouldn’t have arrested the guy,” the neighbor added.

Gates brought race into the situation by accusing Crowley of being racist, and by blaming the situation on being a black man in America. Sgt. Crowley was responding to a 911 call. Race had nothing to do with his showing up on Gates’ porch.

Isn’t Gates being the racist by assuming because Crowley is white he is racist?

Gates was not arrested for being in his home. He was arrested for disorderly conduct and refusing to comply with an officer. He wasn’t arrested because he is black, but he sure acted like an ass because the officer was white, and that’s what got him thrown in the slammer.

Bill Carter, the man who snapped a photograph of Gates being led away in handcuffs, said police officers were calm and that Gates was “slightly out of control” and “agitated” when he was arrested.

“The officers around kind of calmed him down,” Carter said. “I heard him yelling — Mr. Gates yelling. I didn’t hear anything that he was saying so I couldn’t say that he was belligerent.”

There was an article on Daily Beast, and the author wrote:

“…tells you that even if a black man is a brilliant, famous, rich, classy, Harvard professor who’s 58 years old, walking with a cane because of hip-replacement surgery, and ensconced in his own Cambridge home during the day, he can still be arrested. That’s because Malcolm X’s 40-year-old quote is still true: “What do you call a black man with a Ph.D.? A nigger.”

Wow, really…? It should tell you that anyone who disobeys police orders/attacks police/breaks the law can be arrested. It shouldn’t matter how rich, affluent or classy someone is. I never argue with police orders, ever.

The Police Dept. dropped the charges, but stands behind the officer, saying he obeyed proper procedure. A statement was released, “All parties agree that this is a just resolution to an unfortunate set of circumstances.”

That wasn’t good enough for Gates, though. He is now demanding an apology and denying he yelled at the officer. Despite what the witnesses say…

Gates said that when he walked outside it was like a cop convention there were so many police outside. Crowley didn’t call for backup until Gates was refusing to comply with his orders, and refusing to show his ID. The way Gates tells it, they were already there. Gee…lawsuit?

Gates said he was arrested because a white cop couldn’t tolerate having an intellectual black man stand up to him.

Gates made it about race and refused to comply with the request of a police officer. Why was Gates “standing up to him”, as he stated he was?

Why was he so pissed a policeman was asking for ID because of a call about a potential break in? Why was he so pissed that the policeman was responding to a potential B&E call that he would demand his name and ID? What had Crowley done that made Gates demand that information?

He couldn’t reply “Hello officer, yes I am the owner, I have been out of town, and my door was stuck. Here is my ID, and Harvard ID. Thank you for responding so quickly and keeping an eye on our neighborhood.”

(BTW, the door was stuck because Gates thinks that someone tried to break in while he was in China.)

“Because of the capricious whim of one disturbed person . . . I am now a black man with a prison record,” Gates said. “You can look at my mug shot on the Internet.”

Because of the actions of Gates, Crowley, “…a highly respected veteran supervisor with a distinguished record in the Cambridge Police Department,’’ is having to defend himself against charges of racism by Gates, and charges of stupidity by Obama.

“His actions at the scene of this matter were consistent with his training, with the informed policies and practices of the Department, and with applicable legal standards.’’ said the Cambridge Police Superior Officers Association.

Michael Graham from Boston Herald wrote:

Colorblind test failed … by Gates with his racial profiling of the white cop.

The Gates who greeted Crowley was a racist. And I know, because the professor said so himself.

By his own admission, Gates didn’t just blame the incident on the fact that he is “a black man.” He also added the accusatory question, “Are you doing this because you’re a white police officer?”

According to an eyewitness quoted in the Herald yesterday, when police asked him for ID, Gates started yelling, “I’m a Harvard professor . . . You believe white women over black men.”

From the Boston Herald, we learn that Crowley comes from a family of police officers:

Verina Crowley said James is the third of her four sons, all in law enforcement. Two brothers, Jack and Joseph, also work for the Cambridge police. The fourth, Daniel, is a Middlesex County deputy sheriff.

Verina Crowley said her sons were raised mostly in the Fresh Pond neighborhood where she still lives, attended racially diverse Cambridge public schools, and graduated from Cambridge Rindge and Latin High School, where she worked for 26 years.

“He is not a racist,’’ she said in the hallway of her home. And Gates “is not the first black person he ever met in his life.’’

“…it was not the first time he had a memorable encounter in the line of duty with a prominent black man. Nearly 16 years ago, as a Brandeis University police officer, Crowley desperately tried to save the life of Reggie Lewis after the Boston Celtics star collapsed while practicing in the school gym.

“It bothers him terribly that he couldn’t save him,’’ Crowley’s 74-year-old mother, Verina Crowley, said yesterday, speaking of her son and the famous basketball player.

This isn’t the first time Crowley has been accused of racism though:

Yesterday, as President Obama condemned the Cambridge Police Department during a prime-time White House news conference and Crowley steadfastly refused to issue the apology that Gates has sought, a fuller picture began to emerge of the 42-year-old sergeant who arrested the Harvard scholar last week on a charge of disorderly conduct on the porch of Gates’s Cambridge house.

Crowley was a certified emergency medical technician when he performed cardiopulmonary resuscitation on Lewis, to no avail, after the player’s heart stopped on July 27, 1993. In a Globe interview later that day, Crowley said he rushed to the university’s Shapiro Gymnasium, confirmed that Lewis had no pulse, and frantically tried to revive him.

“I just kept on going,’’ he said. “I just kept thinking, ‘Don’t let him die - just don’t die.’ ’’

The Cambridge cop prominent Harvard University professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. claims is a racist gave a dying Reggie Lewis mouth-to-mouth resuscitation in a desperate bid to save the Celtics superstar’s life 16 years ago Monday.

“I wasn’t working on Reggie Lewis the basketball star. I wasn’t working on a black man. I was working on another human being,” Sgt. James Crowley, in an exclusive interview with the Herald, said of the forward’s fatal heart attack July 27, 1993, at age 27 during an off-season practice at Brandeis University, where Crowley was a campus police officer.

It’s a date Crowley still can recite by rote - and he still recalls the pain he suffered when people back then questioned whether he had done enough to save the black athlete.

“Some people were saying ‘There’s the guy who killed Reggie Lewis’ afterward. I was broken-hearted. I cried for many nights,” he said.

Now, 16 years later, he is accused of racism by Gates, one of the foremost scholars on race in America.

And accused of stupidity by the President of the United States. Just for trying to do his job.

Perhaps Gates shouldn’t have been arrested for his rude behavior and his abusive tone and disorderly conduct - at this point I don’t know how disorderly he was. But Crowley shouldn’t have been abused and called a racist for doing his job. Gates created the situation, he elevated the situation, and he was in the wrong. People are arrested all the time for disobeying police orders. You just don’t do it. I don’t care who you are.

Gates is obviously a very learned man, very intelligent, and a very genteel man. He has lived almost 60 years, is very, very successful, and has never had any problems with the law before. He has won numerous awards, and recognitions, and lives in a very nice community in Harvard. But that does not give him the right to accuse someone of being racist, just for doing their job. Especially when he admits to throwing around the race card. That also doesn’t mean they aren’t capable of acting irrational. (Remember Grannie getting tasered in the above video?)

I think Gates needs to man up and admit he was out of line, and I think both he and Obama owe Sgt. James Crowley an apology. I can’t believe Obama would take a dirty shot at our Police Officers like that, especially not knowing the facts. Officers that put their lives on the line every day to protect and serve.

Crowley replied on how he felt about Obama’s comments:

A white police sergeant who arrested renowned black scholar Henry Louis Gates Jr. says he’s disappointed President Barack Obama said police acted “stupidly” without knowing all the facts.

In an interview on WEEI on Thursday morning, Crowley said it was “disappointing that he waded into what should be a local issue.”

And btw, when Obama said that if he were trying to break into the White house he’d “be shot” mean that he thinks the Secret Service and DC police are racist? I kind of think anyone trying to break into “his house” would be arrested or shot.

So, there WERE African Americans and Hispanics who passed the exam, too, something previously unreported. As Mr. Ricci said, the press did NOT do its job, accepting as fact the city of New Haven’s talking points. Wow - what a HUGE surprise - the press not engaging in fact checking. Again! Shocking. Ahem.

I thought this was an interesting interview. Congratulations to all of the firefighters who worked so hard to pass their tests (Ricci was not the only one who sacrificed studying for the exam - it sounds like EVERYONE sacrifices for these extra classes and tests). Here’s hoping you all get the positions, and back pay, you worked so hard to achieve.

I am SHOCKED that Obots would use the race card! I am stunned they’d thuggishly try to take over an event. Well, there was that ONE time during the caucuses, but they were just excited! They’d never undermine us! Would they? (The spokepersons’ confidence is inspiring, but I hope they aren’t naive or unaware of how insidious, vicious and amoral the ACORN and HuffPo groups are, and are highly vigilant.)

The national site for the April 15th event, to locate events in your area, is “Tax Day Tea Party.” My friend, GOPMom, sent a press release for her Boston event, with great graphics!

Boston Tax Day Tea Party Protest to be held at MA State House

On Wednesday, April 15th, concerned citizens will gather on the steps of the Massachusetts State House in Boston to protest government policies of reckless spending and punitive taxation.

Boston, Massachusetts April 8, 2009 – Inspired by the growing Tea Party movement sweeping the nation, organizers have scheduled a Tax Day Tea Party to take place at the Massachusetts State House on Wednesday, April 15th from 12:00 pm – 3:00 pm. The protest will feature speakers from Massachusetts’ grassroots, business and conservative leadership, welcoming over 1,500 followers who have committed to attending to voice their displeasure with the egregious growth of government and the irresponsible policies our local, state and federal governments are pursuing. Speakers, led by emcee Todd Feinburg of WRKO-AM 680, will take to the steps at 12:00 PM, offering their opinions and suggestions as to how to best deal with the recession and the government’s role therein.

The goal of the organizers of the protest has always been to provide a platform for citizens and grassroots leaders to come together in hopes of inspiring participation in the conservative movement, with a focus on recruiting conservative candidates for the 2010 elections. Carla Howell, Committee for Small Government, State Senator Bob Hedlund, R-MA, Jim Stergios, Executive Director of the Pioneer Institute, Michael Johns, conservative leader and writer, David Tuerck, Executive Director of the Beacon Hill Institute, Brad Marston, ConservativeSolutions.org, Chip Faulkner, Associate Director of Citizens of Limited Taxation, Shawni Littlehale of Smart Girl Politics, Barry Hinckley, MA State Director of FairTax.org and Sheridan Folger of Sovereignty Alliance will all speak.

Organized by three conservative women of varying political affiliations and backgrounds - a college student, a recent law school graduate and a stay-home mom - this protest has grown from 300 Facebook members to over 1,500 online members on various web pages on the internet. While the organizers have not received funds for any organization or political party, they have managed to coordinate volunteers, recruit speakers and secure permits from the city to hold the event in conjunction with over 300 protests being held nationwide on Tax Day, April 15th.

More info available at GOPMom’s Boston Tea Party site.

Would it help if arugula grew out of his head? Me thinks Walgreens needs to change their name to Walyellas.

Seriously? This is racist? People are bothered by this? (note: these are rhetorical questions…)

Well, I know one shop I won’t be shopping at the next time I visit my mom.

A US Cardinal and several Bishops denounce the University of Notre Dame for inviting Barack Obama to deliver a speech at their commencement ceremonies. They are also pissed off about the Honorary Law Degree to be given to Barack “God Damn AmeriKKKa” Obama. A lot of Catholics are pissed of too, and over 210,000 of them signed a petition denouncing University of Notre Dame. For the Bishops, Cardinals and many Catholics the problem is Obama’s stance on LIFE:

US Cardinal DiNardo, Archbishop of Galveston-Houston:

“Though I can understand the desire by a university to have the prestige of a commencement address by the President of the United States, the fundamental moral issue of the inestimable worth of the human person from conception to natural death is a principle that soaks all our lives as Catholics, and all our efforts at formation, especially education at Catholic places of higher learning.”

Texas Bishop Gregory Aymond of Austin:

“it is very clear that in this case the University of Notre Dame does not live up to its Catholic identity in giving this award and their leadership needs our prayerful support.”

Indiana Bishop John D’Arcy of Fort Wayne-South Bend:

This will be the 25th Notre Dame graduation during my time as bishop. After much prayer, I have decided not to attend the graduation. I wish no disrespect to our president, I pray for him and wish him well. I have always revered the Office of the Presidency. But a bishop must teach the Catholic faith “in season and out of season,” and he teaches not only by his words — but by his actions.

My decision is not an attack on anyone, but is in defense of the truth about human life.

Arizona Bishop Thomas Olmsted of Phoenix:

“I am saddened and heavy of heart about your decision to invite President Obama to speak at Notre Dame University and even to receive an honorary degree,” began Bishop Olmsted.

But the prelate went further, charging that Fr. John Jenkins, the university’s president, has committed “a public act of disobedience to the Bishops of the United States” by inviting Obama to the May 17 Commencement.

These are fighting words. But the Cardinal and the Bishops miss the point. It’s not just life that is the issue here. It is also about fake Catholic Father Pfleger. Allowing Obama to speak at Notre Dame grants this trash credibility:

Cardinal DiNardo needs to reread his statement.

Particularly troubling is the Honorary Law Degree since it recognizes that the person is a ‘Teacher,’ in this case of the Law. I think that this decision requires charitable but vigorous critique.

Obama’s more than a teacher of law and of abortion. Friends with Father Pfleger, who Obama called a friend and an advisor, Obama is a teacher of hate.

The 2004 Sun-Times article noted that “friends and advisers” such as Pfleger, “who has known Obama for the better part of 20 years, help him keep his (moral) compass, he (Obama) says.” Based on Pfleger’s remarks, either he or Obama, or both, have, uh, lost their bearings.

Pfleger has had a working relationship with Obama since the late 1980s. As noted, he was one of Obama’s spiritual mentors. Between 1995 and 2001, Pfleger contributed a total of $1,500 to Obama’s various political campaigns.

Giving Obama a free degree and letting him speak is to accept the hate of Father Pfleger, who mentored Barack Obama. I am sure all those rich white Irish, Italian, Polish and Lithuanian kids from the suburbs of Chicago who work hard to pay money to attend the Catholic college mommy and daddy attended will want to sit and listen to a guy whose mentor said all white people are responsible for slavery and racism. I am sure all those rich white Catholics who will get a job in daddy’s business or with daddy’s friends from the old parish want to hear a man whose mentor said all of them are responsible for white privilege. I don’t think people go to a Notre Dame graduation to be told they are all white people who feel entitled.

That is what Notre Dame wants. Not just God Damn AmeriKKKa but also BLAME WHITEY and HATE WHITEY. Inviting Barack Obama to speak is inviting Father Pfleger and Reverend Wright to Notre Dame. Not a good move.

This is more about life. This is about ignorance and hate. The Cardinals and Bishops need to wrap their heads around that. If they don’t say anything about Obama and Pfleger, we’ll just assume the Cardinals and Bishops and the whole Catholic Church agrees with Pfleger and Obama and the God Damn AmeriKKKa Church both of them went to. That’s not the direction I think Catholics and Notre Dame want to go.

Here is how the AAPOR defines the Bradley effect on page 53 of the report:

the tendency for respondents to report a preference for a black candidate (Obama) but vote instead for a white opponent.

And here is what their extensive and rigorous report found (pages 53-54):

Several compelling pieces of evidence suggest that the New Hampshire estimation errors were probably not caused by the “Bradley effect” – or the tendency for respondents to report a preference for a black candidate (Obama) but vote instead for a white opponent. A meta-analysis by Hopkins (2008) indicates that while the Bradley effect did undermine some state-level polls in previous decades, there is no evidence for such an effect in recent years. In the 2008 general election, the very accurate final poll estimates of Barack Obama’s fairly decisive victory over John McCain dispelled suspicion that the Bradley effect was at play during the final weeks of the fall contest. There is also a conspicuous lack of evidence for a Bradley effect in the primary contests outside of New Hampshire. Of the 81 polls conducted during the final 30 days of the Iowa, South Carolina, California, and Wisconsin contests, the vast majority (86%) over-estimated Clinton’s relative vote share, while just 14% over-estimated Obama’s relative vote share. This finding is based on the signed direction of A for each survey.26 Furthermore, as reported in Table 3, poll estimates of Obama’s vote share in New Hampshire were quite accurate – it was only Clinton’s share that was consistently underestimated.

Here is Table 3 (page 14):

In poll after poll Hillary Cinton’s support was undersampled while Obama’s support was correctly sampled. It was not that her supporters lied to pollsters; they were simply not contacted.

Pollster.com offers this summary of the report:

• Given the compressed caucus and primary calendar, polls conducted before the New Hampshire primary may have ended too early to capture late shifts in the electorate’s preferences there.
• Most commercial polling firms conducted interviews on the first or second call, but respondents who required more effort to contact were more likely to support Senator Clinton. Instead of continuing to call their initial samples to reach these hard‐to‐contact people, pollsters typically added new households to the sample, skewing the results toward the opinions of those who were easy to reach on the phone, and who more typically supported Senator Obama.
• Non‐response patterns, identified by comparing characteristics of the pre‐election samples with the exit poll samples, suggest that some groups who supported Senator Clinton–such as union members and those with less education–were under‐ represented in pre‐election polls, possibly because they were more difficult to reach.
• Variations in likely voter models could explain some of the estimation problems in individual polls. Application of the Gallup likely larger error than was present in the unadjusted data. The influx of first-time voters may have had adverse effects on likely voter models.

Hillary’s base of women, blue collar workers, union members, single mothers and the elderly were simply too difficult to contact, while young Obama supporters were always available by telephone. It was not racism or the Bradley Effect that enabled Hillary to win New Hampshire; it was that the pollsters never spoke to her base.

But the media and the Obama campaign had to accuse New Hampshire Democratic Primary voters of racism in order to minimize Hillary’s victory and racialize the race before the South Carolina primary, where the majority of Democratic voters are African-American.

Here is Mickey Kaus of Slate on January 9, 2008:

1. Bradley Effect: It seemed like a nice wonky little point when Polipundit speculated on the Reverse Bradley Effect–the idea that Iowa’s public caucuses led Dem voters to demonstrate their lack of prejudice by caucusing for Obama. Now this is the CW of the hour. Polipundit wrote:

I suspect that Obama may have scored better than he would have in a secret-ballot election, and benefited from a Reverse Bradley Effect.

New Hampshire, of course, is a secret ballot election. Voters might have told pollsters one thing but done another in private.** New Hampshirites I ran into Tuesday night mentioned that the state was very late ratifying the MLK Holiday.

Here is Andrew Kohut in the New York Times on January 10, 2008:

To my mind all these factors deserve further study. But another possible explanation cannot be ignored — the longstanding pattern of pre-election polls overstating support for black candidates among white voters, particularly white voters who are poor.…

Poorer, less well-educated white people refuse surveys more often than affluent, better-educated whites. Polls generally adjust their samples for this tendency. But here’s the problem: these whites who do not respond to surveys tend to have more unfavorable views of blacks than respondents who do the interviews….

In New Hampshire, the ballots are still warm, so it’s hard to pinpoint the exact cause for the primary poll flop. But given the dearth of obvious explanations, serious consideration has to be given to the difficulties that race and class present to survey methodology.

Here is David Kuo of the Huffington Post as votes were counted during the New Hampshire Primary:

Tonight, despite all the talk of how little race matters in this campaign, it is clear that race is still a big deal in bi-racial campaigns. And it has showed up for the first time, in a measurable way, in the 2008 presidential race.

It means that every poll — from exit polls to tracking polls — are absolutely suspect from here on out.

Here are excerpts from MSNBC on the night of the New Hampshire Primary:

ROBINSON: Well, I‘ll tell you what some people will suspect. Here you have polls, you know, the day before the primary showing Obama way ahead. And he finishes, you know, 15 points lower than that. A lot of people will suspect a “Bradley effect.”

You know, Tom Bradley…

SCARBOROUGH: Oh, Tom Bradley. You‘re…

(CROSSTALK)

ROBINSON: Not the Bill Bradley effect. We were talking about Bill Bradley‘s endorsement being, you know, not necessarily the greatest thing. I‘m talking about Tom Bradley, the mayor—African-American mayor of Los Angeles years ago, ran for governor of California. Polls showed him on election eve that he was going to cruise to victory and he lost. And Doug Wilder of—the first…

SCARBOROUGH: Wait, wait, wait, but are you really saying right now that the people of New Hampshire may have—I won‘t say, be racist, but are you saying that they did not want to go in that booth and vote for a black man? …

BRIAN WILLIAMS, NBC ANCHOR: I was just going to say, I‘ve been listening to the panel. Number one, the “Bradley effect,” whether people are going to decide it was in effect in this case is very real and talked about among people in the political business. Let‘s not forget the Gantt race in North Carolina few years ago.…

CHUCK TODD, NBC NEWS POLITICAL DIRECTOR: Well, look, you can only go back—you know, and I go back in recent history and you try to find races where you had these gigantic poll shifts, where the final pre-election polls differed so dramatically from the actual result.

And the one thing they all have in common is something that Eugene Robinson brought up earlier, and that is race.

It was Tom Bradley in California governor‘s race in 1982. The polls had him ahead—ahead by a fairly healthy margin over George Deukmejian. He ended up losing.

And Virginia governor, 1989, Doug Wilder had a double digit lead going into the final—in the final weekend. He won by a very narrow 1 point margin.

Harvey Gant, the 1990 Senate race with Jesse Helms—one of the most divisive races, frankly, that this country had on race. That was, again, pre-election polls had Gant ahead, Helms wins.

So you can‘t help but look at that—and particularly you‘ve got to wonder what this sends—the message that this could send to African-American Democrats, who may look at this and say, well, of course, that‘s what happened. You know, a lot of times when I‘ve noticed this and when you talk to African-American Democrats, they sat here and they‘ll see this race stuff a lot quicker than us in white America. And I think that this is—it‘s at least, you‘ve got to explore it. You‘ve got to look at it. History has taught us this—recent history—when it‘s come to dealing with African-American candidates.

Here is Carol Costello, Andrew Kohut and Professor Charles Ogletree on CNN’s Situation Room on January 11, 2008:

I’m Wolf Blitzer.

You’re in THE SITUATION ROOM.

Is the U.S. ready for an African-American president?

Senator Barack Obama’s strong showing so far in this campaign has many saying absolutely, yes. Others, though, say it’s too soon to tell.

Carol Costello has been looking into this story for us — you’ve been talking to a lot of people supposedly knowledgeable on this very sensitive subject.

What are they telling you?

COSTELLO: Well, it is a sensitive subject, isn’t it?

You know, most I talked with today say it is too soon to tell.

Obama seems to have transcended race, but can he in the long run?

Already, critics say Obama’s opponents are trying to create this subtle narrative of racial division. They deny it, but it illustrates how hard it is in this country to take race out of the equation.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

COSTELLO (voice-over): The Iowa caucus created all kinds of excitement surrounding Barack Obama. His win in a predominantly white state and a strong showing in another seemingly proves it — Obama can transcend race. It’s something Obama has always believed could happen.

SEN. BARACK OBAMA (D), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: If I have your support, if I have your energy and involvement and commitment and ideas, then I am here to tell you yes, we can in ‘08.

COSTELLO: Maybe. But there are those who feel while Iowa and New Hampshire prove Obama can certainly get white votes, it doesn’t mean he can continue the trend — that Obama’s second place finish in New Hampshire, despite polls that had him coming in first, illustrates the undercurrent about race that exists in this country.

Andrew Kohut, in charge of Pew Research, has a theory. He says many of those inclined to vote for Hillary Clinton in New Hampshire were poor, uneducated whites who don’t participate in polls and who often don’t vote for blacks.

ANDREW KOHUT, PRES., PEW RESEARCH CTR.: At least race should be considered because we know that the kinds of people drawn to Mrs. Clinton are always the kinds of people who turn down surveys at pretty high rates. We don’t know much about whether the people who we don’t get are like the people that we do get.

COSTELLO: Polls about race are notoriously difficult to analyze. Take this ABC/Washington Post poll conducted before the Iowa caucus. A whopping 88 percent of Americans said race would not matter in choosing a president. But pollsters say you have to take this result with a grain of salt. Few people are willing to tell a pollster they’re racist. It reflects the Bradley effect, after Tom Bradley, a black man who ran for governor in California in 1982. Most polls showed him leading but he lost to a white male candidate.

PROF. CHARLES OGLETREE, HARVARD LAW SCHOOL: Ask Tom Bradley when he ran for governor in California. Black man, thought he could win, he didn’t. Ask Harvey Gant in North Carolina. Ask Harold Ford, Jr.

COSTELLO: Look at the stats. There is one black governor in the United States. They are nine women governors. They are 16 senators who are women. And one black man, Barack Obama.

Still, Barack Obama got plenty of votes in New Hampshire and in Iowa, which are both 95 percent white.

You could say that trumps the poll, but there are many more people yet to vote and racial under currents that are so hard to predict.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

And here is the Obama campaign as discussed in an article by Ryan Lizza in the January 21, 2008, edition of the New Yorker:

Did Obama experience a similar fate in New Hampshire? The evidence is murky, but his campaign believes the question is important enough to warrant study. When I asked a senior Obama adviser whether the Bradley effect was a possible explanation for the gap between the final poll numbers, which showed Obama leading by an average of eight points, and the ultimate outcome, he replied, “Definitely.” He added, “If so, then the question is: what’s different between Iowa and New Hampshire? It could be that the socially acceptable thing in front of your neighbor at a caucus could be different than what you do in a secret ballot. Obviously, that’s something we’re going to be trying to figure out as we go forward, primarily through polling. I know people are working on ways of asking questions about getting at people’s attitudes about race. We’re working on this.”

In other words, the Obama campaign cited the Bradley Effect in order to explain a loss, and the sycophantic media repeated the notion again and again and again. Apparently they received the memo from David Axelrod as votes were counted in New Hampshire. Too bad real analysis reveals that the Bradley Effect had no impact on the New Hampshire Primary.

Will CNN apologize? Will MSNBC apologize? Will the New York Times apologize? Will Slate apologize? And is it not a coincidence that after the Obama campaign decided race was the reason he lost the NH primary that the Clintons were accused of racism by the Obama campaign during the South Carolina primary? All of it was debunked in the report released today by the AAPOR. Will Obama and Axelrod apologize to Hillary and Bill Clinton?

I doubt anyone will apologize, for no one in the Obama administration or in the Obamamedia cares about facts. But at least all of us know that those of us who voted for Hillary during the New Hampshire primary and during the other primaries are not racist. Will they apologize to us?

Consider, for example, that The One promised a new way of doing business in Washington but is responsible for managing the vetting of prospective nominees that green-lights not one but three tax cheats. Instead of showing them the door and finding someone smart enough to know that, if they make more than $200,000, they ought to hire an accountant, Barack signs off on their nominations. (Maybe it is okay to not pay taxes and hold public office in Chicago).

It is only when the press gets wind of the facts that Barack and his team realize they have a problem. Sorry, this is not a “new way of doing business in Washington.” It is the same damn thing.

Barack and his team are acting like every other politician who has taken up residence in the White House–they initially decided to look the other way and excuse the inexcusable. While I credit Barack for admitting his mistake, it is a mistake he should not have made. Unfortunately, it appears that this is not an isolated event.

Victor Davis Hanson, in his typically understated fashion, offers up a list of warning signs and lays part of the blame laser-focused on the lap of the media for abetting the disastrous choice of the American people, so desperate for a “savior” from the Republican disaster, that they bet it all on a naive political neophyte:

Some of us have been warning that it was not healthy for the U.S. media to have deified rather than questioned Obama, especially given that they tore apart Bush, ridiculed Palin, and caricatured Hillary. And now we can see the results of their two years of advocacy rather than scrutiny.

The proof is so obvious:

No matter his protestations that he alone made the decision, it’s clear that former Senator Tom Daschle was summarily dumped, and Steve Clemons hints that Rahm Emanuel had a hand in it (”Many of Daschle’s camp are quite furious with Obama’s chief of staff.”) Clemons also argues that, in typical Democrats’ fashion, they gave up the fight long before they needed to.

General Anthony Zinni, who was already preparing for his departure to Iraq as its new ambassador, is left hanging by the White House. The puzzled general finally called up Gen. Jones, Obama’s National Security Advisor, and “was told that Christopher Hill, the outgoing assistant secretary of State for East Asia, was getting the job.” [SEE ALSO: Laura Rozen's "General Zinni gets undiplomatic treatment from Obama team" and related Memeorandum-listed stories.]

Gen. Zinni said no explanation was given. “That kind of bothered me,” he said. “I was told that I had it.”

What the hell? And now we have more distressing news coming out on Obama’s nominee to head Commerce, Sen. Judd Gregg.

The arch-conservative New Hampshire senator, as I wrote yesterday about a report in CQ Politics, “voted in favor of abolishing the agency as a member of the Budget Committee and on the Senate floor in 1995.”

Now we find out, via Time’s Mark Halperin, that Gregg had “ties to the disgraced lobbyist” Jack Abramoff. The White House is sloughing off the problem, even though Halperin points out that “a former legislative aide [of Gregg] is allegedly ‘Staffer F’ cited in a guilty plea last week by a former Abramoff deputy.”

The left hand is clearly not in touch with the right hand.

How did General Jones know that General Zinni was not the choice for Ambassador to Iraq, yet no one in the White House disabused Gen. Zinni of his justified assumption that he had the job?

How did no one in the White House and the very large vetting staff not clear Daschle’s tax problems and his relationships to for-profit health care companies?

How did no one in the White House not know that Gregg had voted to demolish the agency that he’s now been picked to oversee? Or that he has ties to Jack Abramoff?

Larry Johnson made a great point last night in his story, for which he took some heat, “Let’s Give Barack Credit“:

Did you catch Barack telling CNN’s Anderson Cooper, “I screwed up.” Damn, is that refreshing. After eight years of George Bush never admitting to any mistakes (even though they were numerous and glaring) it does appear that President Obama may be serious about this change thing.

However, the sole thing that matters after you admit you made a mistake is if you change your OWN behavior and that of your staff.

It’s disturbing to read Steve Clemons’ report about (1) the ease with which Democrats concede defeat and (2) the behavior of Rahm Emanuel, the man on whom Obama must most depend:

Obama seems to be replicating the pattern — conceding defeat on Tom Daschle, one of the people most responsible for actually creating the Obama political machine — and on the very same day yielding a senior cabinet position at the Department of Commerce not to a leading business official or Democratic Congressman or Governor — but rather giving it to Judd Gregg who voted 14 years ago to abolish the Commerce Department.

People will be parsing for some time Tom Daschle’s missteps with his taxes, and why he wasn’t vetted more by the Obama team, and whether Rahm Emanuel was part of the game knifing Daschle from behind, and what the political upper crust in Washington sees as “normal” when they leave office — but mostly, this was about the opposing team taking down one of Obama’s most important chess pieces.

This was all about Obama, about humbling him, about dividing progressives over whether to support or oppose Daschle.

What we see are two interesting things. First, we see that the divisions between the political franchises inside the Obama camp are fraught with tension and anger now. Many of Daschle’s camp are quite furious with Obama’s chief of staff.

Yes, Obama has been humbled. Perhaps. If he’s learned.

But the news about the “tension and anger” within the Obama camp is disturbing. For that to be cured, a strong and experienced leader is needed, and is Obama up to the job?

And if he isn’t, is his staff? Hell, his press office can’t even get out their daily press briefing videos and transcripts. You try to get one promptly, and you’ll see what I mean. (Meanwhile, over at State, Hillary’s press staff, like clockwork, posts the daily press briefing video and the transcript with lightning speed.) Victor Davis Hanson declares Robert Gibbs a “nightmare”:

Gibbs as press secretary is a Scott McClellan nightmare that won’t go away, given his long McClellan-like relationship with Obama (McClellan should have been fired on day hour one on the job). Blaming Fox News for Obama’s calamities is McClellan to the core and doesn’t work. He already reminds me of Reverend Wright’s undoing at the National Press Club—and he will get worse.

And the Columbia Journalism Review’s blog, Campaign Desk is as skeptical about Obama’s press office as I am:

Who’s Undercutting Obama?
For the moment, at least, it’s his press office

[...]

While it is too early to judge just how this will work out, the early signs are troubling. And interviews with a dozen Washington reporters indicate that the Obama press operation tends to embrace friendly questions, while treating skeptical questions as not worth their time or, worse, as coming from an enemy. [...]

Questions about whether Shapiro [a White House press office staffer] knows the difference between off-the-record, background, deep background, and on-the-record did not get asked, because Shapiro made it clear he had no interest in answering anything about how the Obama press secretary’s office is operating and what its tone will be. He said questions should be submitted in writing by e-mail to nshapiro@who.eop.gov. I sent Shapiro an e-mail outlining the contours of what would be covered in an interview, but have not received a response as of this writing, the following day.

Shapiro did say that there are press office numbers to call beside 202-456-2580, which has been the main White House press office number for decades. “You should have used one of them,” he said.

And those numbers are? Shapiro said these numbers would be made public soon. (Thoughts of the illogic made famous by Kafka, Catch-22, and Lewis Carroll’s King of Hearts come to mind here.) But there is more to this than just the answering, or not answering, of telephones and questions. [...]

The Obama administration is also editing briefing transcripts. So far it posts only snippets of some White House briefings at whitehouse.gov. Shapiro promised that would be corrected soon.

Politicians make choices and have to live with them. How they deal with journalists—especially whether they are candid and direct about dealing in facts—sets a tone that will influence the administration’s ability to communicate its messages, especially those Obama messages that run counter to deeply ingrained cultural myths about the economy, taxes, and the role of government. … [Read all -- it's worth it.]

Victor Davis Hanson has a litany of Obama’s failures.

One which struck me was Obama’s utter naivete in expecting the Republicans, over a series of luncheons, cocktail parties and Superbowl chips and dips, to warm to him — to find him inescapably charming and the answer to their prayers too. But these grizzled GOP veterans know far too much about D.C., about legislation, and about how to manipulate the malleable Democrats to ever be “touched” by the Obamatopia that sadly overcame millions of dreamy-headed Americans.

Obama seems to be the kind of guy who loves the campaign, the chase, the hunt, and the all-glorious win. But he is most definitely NOT the kind of guy who likes the day-to-day tough drudgery and decision-making.

Like many of his adoring fans at Daily Kos, he wants what he wants when he wants it. The hard work part of governing — the grinding job of building longterm alliances and forging sensible compromises and the long hours involved in accomplishing all of that, just do not appeal to these people. They want to snap their fingers, and have what they want.

I have never seen in Obama the capacity for that kind of work. I still do not.

I think that that is one reason that Obama made the disastrous decision to let Nancy Pelosi and David Obey control the writing of the stimulus packaging bill. That bill should have been closely overseen and scrutinized in the White House, and have received the most cold-hearted “due diligence” possible.

But Obama and team did not want to do that hard work. They thought they could pass off the job to Nancy and crew, a truly frightening decision given Nancy’s penchant for pet far-left projects that drew immediate criticisms from so many that the Republicans voted a unanimous NAY and even 11 Democrats in conservative districts also had to vote NAY in order to keep their seats.

Now, we have a mess of a stimulus plan that is so bad that Obama is not likely, at present, to even bring in the few Republicans he needs for the bill to pass the Senate. Even reliable types like Olympia Snow are rejecting the bill in its present form. She has directly asked Obama to remove the unnecessary and pork-driven parts of the bill; he’s said he did, but he has not. And she knows it.

And, while they fiddle, and Obama doesn’t do the hard work necessary, the American people — and the world’s people — are left with a worsening recession and increasing joblessness and worsening opportunities for small-, medium-, and large-sized businesses of all types.

You’ll have to read Victor David Hansen’s article in full, but here’s the closing:

This is quite serious. I can’t recall a similarly disastrous start in a half-century (far worse than Bill Clinton’s initial slips). Obama immediately must lower the hope-and-change rhetoric, ignore Reid/Pelosi, drop the therapy, and accept the tragic view that the world abroad is not misunderstood but quite dangerous. And he must listen on foreign policy to his National Security Advisor, Billary, and the Secretary of Defense. If he doesn’t quit the messianic style and perpetual campaign mode, and begin humbly governing, then he will devolve into Carterism—angry that the once-fawning press betrayed him while we the people, due to our American malaise, are to blame.

Have we anointed a messiah who sinks the minute he’s put out on the water? Have we hired a weatherman who can’t tell which way the wind is blowing? Have we chosen an orator who can only parrot the words of hired scribes, but lacks the depth of experience to understand the peril that lies before us? When I look at Barack I fear I am seeing a younger, but equally feckless clone of Jimmy Carter.

Perhaps this explains why he ended up in an elementary school. The naive, joyous laughter of schoolchildren provided a welcomed escape from the burdens of poor decision making.

No Quarter Radio Presents: Sins of Omission with Paulie Abeles Monday nights, 9-10 p.m. ET On BlogTalkRadio January 26, 2009 guest: Rev. Marcia Dyson Active Supporter, Hillary Clinton

UPDATE: THE CHAT ROOM IS OPEN!

Until I did a lot of digging, I had NO idea how indebted all of us — you and me who supported Hillary Clinton — are to tonight’s special guest on Paulie Abeles’ radio show.

Let’s all call in at (347) 677-0792 and thank Rev. Marcia Dyson for her tremendous work during the primaries, and for all the time, money and travel she put in to help Hillary across the nation.

Then there’s our terrific new host, Paulie, who worked non-stop for Hillary in the primaries, despite having small children at home and a career. Both women have great stories to tell us. Marcia, for one, was on the ground in Texas during that insane two-step primary process, and she fought to get votes for Hillary in tough states like South Carolina, starting back in November 2007.

Sure, during the primaries, I saw Rev. Marcia Dyson on television many times during the epic battles of the Democratic state primaries, including on Larry King Live and other national news outlets. Most of the time, at least on television, she was alongside her equally famous husband, Michael Dyson, an avid Obama supporter.

But, until I did a lot of digging, I had no idea just how much on-the-ground WORK that Rev. Dyson put in to Hillary’s primary campaigns. Rev. Dyson was in so many states — key states, from Texas to South Carolina — urging voters to back Hillary. Here’s a marvelous article written by Dr. Dyson in March 2008:

A House Divided: Marcia Dyson - Hillary Clinton supporter & Michael Eric Dyson - Barack Obama supporter

I am tired of trying to explain this to my husband, so I’ll explain it to you instead. …

I have been an advocate for the civil rights of African Americans since back when we were called Negroes. Growing up during the 50s and 60s in Chicago, I was well aware of the fault lines of bigotry that blocked me from entering certain neighborhoods, classrooms or stores.

As an adult, I have championed [every black cause]. [...]

So given my personal track record, I astounded myself when I realized that the person that I would travel the country campaigning for — the person I trusted to work on behalf of African American children in need of Head Start programs, for people of color whose uninsured illnesses were left untreated, for single moms and working women who are treated as second class citizens with less pay for equal work than all my brothers of varied hue, and for minorities whose communities are targets of environmental racism — was NOT black! Not a Negro!

Yes, this phenomenal black woman is standing beside the phenomenal white woman – Hillary Clinton. For this moment in HERSTORY, I will let this capable, more than qualified, compassionate and intellectual white woman clean up a white man’s mess.

You’ll want to read the full story. Well, before we move on, I just have to include this great ending from “A House Divided”:

But when Michael presses me on my support of Hillary, I tell him what I’ll tell anybody – especially as we head into the March 4th primaries. This is, after all, Women’s History Month. After 150 years, it’s time to change the punctuation mark of Sojourner Truth’s famed line, “Ain’t I a Woman?” from a question mark to an exclamation point: “Ain’t I a Woman!!!”

Yes, Hillary, you are! The WOMAN for the job of president of these here United States. What Obama has us hoping for, Hillary is ready to deliver. And for the first time in American HISTORY “ladies first.”

Here are more great moments in Rev. Marcia Dyson’s activist work on behalf of her candidate, Hillary Clinton:

In Texas, on March 3, 2008, Rev. Dyson and Erika Alexander, at the Hillary Clinton Texas Town Hall in Austin, urged Hillary Clinton’s supporters to turn out for the full Texas “two-step”:

Then there’s her interview with Roland Martin on his radio show, proof that she was willing to go anywhere to let the word out about Hillary:

On CNN’s Larry King Live, with her husband, Marcia Dyson said:

M. DYSON: … I think that Carole is right on it, because even if you shake the glass of race and it settles into the class segment, you’re going to find a lot of African-American women of color in that class segment. And sexism has been really rampant, as well, in this election.

But what I want to say is that Hillary Clinton, very bravely, too, in the embodiment of a white woman, as an African-American woman, I never would have thought that I would be supporting, really, a white woman for president.

But I remember at the first debate at Howard University when she talked about if AIDS were in disproportion in the bodies of white woman as they are black women, it would be considered an epidemic and it probably would have been cured by now. I thought that she took a very poignant message that I’m concerned about the African-American community without speechwriting.


+++

M. DYSON: And for Hillary, I think that when she heard the speeches of Dr. King in the late ’60s, as she talked about in her books, that she, too, instilled that. Because, you know, you talk about crisis and opportunity, she went down into a great — in a very heated moment at “The State of the Black Union” that Tavis Smiley held in New Orleans — a community of people that there are thousands who had not voted for her. 

But she came back and held her feet to the fire to discuss some of the racial issues that unfortunately the media didn’t want to address. I mean we could talk about Ashley, the woman in Barack’s speech today — …

There’s also a great report — clear back in November 2007 — in the Caucus blog at the New York Times, “Clinton Backer Goes on ‘Faith Tour’“:

[...] We found the Rev. Dyson at Le Salon talking with Charles Davis, 58, the owner, who was preparing to clip a patron’s hair.

She was telling him that Mrs. Clinton would “let go of the ego, or the she-go, often demonstrated in politics” and that she would “put a swivel base on the Statue of Liberty” to turn attention toward all the tired and poor.

[...]

After the Rev. Dyson left, Ms. Bolden told us she liked Mrs. Clinton and said she had been strong during Tuesday’s contentious debate in Philadelphia (after which the Clinton campaign had said her male opponents had been piling on).

“I like the fact that she’s not intimidated when she’s speaking,” Ms. Bolden said. “I know how it is to be in a roomful of men. She’s always prepared. Whenever someone throws a cheap shot at her, she’s able to rebound and take it professionally.”

On her way out the door, the Rev. Dyson told us she thought that at the debate, Mrs. Clinton’s rivals had ganged up on her “but that was O.K.” because she is the front-runner. “That wasn’t very gentlemanly of them, but it proved she is a brave person and can take her own and can carry her own,” she said.

She then hopped in a van bound for Columbia and perhaps a bigger audience.

Amazing.

This line from Reverend Dyson:

[Hillary] would “put a swivel base on the Statue of Liberty” to turn attention toward all the tired and poor.

Yes, she would.

I mean, yes she will.

I wish she were doing it as president.

But she will now do it for peoples of the world, in the most dangerous and dark places, and fight for the help needed desperately by women and children, just as she did when she was a young college student and continuing through her eight years as First Lady.

Right now, I’m thinking of the questions I want to ask Reverend Dyson.

Call (347) 677-0792 and talk to Reverend Dyson and Paulie Abeles, tonight from 9 to 10:00 p.m. ET.

The “affordable” tickets reportedly sold-out in a matter of minutes.

Only the highest online bidders will have the chance to see the hip-hop superstar honor the new president-elect. The cheapest seats for the show, located in the balcony of Washington’s Warner Theatre, cost between $195 and $375 depending on the view. Those disappeared from Ticketmaster in less than five minutes after going on sale at 10 a.m. Friday. (CNN)

In light of LisaB’s great article earlier today, “The ‘racist’ angle, going forward,” I have to ask how this disgusting, utterly vulgar trash talking by “Young Jeezy” and “Jay-Z” at one of the Tuesday night inaugural balls (!) — featured in a segment on The O’Reilly Factor — is not also racist. Racism, contrary to the high-minded assumptions of the elite mainstream media and academia, is not a one-way street.

As I researched this story, I found more and more must-read items, and this story goes clear back to Obama’s behavior during the Democratic primaries. So, let me distill all below into a few succinct key points:

     1) During the Democratic primaries, candidate Barack Obama evoked the motions and style of Jay-Z in order to mock and demean Hillary Clinton. Obama’s gestures — unfamiliar to us who aren’t into hip-hop but instantly understood by all who are into that “music” — were summed up in a great article published at No Quarter, “Obama Invokes Jay-Z: ‘Stab the Ladies…Middle Finga To The Law’.”

     2) Jay-Z is regarded as an “A-list” celebrity, even by the so-called MSM.

     3) Not only that, Jay-Z was awarded the privilege and protection of an official police escort this week in Washington, D.C. (although we don’t know who picked up the tab for that).

     4) Jay-Z attends the Neighborhood Inaugural Ball — which means he was invited (!) — with his pal Young Jeezy, and the two tear up the place with a racist rant that essentially flaunts black power because they have a black president.

     5) During the Neighborhood Ball, Jay-Z and Young Jeezy pitch a nasty, foul-mouthed fit that they’re not asked to perform at the Ball.

     6) We learn that Jay-Z, along with Arcade Fire, has been chosen by the top administrators of the Obama campaign staff to headline a special concert for the hardest-working Obama campaign staff in D.C.

     7) We therefore conclude that, while on Inaugural Day, the Obamas danced to the more elegant Beyonce, they are still promoting the filth and misogyny of Jay-Z and other “performers” of his ilk, just as they did during the campaign.
Above all else, what Jay-Z and Young Jeezy sell is misogyny, sexism, and the objectification of women, as well as dangerous hatred of all other races except blacks. Ironically, sadly, those sales are made to a lot of white, Asian and Hispanic kids.

Here are some sample lyrics from Jay-Z and Young Jeezy are below (brace yourselves). There are more lyrics like this:

How We Ball In The Club, I Know You Hate It
Mommy Dancing On The Floor, All Like She Naked
When She Lay Down With You, I Know She Fake It
All The Girls Give It To Me, I Ain’t Gotta Take It …

Then there are these “lyrics” from Jay-Z’s song that inspired Obama’s gesture, captured on YouTube (seen at the end of this story), towards Hillary Clinton:

If you feelin’ like a pimp nigga, go and brush your shoulders off
Ladies is pimps too, go and brush your shoulders off
Niggaz is crazy baby, don’t forget that boy told you
Get, that, dirt off your shoulder

Now for all the details of the above summary. First, this segment was aired on Bill O’Reilly’s show Wednesday night:

Bill O’Reilly didn’t have the whole story. Not by a long shot. First, there are these remarks by YouTube channel owner (Mark1 Williams, a black man) whose video is below:

and jayz had the nerve to act like his feelings were hurt when he wasn’t asked to perform. these are grown men for god’s sake. *shaking my head*

So Mark Williams believes that Jay-Z behaved like this at the ball Tuesday night. You’ve now seen our update above. We just aren’t sure which night it was. But the point that Williams made was that Jay-Z was acting out furiously because he wasn’t invited to perform at the inaugural ball? Jay-Z is an arrogant racist and a misogynistic blowhard afflicted with stunted emotional growth.

BELOW is the un-censored video of Jay-Z’s antics at the inaugural ball Tuesday night, posted by YouTube channel owner Mark1 Williams. STRONG WARNING: The language is very raw, so prepare yourself before you click and, if you’re sensitive to such vulgarity, skip it:

Not that you’re likely to want to see more, but if you do, here’s a link to more such videos from Tuesday night and from those two, uh, performers.

NOW GET THIS. While researching this story, I discovered that Jay-Z has no reason to pout for not getting to perform at the inaugural balls since he is performing, along with Arcade Fire, at an exclusive private party for key Obama campaign staffers as a “thank you” from the campaign. Bill O’Reilly didn’t have this either, even though it’s published by the NYT reporter who spewed bile on Hillary Clinton, Adam Nagourney, at the New York Times Caucus blog as well as at PitchforkMedia and other media outlets. PitchforkMedia praises “Jay and the Arcade Fire [who] both campaigned hard for Obama. … [T]his should be an incredible show, and it seems a fair bet those staffers will hear that “My President is Black” remix at some point.

Oh wow. Don’t we hope. That “My President is Black” remix? It features not only Jay-Z but his partner in filth, “Young Jeezy.”

Isn’t it great that our new president is treating his hardest-working campaign staffers to these sleazeballs?

Do you recall the great article we posted on Jay-Z by Laluchasigue? It’s this article: “Obama Invokes Jay-Z: ‘Stab the Ladies…Middle Finga To The Law’.”

Here’s the history behind Jay-Z that O’Reilly left out of his program Wednesday night:

Obama mimicked Jay-Z during the campaign to connect with hip young black voters and — and! — to denigrate Secretary Hillary Clinton, along with, let’s face it, all women since these two are clearly misogynistic. Shockingly, Obama was willing to stoop to Jay-Z’s level to get votes. So, actually, what took place at the Tuesday inaugural ball is in part Obama’s own fault because he legitimized these foul-mouthed lousy performers by mimicking them, especially in rallies dominated by black voters. Wrote Laluchasigue:

Obama’s invocation of Jay-Z’s defiant “Dirt Off Your Shoulder” battle anthem during the same speech adds evidence to the claim that he gave Hillary the finger.

Obama’s gesture prompted a mash-up video that made the Jay-Z/Obama connection explicit. Ari Melber, the other Obamabot named Ari at The Nation, posted the video on The Nation’s website, noting, “Obama really is a Jay-Z fan, too. When asked which hip hop artists he likes in a recent interview, he said, ‘lately I’ve been listening to a lot of Jay-Z — this new American Gangster album.’”

Sigh. Yeah. That American Gangster album is da bomb. Great taste, Mr. President. Just great. And what a fine example to the nation’s youth.

Dennis Miller is correct, in the O’Reilly segment, about the two young men being unable to “ratchet down the hate.”

But let’s face it. If those two didn’t have white people to hate, and women to trash, what in the hell would they have left to rap about?

And I LOVE what Miller says about the term “ho’s” versus “hose.” (That’s another strong theme in this kind of “music” [I use the term reluctantly] in that it is also misogynistic and constantly regards women as objects whose sole function is for the gratification of male sexual pleasure.)

Quite frankly, their “music” is nothing more than crudely dysfunctional emotional ejaculation and has nothing to do with the deepest needs of all psychologically healthy human beings, which are to connect emotionally as well as physically.

This kind of language, and what it conveys, has no place in our society. Racism can, and does, affect ALL races.. And the speech of Jay-Z and Young Jeezy is racist against whites, Hispanics, Native Americans, and Asian Americans.

It makes me sick to my stomach that young people are spending money — most likely their parents’ hard-earned money — to make rich brats out of these thugs. It repulses me that young people are reveling in the music put out by disgusting hate-filled people like these two. Bill O’Reilly’s minimization of their impact is woefully wrong. The truth is that far too many young people are listening to music like this.

Can we have a little class, please. Is that too much to ask? A little more Beyonce and no more Jay-Z?

Naturally, the vast majority of blacks yesterday rejoiced in the inauguration of the nation’s first black president. But there were a few who used the occasion to preach hate and racism against anyone who’s not black like them.

President Obama must do all he can to set these young thugs straight, and to discourage young people from imitating their behavior and adopting their sickening attitudes.

Perhaps President Obama can begin by not emulating them in order to win a presidential election.

I finished the above story but it kept bugging me. So I searched the news for more reports.

This is by an LA Times reporter for its arts section, “The Culture Monster,” who spotted Jay-Z in the morning:

I walked to the southeastern edge of the Capitol this morning with my sister and a friend. They held blue tickets for the swearing-in ceremony; mine was green. We parted at the corner of Independence Avenue and South Capitol Street. And while I progressed rather quickly through a battery of security checkpoints and found my seat around 9 a.m. — well before a parade of celebrities including Jay-Z (wearing a gigantic, Yeltsin-esque fur hat), Beyonce and Maria Shriver swept past me toward their seats nearby — they stood motionless in a massive block of people that went nowhere. They ultimately gave up after standing in line for four hours.

Here’s another not-too-deep report, “Leonardo DiCaprio Joins Beyonce, Jay-Z, and More at Neighborhood Inaugural Ball.”

And last, this from the San Francisco Examiner:

How the mighty have fallen - Jennifer Lopez locked out of Jay-Z show at Obama Inaugural

[...]

Real A-listers like Jay-Z, who was getting around town with a police escort, and Alicia Keys had been warned to make it to balls and other celebrations up to four hours early to make it past the snarled traffic and tight security. Even Leonardo DiCaprio and Toby “Spiderman” Maquire were there early. …

Got that? Jay-Z is a “real A-lister” who gets a “police escort” — and who’s paying for that? The taxpayers of Washington, D.C.? And who ordered that he merited a police escort? I’d like to know who arranged that. Was it an Obama staffer? And why?

My jaw has dropped so many times while writing this article that I can’t find it anymore.

So a misogynistic, foul-mouthed creep like Jay-Z gets A-list treatment, a police escort, and a lead in the entertainment for Obama’s most prized campaign staffers? And he served as a role model for Obama to capture the black vote?

What world am I living in?

The one thing I do know is that it’s not my world or my country. It’s not my family’s world. It’s not my mother’s world (she’d be shocked beyond belief by this article if she were alive to read it).

Down is up.

Class is trash.

And I’m glad that I chose to stay away from that campaign and that candidate, if those are the celebrities and the “talent” he chooses to reward.

I’ll stick with the one who should be president.

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Now there’s real class.

But remember this video. That crowd got exactly what Obama was doing:

That gesture comes from these lyrics:

[Chorus: Jay-Z]
If you feelin’ like a pimp nigga, go and brush your shoulders off
Ladies is pimps too, go and brush your shoulders off
Niggaz is crazy baby, don’t forget that boy told you
Get, that, dirt off your shoulder

[Verse One]
I probably owe it to y’all, probably to be locked by the force
Tryin to hustle some things, that go with the Porsche
Feelin no remorse, feelin like my hand was forced
Middle finger to the law, nigga grippin ma balls
Stab the ladies they love me, from the bleachers they screamin
All the ballers is bouncin, they like the way I be leanin
All the rappers be hatin, off the track that I’m makin
But all the hustlers they love it just to see one of us make it
Came from the bottom the bottom, to the Top of the Pops
Nigga London, Japan and I’m straight off the block
Like a running back, get it man, I’m straight off the block
I can run it back nigga cause I’m straight with the Roc
=

Just remember, as if I have to repeat it, from above:

“Obama really is a Jay-Z fan, too. When asked which hip hop artists he likes in a recent interview, he said, ‘lately I’ve been listening to a lot of Jay-Z — this new American Gangster album.’”

What an example to the nation’s children our new president is.

UPDATE on “Jay-Z’s ‘Concert On The Eve Of Change’.” (H/T to LDP, who did some more digging, and found out that Jay-Z probably performed those antics at the Monday night concert he held. See photos. Lovely. (He performed his apparently revered new hit song, “History,” which I’ve added at the end of this post.) See sohh.com for more background on the concert.

NOW HERE ARE SOME of the lyrics to his lauded song, “History” — I note that “defeat” is a woman, but of course:

Known for his clever usage of metaphors, Jay compares Obama’s victory to his yearning and frustration over a woman.

“Until she visit me/I’ll be stuck with her sister her name is defeat/she gives me agony/I‘m
stuck in this routine/whole new different day/same old thing/all I got
is dreams/nobody else could see/nobody else believes/nobody else but
me/Where are you victory/I need you desperately/not just for the
moment, to make history.”

The song, which debuted on Angie Martinez’s Hot 97 radio show in New York City, comes after months of Jay’s personal endorsement of Obama at concerts, rallies with fans throughout the nation and exclusive Obama benefit shows. 

Read all here, including more on songs by others on Obama’s victory.

UPDATE/CORRECTION?: Thanks to reader LDP doing some more digging, we now believe that Jay-Z and Young Jeezy exhibited their crude behavior at a concert Monday night called “Jay-Z’s ‘Concert On The Eve Of Change’.” See photos. Lovely. (He performed his apparently revered new hit song, “History,” which I’ve added at the end of this post.) Get this: He charged big bucks for tickets, which scalpers quickly scooped up. Via sohh.com:

The “affordable” tickets reportedly sold-out in a matter of minutes.

Only the highest online bidders will have the chance to see the hip-hop superstar honor the new president-elect. The cheapest seats for the show, located in the balcony of Washington’s Warner Theatre, cost between $195 and $375 depending on the view. Those disappeared from Ticketmaster in less than five minutes after going on sale at 10 a.m. Friday. (CNN)

In light of LisaB’s great article earlier today, “The ‘racist’ angle, going forward,” I have to ask how this disgusting, utterly vulgar trash talking by “Young Jeezy” and “Jay-Z” at one of the Tuesday night inaugural balls (!) — featured in a segment on The O’Reilly Factor — is not also racist. Racism, contrary to the high-minded assumptions of the elite mainstream media and academia, is not a one-way street.

As I researched this story, I found more and more must-read items, and this story goes clear back to Obama’s behavior during the Democratic primaries. So, let me distill all below into a few succinct key points:

     1) During the Democratic primaries, candidate Barack Obama evoked the motions and style of Jay-Z in order to mock and demean Hillary Clinton. Obama’s gestures — unfamiliar to us who aren’t into hip-hop but instantly understood by all who are into that “music” — were summed up in a great article published at No Quarter, “Obama Invokes Jay-Z: ‘Stab the Ladies…Middle Finga To The Law’.”

     2) Jay-Z is regarded as an “A-list” celebrity, even by the so-called MSM.

     3) Not only that, Jay-Z was awarded the privilege and protection of an official police escort this week in Washington, D.C. (although we don’t know who picked up the tab for that).

     4) Jay-Z attends the Neighborhood Inaugural Ball — which means he was invited (!) — with his pal Young Jeezy, and the two tear up the place with a racist rant that essentially flaunts black power because they have a black president.

     5) During the Neighborhood Ball, Jay-Z and Young Jeezy pitch a nasty, foul-mouthed fit that they’re not asked to perform at the Ball.

     6) We learn that Jay-Z, along with Arcade Fire, has been chosen by the top administrators of the Obama campaign staff to headline a special concert for the hardest-working Obama campaign staff in D.C.

     7) We therefore conclude that, while on Inaugural Day, the Obamas danced to the more elegant Beyonce, they are still promoting the filth and misogyny of Jay-Z and other “performers” of his ilk, just as they did during the campaign.
Above all else, what Jay-Z and Young Jeezy sell is misogyny, sexism, and the objectification of women, as well as dangerous hatred of all other races except blacks. Ironically, sadly, those sales are made to a lot of white, Asian and Hispanic kids.

Here are some sample lyrics from Jay-Z and Young Jeezy are below (brace yourselves). There are more lyrics like this:

How We Ball In The Club, I Know You Hate It
Mommy Dancing On The Floor, All Like She Naked
When She Lay Down With You, I Know She Fake It
All The Girls Give It To Me, I Ain’t Gotta Take It …

Then there are these “lyrics” from Jay-Z’s song that inspired Obama’s gesture, captured on YouTube (seen at the end of this story), towards Hillary Clinton:

If you feelin’ like a pimp nigga, go and brush your shoulders off
Ladies is pimps too, go and brush your shoulders off
Niggaz is crazy baby, don’t forget that boy told you
Get, that, dirt off your shoulder

Now for all the details of the above summary. First, this segment was aired on Bill O’Reilly’s show Wednesday night:

Bill O’Reilly didn’t have the whole story. Not by a long shot. First, there are these remarks by YouTube channel owner (Mark1 Williams, a black man) whose video is below:

and jayz had the nerve to act like his feelings were hurt when he wasn’t asked to perform. these are grown men for god’s sake. *shaking my head*

So Mark Williams believes that Jay-Z behaved like this at the ball Tuesday night. You’ve now seen our update above. We just aren’t sure which night it was. But the point that Williams made was that Jay-Z was acting out furiously because he wasn’t invited to perform at the inaugural ball? Jay-Z is an arrogant racist and a misogynistic blowhard afflicted with stunted emotional growth.

BELOW is the un-censored video of Jay-Z’s antics at the inaugural ball Tuesday night, posted by YouTube channel owner Mark1 Williams. STRONG WARNING: The language is very raw, so prepare yourself before you click and, if you’re sensitive to such vulgarity, skip it:

Not that you’re likely to want to see more, but if you do, here’s a link to more such videos from Tuesday night and from those two, uh, performers.

NOW GET THIS. While researching this story, I discovered that Jay-Z has no reason to pout for not getting to perform at the inaugural balls since he is performing, along with Arcade Fire, at an exclusive private party for key Obama campaign staffers as a “thank you” from the campaign. Bill O’Reilly didn’t have this either, even though it’s published by the NYT reporter who spewed bile on Hillary Clinton, Adam Nagourney, at the New York Times Caucus blog as well as at PitchforkMedia and other media outlets. PitchforkMedia praises “Jay and the Arcade Fire [who] both campaigned hard for Obama. … [T]his should be an incredible show, and it seems a fair bet those staffers will hear that “My President is Black” remix at some point.

Oh wow. Don’t we hope. That “My President is Black” remix? It features not only Jay-Z but his partner in filth, “Young Jeezy.”

Isn’t it great that our new president is treating his hardest-working campaign staffers to these sleazeballs?

Do you recall the great article we posted on Jay-Z by Laluchasigue? It’s this article: “Obama Invokes Jay-Z: ‘Stab the Ladies…Middle Finga To The Law’.”

Here’s the history behind Jay-Z that O’Reilly left out of his program Wednesday night:

Obama mimicked Jay-Z during the campaign to connect with hip young black voters and — and! — to denigrate Secretary Hillary Clinton, along with, let’s face it, all women since these two are clearly misogynistic. Shockingly, Obama was willing to stoop to Jay-Z’s level to get votes. So, actually, what took place at the Tuesday inaugural ball is in part Obama’s own fault because he legitimized these foul-mouthed lousy performers by mimicking them, especially in rallies dominated by black voters. Wrote Laluchasigue:

Obama’s invocation of Jay-Z’s defiant “Dirt Off Your Shoulder” battle anthem during the same speech adds evidence to the claim that he gave Hillary the finger.

Obama’s gesture prompted a mash-up video that made the Jay-Z/Obama connection explicit. Ari Melber, the other Obamabot named Ari at The Nation, posted the video on The Nation’s website, noting, “Obama really is a Jay-Z fan, too. When asked which hip hop artists he likes in a recent interview, he said, ‘lately I’ve been listening to a lot of Jay-Z — this new American Gangster album.’”

Sigh. Yeah. That American Gangster album is da bomb. Great taste, Mr. President. Just great. And what a fine example to the nation’s youth.

Dennis Miller is correct, in the O’Reilly segment, about the two young men being unable to “ratchet down the hate.”

But let’s face it. If those two didn’t have white people to hate, and women to trash, what in the hell would they have left to rap about?

And I LOVE what Miller says about the term “ho’s” versus “hose.” (That’s another strong theme in this kind of “music” [I use the term reluctantly] in that it is also misogynistic and constantly regards women as objects whose sole function is for the gratification of male sexual pleasure.)

Quite frankly, their “music” is nothing more than crudely dysfunctional emotional ejaculation and has nothing to do with the deepest needs of all psychologically healthy human beings, which are to connect emotionally as well as physically.

This kind of language, and what it conveys, has no place in our society. Racism can, and does, affect ALL races.. And the speech of Jay-Z and Young Jeezy is racist against whites, Hispanics, Native Americans, and Asian Americans.

It makes me sick to my stomach that young people are spending money — most likely their parents’ hard-earned money — to make rich brats out of these thugs. It repulses me that young people are reveling in the music put out by disgusting hate-filled people like these two. Bill O’Reilly’s minimization of their impact is woefully wrong. The truth is that far too many young people are listening to music like this.

Can we have a little class, please. Is that too much to ask? A little more Beyonce and no more Jay-Z?

Naturally, the vast majority of blacks yesterday rejoiced in the inauguration of the nation’s first black president. But there were a few who used the occasion to preach hate and racism against anyone who’s not black like them.

President Obama must do all he can to set these young thugs straight, and to discourage young people from imitating their behavior and adopting their sickening attitudes.

Perhaps President Obama can begin by not emulating them in order to win a presidential election.

I finished the above story but it kept bugging me. So I searched the news for more reports.

This is by an LA Times reporter for its arts section, “The Culture Monster,” who spotted Jay-Z in the morning:

I walked to the southeastern edge of the Capitol this morning with my sister and a friend. They held blue tickets for the swearing-in ceremony; mine was green. We parted at the corner of Independence Avenue and South Capitol Street. And while I progressed rather quickly through a battery of security checkpoints and found my seat around 9 a.m. — well before a parade of celebrities including Jay-Z (wearing a gigantic, Yeltsin-esque fur hat), Beyonce and Maria Shriver swept past me toward their seats nearby — they stood motionless in a massive block of people that went nowhere. They ultimately gave up after standing in line for four hours.

Here’s another not-too-deep report, “Leonardo DiCaprio Joins Beyonce, Jay-Z, and More at Neighborhood Inaugural Ball.”

And last, this from the San Francisco Examiner:

How the mighty have fallen - Jennifer Lopez locked out of Jay-Z show at Obama Inaugural

[...]

Real A-listers like Jay-Z, who was getting around town with a police escort, and Alicia Keys had been warned to make it to balls and other celebrations up to four hours early to make it past the snarled traffic and tight security. Even Leonardo DiCaprio and Toby “Spiderman” Maquire were there early. …

Got that? Jay-Z is a “real A-lister” who gets a “police escort” — and who’s paying for that? The taxpayers of Washington, D.C.? And who ordered that he merited a police escort? I’d like to know who arranged that. Was it an Obama staffer? And why?

My jaw has dropped so many times while writing this article that I can’t find it anymore.

So a misogynistic, foul-mouthed creep like Jay-Z gets A-list treatment, a police escort, and a lead in the entertainment for Obama’s most prized campaign staffers? And he served as a role model for Obama to capture the black vote?

What world am I living in?

The one thing I do know is that it’s not my world or my country. It’s not my family’s world. It’s not my mother’s world (she’d be shocked beyond belief by this article if she were alive to read it).

Down is up.

Class is trash.

And I’m glad that I chose to stay away from that campaign and that candidate, if those are the celebrities and the “talent” he chooses to reward.

I’ll stick with the one who should be president.

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Now there’s real class.

But remember this video. That crowd got exactly what Obama was doing:

That gesture comes from these lyrics:

[Chorus: Jay-Z]
If you feelin’ like a pimp nigga, go and brush your shoulders off
Ladies is pimps too, go and brush your shoulders off
Niggaz is crazy baby, don’t forget that boy told you
Get, that, dirt off your shoulder

[Verse One]
I probably owe it to y’all, probably to be locked by the force
Tryin to hustle some things, that go with the Porsche
Feelin no remorse, feelin like my hand was forced
Middle finger to the law, nigga grippin ma balls
Stab the ladies they love me, from the bleachers they screamin
All the ballers is bouncin, they like the way I be leanin
All the rappers be hatin, off the track that I’m makin
But all the hustlers they love it just to see one of us make it
Came from the bottom the bottom, to the Top of the Pops
Nigga London, Japan and I’m straight off the block
Like a running back, get it man, I’m straight off the block
I can run it back nigga cause I’m straight with the Roc
=

Just remember, as if I have to repeat it, from above:

“Obama really is a Jay-Z fan, too. When asked which hip hop artists he likes in a recent interview, he said, ‘lately I’ve been listening to a lot of Jay-Z — this new American Gangster album.’”

What an example to the nation’s children our new president is.

UPDATE on “Jay-Z’s ‘Concert On The Eve Of Change’.” (H/T to LDP, who did some more digging, and found out that Jay-Z probably performed those antics at the Monday night concert he held. See photos. Lovely. (He performed his apparently revered new hit song, “History,” which I’ve added at the end of this post.) See sohh.com for more background on the concert.

NOW HERE ARE SOME of the lyrics to his lauded song, “History” — I note that “defeat” is a woman, but of course:

Known for his clever usage of metaphors, Jay compares Obama’s victory to his yearning and frustration over a woman.

“Until she visit me/I’ll be stuck with her sister her name is defeat/she gives me agony/I‘m
stuck in this routine/whole new different day/same old thing/all I got
is dreams/nobody else could see/nobody else believes/nobody else but
me/Where are you victory/I need you desperately/not just for the
moment, to make history.”

The song, which debuted on Angie Martinez’s Hot 97 radio show in New York City, comes after months of Jay’s personal endorsement of Obama at concerts, rallies with fans throughout the nation and exclusive Obama benefit shows. 

Read all here, including more on songs by others on Obama’s victory.

I published this satire script about a month ago here at No Quarter.  It hit the front page the same day as Governor-Gate hit and right after Cardboard-Cutout-Gate was all over the place.

You remember back in mid-December, right after the infamous picture of Obama’s speech writer copping a faux feel-up of a cardboard-cutout full-size replica of Secretary of State (to be) Hillary Clinton.  And immediately after that outrageous fiasco, the news hit about Governor Blagojevich trying to sell Obama’s Senate seat to the highest bidder.

Right between those two major events, that’s when this little skit got published.  It may as well not have been published at all, for all the attention it got.  (pout)

And, taking some of the blame on myself (mark your calendars), I didn’t really set it up properly.  I just published it as a script, with no intro, except to belabor the obvious point that it was satire and not an actual transcript of a real recording.

So let me do a little set-up now:

All through 2008, we’d been wondering how in the hell it came to pass that the Democratic National Committee decided to throw its weight behind Obama, and to deliberately sabotage Hillary’s campaign for the nomination.

It had to be a conspiracy of some kind!  You know it’s true!  People were talking about Hillary being the next president even before 2004!  So what happened?

Well, believe what you want, but this is how it might have happened, IMHO.  I was thinking, “Oh, to be a fly on the wall in that conversation!”  And this script was the result of my daydreaming about what that fly might have heard.

———————————————————————————————-

“Fly on the Wall (do-over)”

In an office meeting room are The Fetid Four: Howard Dean, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and Donna Brazile. They are stewing over the Democratic loss in the election of 2004, and starting to think ahead to 2008.

HOWARD: (both hands pressed to his temples in anguish) I can’t believe Kerry lost!  Bush is so awful!

NANCY:  He’s a war criminal.  He should be impeached!

DONNA:  Yes!  And Cheney, too!  And you know what that means… (nudges Nancy) …Madam President!

(room erupts in nervous laughter)

HARRY:  Even if you had the votes to impeach in the House, you know that in the Senate we only have a one-vote majority…

NANCY: (cutting him off) That is so not gonna happen, so let’s just play the cards we’re dealt.

(general murmur of agreement)

HOWARD: (peering over his glasses) Well, one thing is for certain, we’ll win the next one, no matter who we run!

NANCY:  Absolutely!

DONNA:  Hell, even I could win it!

HARRY: (shaking head) Let’s not get carried away.

DONNA: (indignantly) Oh, thanks!

NANCY:  But I get your point.  Doesn’t matter anyway, because Her Nibs, Queen Hillary, is the heiress-apparent.

HARRY:  It’s an abomination!  What has she got, like two years in Congress?

DONNA:  Hillary… (makes gagging noises)

HOWARD: (laughing cautiously as he loosens his tie) I don’t think we can stop her… unless…

NANCY:  Unless what, Doc?  You planning on running again?

HOWARD: (wistfully) No, no, no… unless you think I should…

HARRY:  Oh, for the love of…

DONNA:  I don’t think so!

HARRY:  OK, so who can beat her?  She’s got all the momentum right now.  And the money.  She’s a walking ATM!

NANCY:  Let’s worry about the money later.  Even assuming she has the most cash, money’s not everything.

DONNA:  True.  If it was,  Soros would be running!

(Big laughter all around)

HOWARD:  Problem is, he’s not Natural Born.

HARRY:  You mean… he was born Caesarian?

HOWARD: (laughing) Good one!

HARRY:  Huh?

NANCY:  Natural born citizen!  Have you ever actually read the Constitution?  Article II?

HARRY: (blushing and flustered) Yes, I’ve read it!  Twice!  What do you think I am, an idiot?

(uncomfortable silence for several seconds)

HARRY: (struggling to recompose and assume an air of authority) Look, you know what I meant!  It was a joke!

NANCY:  Of course.

DONNA:  Sure it was.

HOWARD:  Well, I thought it was funny!

DONNA:  You would!

NANCY:  Medical humor, doc?

HOWARD:  Sure!  I mean, from an obstetrician’s point of view.

HARRY: (snorts and snickers)

DONNA:  Let’s not go there!

NANCY:  Come on, children! Let’s focus!

DONNA:  Well, anyway, like I was TRYING to say before… I think anyone we nominate is a shoo-in!

HARRY:  I thought it was “shoe-in.”

NANCY:  What?

HOWARD:  That makes no sense at all!  You mean like a boot?

NANCY:  No, it’s “shoo!” Like in “shoo fly!”  Or you “shoo” the horse into the barn.

DONNA:  What are you talking about?

HOWARD:  Horse shoes?

DONNA: (shaking her head in bewilderment, pronounces words studiously) Shoo.  Shoe.  Sorry, I don’t hear any difference!

NANCY:  Well, it’s “shoo.”

HARRY:  Are you sure?  Because I always thought it was like “shoe in,” like … (pushes with foot)

NANCY:  What, you’re going to kick the candidate into office against his will?

HOWARD:  I agree.  It’s “shoo.”  Like you’re just shooing them through without effort, because there’s no resistance.

HARRY:  I still think it’s “shoe.”

DONNA: (getting visibly agitated) Look! It doesn’t matter!  Our guy is going to win, that’s my point!

NANCY:  Or girl… woman I mean.

(all eyes turn to Nancy warily)

NANCY:  Well, not me, obviously…

HARRY:  Obviously…

DONNA:  Although it would be great to have a woman president… I just don’t want it to be Hillary!

NANCY:  No shit!

HOWARD:  Well, I agree to an extent.  I mean, as liberals, and as leaders of the Democratic Party, I do think it’s our duty to use this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to make some history.  “The first female president!”

NANCY:  Yes! But not that female!

DONNA:  We agree on that, sis! (high-fives Nancy)

HARRY:  Then who?  Kathy Sebelius?

(general mumbling of discontent)

HOWARD:  Claire McCaskill?

NANCY:  Oh, please!  She’s… (shakes her head) No. Not her!

DONNA:  What if it’s not a woman?

HARRY:  Claire McCaskill’s not a woman?

(others ignore him)

HOWARD:  What do you have in mind, Donna?

DONNA:  What if…?  What if it’s a man, but a man of color?

HARRY: (does double take) You mean Bill Richardson?

HOWARD:  Oh, good lord…

DONNA:  No, I was just thinking about our keynote speaker at the convention.

NANCY: (smirks, knowingly) You still carrying a torch for him?

DONNA: (elbows Nancy sharply, glaring) No!

HOWARD:  Something I should know about?

HARRY:  I think she’s talking about Senator Obama, but we can’t run him.  He’s totally green behind the ears!

HOWARD:  Green behind the ears?  What the hell does that mean?

NANCY:  Well, Donna thinks he’s hot!

DONNA: (pouts and kicks Nancy under the table) Shut up!

HOWARD:  OK, so we know he’s hot and green behind the ears.  What else do we know about him?

HARRY:  Well, I hear he’s pretty much broke.  Had to do some financial flim-flam just to buy a house.

HOWARD:  Anything illegal?

HARRY: (clears throat) I don’t know all the details, but I heard some rules were bent at the bank.  Some third party, a shyster lawyer or mob guy or something…

HOWARD:  O-keeeeeeeeeeeeeee!  “Next!” Who else we got?

DONNA:  Now wait a minute!  Let’s not rule him out yet.  Look, you know a lot of women are still mad at Hillary for staying with Bill after he had sex, or whatever he had, with Miss Fatty Blue Dress.

NANCY:  True.  She should have at least done a Bobbitt on him. (makes scissors gesture)

HOWARD:  Ouch! For a BJ?

HARRY:  Don’t forget the cigar.

NANCY:  Oh gaaaaaaaawd… I’ve been trying to forget it!

DONNA:  My point is that just because she’s a female, doesn’t mean most women will vote for her.  She’s not a shoo… I mean it’s not written in stone.

HARRY:  “Etched in stone.”

HOWARD:   I agree. It’s “etched.”

DONNA: (slams both palms on the table) Whatever!  I’m just saying “forget Hillary!” The next election is ours!  We can’t lose!  Let’s make some real history!  Now, while we can!  It’s a chance of a lifetime!  Let’s elect a black man!

NANCY:  Agreed.  We can do the woman later.

HOWARD:  Woohoo!  Sounds like a party!

HARRY:  Are you sure he’s black?  I heard he was Indonesian or something?

HOWARD: (enunciates the name slowly) O-bah-ma… I don’t know, that sounds pretty African to me!

DONNA: (frowning) He’s half white, half African.  In fact, you can’t get much more African than him.  He says in his book that his daddy was from Kenya.

HARRY:  He’s written a book?

NANCY:  An autobiography.

HOWARD:  How many pages?  Three? (laughs loudly)

DONNA:  Look, he’s an excellent speaker!  He’s handsome, he’s got charisma, he’s a cool guy, and he’s… good-looking.

NANCY:  I think you’ve established that you think he’s attractive.

DONNA:  Well?  Isn’t he?

NANCY:  Not to me.

DONNA:  Why?

NANCY:  Oh, I don’t know, he’s just not my type, I guess.

DONNA:  You mean black?

HOWARD: (gasps) Uh-oh!

HARRY:  You’re a racist?

NANCY:  No!  That’s not what I meant!

DONNA:  Uh-huh.  Then what do you find not attractive about him?

NANCY:  He’s just, I don’t know, too skinny, for one thing.  And those ears!

DONNA:  That sounds pretty racist to me!

NANCY:  What?  Are you kidding me?

HOWARD:  Wait a minute, I think we’re onto something here!

HARRY:  America isn’t ready for a black president.  Let’s face it.

DONNA:  You too?

NANCY:  See?  I’m not the racist, he’s the racist!

HARRY:  I am not a racist!

NANCY:  Well, neither am I!  I’d vote for him!

HARRY:  Well, so would I!  But will the teamsters?

HOWARD: (cynically) The teamsters will do whatever we tell them to, as usual.

NANCY:  OK, so let’s be serious a minute…

DONNA:  I am serious!  Think about it.  If the four of us get behind one candidate, we can stop Hillary.  I know we can!  We just need to get my friends at Acorn to get the vote out in the first couple of primaries and take the momentum away from her!

HOWARD:  Acorn?  In Iowa?  Have you ever been to Iowa?  I have!

NANCY:  Yeah, so we’ve heard.

HARRY:  How could we not hear?  As loud as you yelled… Yahoooooo!

NANCY:  No, it was more like Yeehaaaaaaaaaaaaw!

DONNA:  If we can try to stay on topic… I really think we can pull this off!  Seriously!  Just let me spell it out for you.  First, it’s our turn, the Democrats I mean, and after Bush and Cheney, it doesn’t really matter who we nominate.  We will win!  That’s why everyone thinks Hillary has it made.  But it doesn’t have to be her.  We can take her down if we play it right.  We’ve got Acorn on our side!

HOWARD:  Not in Iowa, we don’t!  In Iowa, it’s about corn, not Acorn.  Hell, it’s more white-bread than New Hampshire.  And do you think Acorn can even find enough voters in Iowa to win?  You’ve got the Clinton Machine, you’ve got pretty-boy Edwards…

DONNA: (quickly draws a crude map) Lookie here.  You’ve got Iowa here, and right next door, Illinois.  That’s Barack’s state.

NANCY:  Oh, I see!  Illinois is close enough to Iowa, you think voters will identify with the guy from the next-door state!  That might help.

DONNA:  Well, that’s part of it, but think about this.  These are caucuses, not elections.  And we can run a shitload of buses from Chicago, Detroit, Minneapolis, St. Louis, Kansas City… all full of brand new Iowa voters.  They swamp the caucuses, because even in Iowa hardly anyone goes to those things.  It would only take about one or two busloads per precinct.  Our guys swarm in, make a lot of noise, a little intimidation, and before the Clintons know what hit them, Hillary’s toast!

NANCY:  I think you’ve got something here!  But are you sure we can sell America on voting for an African-American man with a name that rhymes with Osama?

HARRY:  There you go being racist again!

NANCY:  I am not a racist!

DONNA:  I can’t believe you’re so racist!  Stop the hate!

HOWARD: (slaps table hard) That’s it! That’s how we sell it!  If anyone questions his name, his character, his background, anything… we play the race card!  And good old white liberal guilt will shame them into voting for him!

HARRY:  Brilliant!

NANCY:  I love it!  It gives me hope! Maybe we canchange candidates!

DONNA: Yes, we can!

HOWARD: (scribbling notes furiously) This is the best idea we’ve had in a loooooooooong time!

DONNA:  Too long!

NANCY:  Much too long!

HARRY:  That’s what she said!

Yes, Emily Yoffe, the writer, treats us to this informative study about emotions, and how Obama used them to bring in the masses. Now, many of us already knew it was rhetoric over substance, but here she lays it out for us in her Own way:

For researchers of emotions, creating them in the lab can be a problem. Dacher Keltner, a professor of psychology at the University of California-Berkeley, studies the emotions of uplift, and he has tried everything from showing subjects vistas of the Grand Canyon to reading them poetry—with little success. But just this week one of his postdocs came in with a great idea: Hook up the subjects, play Barack Obama’s victory speech, and record as their autonomic nervous systems go into a swoon.

In his forthcoming book, Born To Be Good (which is not a biography of Obama*), Keltner writes that he believes when we experience transcendence, it stimulates our vagus nerve, causing “a feeling of spreading, liquid warmth in the chest and a lump in the throat.” For the 66 million Americans who voted for Obama, that experience was shared on Election Day, producing a collective case of an emotion that has only recently gotten research attention. It’s called “elevation.”

Elevation has always existed but has just moved out of the realm of philosophy and religion and been recognized as a distinct emotional state and a subject for psychological study. Psychology has long focused on what goes wrong, but in the past decade there has been an explosion of interest in “positive psychology”—what makes us feel good and why. University of Virginia moral psychologist Jonathan Haidt, who coined the term elevation, writes, “Powerful moments of elevation sometimes seem to push a mental ‘reset button,’ wiping out feelings of cynicism and replacing them with feelings of hope, love, and optimism, and a sense of moral inspiration.”

* Oh, isn’t she witty?? And way to keep the bias out of this “scientific” piece.

Ah - so Obama has learned how to hit the reset button so that normally thinking human beings will be transported into La-la land. Everyone has now donned their rose colored glasses, and let all the bad reality just slip away. Oh, see how much happier they are than those of us still stuck in the real world!

This is just the beginning, though. Seems this idea has been around for some time:

Haidt quotes first-century Greek philosopher Longinus on great oratory: “The effect of elevated language upon an audience is not persuasion but transport.” Such feeling was once a part of our public discourse. After hearing Abraham Lincoln’s second inaugural address, former slave Frederick Douglass said it was a “sacred effort.” But uplifting rhetoric came to sound anachronistic, except as practiced by the occasional master like Martin Luther King Jr. or Ronald Reagan. And now Obama.

We come to elevation, Haidt writes, through observing others—their strength of character, virtue, or “moral beauty.” Elevation evokes in us “a desire to become a better person, or to lead a better life.” The 58 million McCain voters might say that the virtue and moral beauty displayed by Obama at his rallies was an airy promise of future virtue and moral beauty. And that the soaring feeling his voters had of having made the world a better place consisted of the act of placing their index fingers on a touch screen next to the words Barack Obama. They might be on to something. Haidt’s research shows that elevation is good at provoking a desire to make a difference but not so good at motivating real action. But he says the elevation effect is powerful nonetheless. “It does appear to change people cognitively; it opens hearts and minds to new possibilities. This will be crucial for Obama.”

Wait, say what? First we have “moral beauty,” character and virtue being exhibited by Obama in his speeches (or so it seems to his followers), written by the Bozo on the left:

Then we have an acknowledgment that people who voted for McCain are pretty much right that the extent of this “elevation” is pushing a button, concluding with the benefits to OBAMA of the mind control (well, what the hell else is it when it wipes the slate clean, making normally rational people start believing in a hope-y change-y rainbow unicorn??)? Wow - that is some massive movement, all within one paragraph: character not demonstrated but framed in “words, just words” which many did not buy into but good for Obama those who threw away their analytical, rational selves. Check.

There is so much about Obama in this regard, though:

Keltner believes certain people are “vagal superstars”—in the lab he has measured people who have high vagus nerve activity. “They respond to stress with calmness and resilience, they build networks, break up conflicts, they’re more cooperative, they handle bereavement better.” He says being around these people makes other people feel good. “I would guarantee Barack Obama is off the charts. Just bring him to my lab.”

I’m sorry, sir, but you seem to be caught up in the Rainbow Unicorn of Hope yourself. Obama has actually demonstrated he is NOT calm, but rather testy (examples here, here and here), quick to anger, and a bully. You are buying into the MSM definitions of him, not the REALITY of him. Just like when they termed George Bush’s arrogant smugness as “charm.” Despite the attempts by the MSM to paint Obama as the new Buddha, he has shown in debates and unscripted interactions who he really is. Maybe you shouldn’t be watching MSNBC while you do your “research.” Just a suggestion.

I barely know what to say about this next part, so I will just leave it to you:

It was while looking through the letters of Thomas Jefferson that Haidt first found a description of elevation. Jefferson wrote of the physical sensation that comes from witnessing goodness in others: It is to “dilate [the] breast and elevate [the] sentiments … and privately covenant to copy the fair example.” Haidt took this description as a mandate. Since it’s tricky to study the vagus nerve, he and a psychology student conceived of a way to look at it indirectly. The vagus nerve works with oxytocin, the hormone of connection. Since oxytocin is released during breast-feeding, he and the student brought in 42 lactating women and had them watch either an inspiring clip from The Oprah Winfrey Show about a gang member saved from a life of violence by a teacher or an amusing bit from a Jerry Seinfeld routine.

About half the Oprah-watching mothers either leaked milk into nursing pads or nursed their babies following the viewing; none of the Seinfeld watchers felt enough breast dilation to wet a pad, and fewer than 15 percent of them nursed. You could say elevation is Oprah’s opiate of the masses, so it’s fitting that she early on gave Obama her imprimatur. And that for his victory speech was up front in Grant Park, elevation’s moist embodiment, feeling so at one with humankind that she used a stranger as a handkerchief.

Thank heavens Haidt is such a dedicated scientist. Ahem. How else would we know why Oprah was so moved to use someone she didn’t know as her handkerchief?

Are we PAYING for this research, by the way? You know, with our tax dollars?? Just wondering.

Back to the research:

The researchers say elevation is part of a family of self-transcending emotions. Some others are awe, that sense of the vastness of the universe and smallness of self that is often invoked by nature; another is admiration, that goose-bump-making thrill that comes from seeing exceptional skill in action. Keltner says we most powerfully experience these in groups—no wonder people spontaneously ran into the street on election night, hugging strangers. “We had to evolve these emotions to devote ourselves into social collectives,” he says.

When you start thinking about mass movements, all those upturned, glowing faces of true believers—be they the followers of Jim Jones or Adolf Hitler—you don’t always get a warm feeling about mankind. Instead, knowing where some of these “social collectives” end up, the sensation is a cold chill. Haidt acknowledges that in “calling the group to greatness,” elevation can be used for murderous ends. He says: “Anything that takes us out of ourselves and makes us feel we are listening to something larger is part of morality. It’s about pressing the buttons that turn off ‘I’ and turn on ‘we.’ “

Thank heavens someone finally said it. I mean, besides those of us in the reality-based world. It is important for a scientist to be able to step outside him/herself. And with Obama, what we have is massive turning back the clock on women’s rights, race relations, transparency of our “elected” officials (a PEBO who doesn’t have to submit ANY paperwork for the greatest job in the world, but demands that and much, much more from his subordinates. I’d sure like to see this Haidt guy do some research on that. Or anyone in the freakin’ MSM.).

Your patience with this article is about to be rewarded:

Even at its most benign, elevation can seem ridiculous to outsiders. Think of how Obama’s opponents love to mock his effect on people. During the campaign, if your chest was contracting while all about you chests were dilating, you may be a Republican. If you were unmoved by Obama, watching your fellow citizen get all tingly, even fall into a faint (too much vagus stimulation, and you’re going down), was maddening. “Other people’s reverence seems unctuous and sanctimonious,” says Keltner.

Obama himself seemed aware of the dangers that too much elevation might pop his candidacy like a helium balloon hitting a power line. Conservative columnist Charles Krauthammer described Obama’s canny strategy to make his rhetoric more pedestrian for the final months of the campaign.

Or, one might still have one’s WITS about one, thus not being taken in by this charlatan, this snake oil salesman. But of course, anyone who was not moved to tears or into a faint by this lying, conniving, arrogant, bullying, race-baiting, misogynistic, homophobic unqualified first term senator was just because someone was a “Republican.” Newsflash: those of us who actually prefer qualified, intelligent, candidates who compose their own policy positions rather than steal them from others, and come up with their own words to use, not plagiarizing others, may simply be mature. I’m just sayin’. Despite the MSM’s characterizations of Hillary Clinton’s speeches, I attended two of them, and I am here to tell you she is moving, compelling, funny as hell, and brilliant. But not once did I feel faint. Nor did I ever feel faint when Obama was speaking, even as I watched his 2004 speech which seemed sufficient experience for those “elevated” people who swooned over his “borrowed” words. But that’s just me. And millions others. Whatever.

Oh, but you knew it wasn’t going to stop there. There had to be a way for the author to turn this back to Obama worship:

While there is very little lab work on the elevating emotions, there is quite a bit on its counterpart, disgust. University of Pennsylvania psychologist Paul Rozin has been a leading theorist in the uses of disgust. He says it started as a survival strategy: Early humans needed to figure out when food was spoiled by contact with bacteria or parasites. From there disgust expanded to the social realm—people became repelled by the idea of contact with the defiled or by behaviors that seemed to belong to lower people. “Disgust is probably the most powerful emotion that separates your group from other groups,” says Keltner.

Haidt says disgust is the bottom floor of a vertical continuum of emotion; hit the up button, and you arrive at elevation. This could be why so many Obama supporters complained of being sickened and nauseated by the Republican campaign. Seeing a McCain ad or Palin video clip actually felt like being plunged from their Obama-lofted heights.

Disgust carries with it the notion of contamination, which helps to explain the Republicans’ obsession with Bill Ayers, Tony Rezko, and Jeremiah Wright and their frustration that more voters didn’t have a visceral reaction that Obama had unforgivably sullied himself by association with these men. But this time, elevation won. And expect that on Inauguration Day, even if the weather’s frigid, millions will be warmed by that liquid feeling in their chests. (Emily Yoffe is the author of What the Dog Did: Tales From a Formerly Reluctant Dog Owner. You can send your Human Guinea Pig suggestions or comments to emilyyoffe@hotmail.com)

Oh, yes - it was the REPUBLICANS’ problem that they, and all others not in the tank for Obama, were concerned about a CONFIRMED DOMESTIC TERRORIST, a convicted felon, and a racist in whose church Obama sat for over TWENTY years. And of course, it had nothing to do with the MSM downplaying those connections, even dismissing them )like Obama’s speechwriter groping a cut-out of the incoming Secretary of State of the United States), because those inconvenient people/facts did not fit their preconceived narrative of who Obama is. It wasn’t so much Republicans who wanted to highlight the nefarious associations of the PEBO, but AMERICANS who care about the sanctity of the Constitution, who care about with whom the PEBO chooses to associate himself. Unrepentant domestic terrorists, convicted felons (don’t forget Kwame Kilpatrick!), and anti-American racist ministers are not the kinds of people with whom a potential president should surround himself. In my humble opinion, of course.

In conclusion, what this “research” highlights is that Obama followers really did drink the Kool Aide. Vindication for those of us who did not, and managed to keep ourselves in emotional balance. Now we can say, “Told you so!” But, they’ll probably be too busy polishing their rose-colored glasses and looking for the rainbow unicorn to notice…

Can you believe that about the school changing its name to Barack Obama Elementary?? Sadly, it is true. Here is the article: New York School Changes Name to Barack Obama Elementary,

Some public figures wait a lifetime — or longer — to see their names affixed to airports, bridges and public schools.

Not so Barack Obama.

In what appears to be a national first, the school board in Hempstead, N.Y., has voted unanimously to change the name of its 460-student Ludlum Elementary School to Barack Obama Elementary School.

Officials hope to hold a name-changing ceremony shortly after the new year begins. Such quick action could put the 47-year-old president-elect’s name on a public institution even before his inauguration Jan. 20. “I think we were still caught up in the moment,” principal Jean Bligen said.

Like many across Long Island, Hempstead students followed the campaign closely. Students at the former Ludlum School held a mock debate, and a straw ballot there in grades 3-5 produced 257 votes for Obama, 28 for opponent Sen. John McCain.

The school’s enrollment is 62 percent Hispanic and 36 percent African-American. Several students come from Africa, and many more come from El Salvador, Guatemala, Ecuador and Puerto Rico.

“For me, we made history,” said Teonte Jackson, 11, a fifth-grader who played Obama in the debate. “I feel really proud to have an African-American president. I don’t think it’s a racial thing. I think he will bring everybody together.”

Here’s the thing. If they indeed did follow this election closely, did it not ever bother any of these TEACHERS that Obama refused to provide his transcripts? ANY of his transcripts from any three of the institutions of higher learning he attended? It didn’t bother ANY of them that he treated women so poorly? It didn’t bother them at all that he PLAGIARIZED his speeches and policies?? All because he is half black, he gets a school named after him?? He has done VERY little on his own, as I have been saying for months, and as the video above details.

Oh, but you know there is more:

Clear Stream Avenue School in Valley Stream will also consider a renaming resolution next month, The Associated Press reported.

Eileen Garbe, who teaches fifth grade at the former Ludlum School, said the election provided a “monumental” opportunity to bring history alive for students. She plans to retire in about a year and a half after 20 years of teaching. “Isn’t this a wonderful way to go out?” she said.

A photo of Obama already hangs in the school’s office. Coincidentally, since September the school has been sending hundreds of books to an orphanage in Kenya, the home of Obama’s late father, even before the idea of a name change took hold.

The idea began to jell after another fifth-grade teacher asked students Jalani Johnson and Samantha Alburez, both 10, to write essays on why their school should be named for Obama.

Interim Superintendent Joseph Laria praised both students and adults for urging the name change at the Thursday school board meeting. The board’s vote was 5-0.

As he voted, board president Charles Renfroe thought of his own fifth-grade teacher, Artiebelle Lowe, who worked in a segregated, two-room schoolhouse in rural Alabama.

Renfroe still recalls her joy at the news in 1955 that a Montgomery, Ala., seamstress named Rosa Parks had defied Jim Crow laws by refusing to move to the rear of a bus. “I just wish she could be around today to see how far we’ve come,” Renfroe said of his former teacher.

“I think this will unite us,” said another board member, Betty Cross, who has differed with the board on other issues.

Hempstead Village Mayor Wayne Hall said naming the school after Obama is appropriate. “The fact that he was elected on Nov. 4 as the first African American is the achievement,” Hall said. “He doesn’t have to do anything else. The fact that he was elected is the ultimate achievement for all Americans.”

A Web search finds no mention of other schools or public facilities in the United States named for Obama, though such moves are being advocated in Calumet City, Ill., and Portland, Ore.

Geezy pete. JUST because he is half African and half American is sufficient. Wow. That seems like a mighty low threshold to me, but hey - maybe I expect too much. Again, it just shocks and appalls me that these teachers are completely ignoring the reality of how Obama got to where he is - the lying, cheating, stealing, misogyny, homophobia, and deception (to name a few). If they were truly following this election closely, they would have to know on SOME level that what they are doing is all about color of the skin, and NOT character. What the hell kind of message is THAT to be sending to our young people??? No wonder so many of our youth are cheating, lying, and plagiarizing - they see that success comes to those who cheat their way to the top, with no recrimination whatsoever. Wow.

And on a final note of disgust, this was the very end of the article:

In Antigua, the prime minister has said he’s taking measures to have the island’s highest peak renamed Mount Obama, according to the AP.

A school in Kogelo, Kenya, birthplace of Obama’s father, was named for the president-elect after he was elected senator.

ANTIGUA??? What the hell does Obama have to do with ANTIGUA??? Kenya maybe, but holy cow, these people have drunk way too much kool aide…

He is also half white.

Unless the one-drop rule still applies, our president-elect is not black.

We call him that — he calls himself that — because we use dated language and logic. After more than 300 years and much difficult history, we hew to the old racist rule: Part-black is all black. Fifty percent equals a hundred. There’s no in-between.

That was my reaction when I read these words on the front page of this newspaper the day after the election: “Obama Makes History: U.S. Decisively Elects First Black President.”

The phrase was repeated in much the same form by one media organization after another. It’s as if we have one foot in the future and another still mired in the Old South. We are racially sophisticated enough to elect a non-white president, and we are so racially backward that we insist on calling him black. Progress has outpaced vocabulary.

To me, as to increasing numbers of mixed-race people, Barack Obama is not our first black president. He is our first biracial, bicultural president. He is more than the personification of African American achievement. He is a bridge between races, a living symbol of tolerance, a signal that strict racial categories must go.

Well, this was originally what Barack Obama was supposed to be – a post-racial candidate. Ms. Arana indicates there is much racial mixing in our society and others so as to render old labeling out of date and useless. However, as fascinating as this article is, as she details her own rich cultural heritage among others, and it is certainly worth a read in its entirety, she seems to be placing the blame on the media and the American people for the labeling of Barack Obama as black.

While she is right that the media did push this narrative for all it was worth, Ms. Arano neglects to mention that a great deal of the responsibility for that label belongs with President-elect Obama himself. He did nothing to disabuse the media of this notion which he could have done at any time by continuing to trumpet his own mixed heritage.

Even Obama himself seems to have bought into the nomenclature. In his memoir “Dreams from My Father,” he writes, “I was trying to raise myself to be a black man in America, and beyond the given of my appearance, no one around me seemed to know exactly what that meant.” You can almost feel the youth struggling with his identity, reaching for the right words to describe it and finally accepting the label that others impose.

It was a label he imposed. In his run for the presidency, his first campaign narrative was that he was the post-racial candidate. How nice if he would have stuck with that. Instead, he very clearly brought race to the forefront of his campaign by playing the race card with impunity almost every day since January.

He was very clear to define himself as bi-racial, for instance, when he was campaigning in New Hampshire, very early in this years’ primary season. However, at the next primary, in South Carolina, he suddenly became “black” and there was absolutely no mention of his white Kansan mother. It was as if she did not exist. Is this not disrespectful to an equally important part of his heritage? It is easy to understand why he did this in a state with so large an African American population. I am sure I remember several articles before Super Duper Tuesday indicating that certain AA voters were not relating to him as being ‘AA enough.’ Was this a reason for his assuming an affectation once he got out on the campaign trail in these states?

Subsequently, his white grandmother who raised him and put him through private school only got a rather negative mention in his ‘monumentally important’ speech on race, and he soon after referred to her in a very insulting, limiting and quite frankly, inaccurate fashion as ‘a typical white person.’ So much for post-racial. His speech on race was a very well orchestrated diversion, since his candidacy was in much hot water after his close 20-year relationship with the racially divisive Reverend Wright was revealed just a few days earlier. Again, he played the race card rather than answering the question of what he was doing in that church in the first place, deflecting blame onto the ‘racial divide’ in this country rather than taking responsibility for his actions.

He claimed this ‘narrative’ of the black candidate for himself, as opposed to a bi-racial one, because he needed to pull the African American vote away from Hillary Clinton and aim a wrecking ball at the popularity the Clintons always enjoyed within the African American community. Professor Sean Wilentz’ brilliant article in The New Republic, “Race Man,” has often been referenced here, and details just how the Obama campaign played the race card to their advantage to accomplish this very mission.

Ms. Arana further states:

The explosion of “minorities” in the United States in the past half-century has guaranteed that ever more interracial mingling is inevitable. According to the 2000 Census, there were 1.5 million Hispanic-white marriages in the United States, half a million Asian-white marriages, and more than a quarter-million black-white marriages. The reality is probably closer to double or triple that number. And growing.

The evidence is everywhere. If not in our neighborhoods, in our culture. We see it in Tiger Woods, Halle Berry, Ben Kingsley, Nancy Kwan, Ne-Yo, Mariah Carey. Yet we insist on calling these hybrids by a reductive name: Berry is black. Kingsley is white. Kwan is yellow. Even they label themselves by the apparent color of their skin. With language like that, how can we claim to live in a post-racial society?

Interracial mingling is a very positive thing – showing that we are breaking down all sorts of barriers and just taking each person as we find them, without regard to labels or skin color.

Few who see Barack Obama, it seems, understand that he’s 50 percent white Kansan. Even fewer understand what it means to be second-generation Kenyan. It reminds me of something sociologist Troy Duster and bioethicist Pilar Ossorio once observed: Skin color is seldom what it seems. People who look white can have a significant majority of African ancestors. People who look black can have a majority of ancestors who are European.

In other words, the color of a president-elect’s skin doesn’t tell you much. It’s an unreliable marker, a deceptive form of packaging. Isn’t it time we stopped using labels that validate the separation of races? Isn’t it time for the language to move on?

How much more honest would Obama’s campaign have been if he had moved on from labels as well, being that he promised to do so. It is exhausting that those who choose to write articles about this subject turn a blind eye to his part in its current cause. Our ‘language’ isn’t the only thing that needs to move on.

The ‘unreliable marker’ of which Ms. Arano speaks is indeed a deceptive form of packaging. Contrary to what he would have you believe as being a detriment in his campaign, President elect Obama’s skin color was something he used to his advantage. He enjoyed a solid 90-95% voting bloc within the African American community, while doing basically nothing to earn their votes, apart from using his appearance as a victory in itself for those voters.

While many may understandably take his election as a great triumph and a huge leap beyond our painful past, he has set race relations back in this country with the insulting ‘labels’ he and his surrogates suggested in order to corner those who did not believe in him into voting for him. Politics is a bloody business, and obviously, President-elect Obama, his campaign manager, David Axelrod, and their surrogates used every trick to get to victory.

Earlier, Ms. Arano mentioned that “progress had outpaced vocabulary,” but it was the Obama campaign that pretended we had made less progress on racial issues than we actually have. When voters who chose not to embrace Obama’s candidacy were routinely referred to as racists, Archie Bunkers, and low information voters, so as to deny the fact that there were myriad excellent reasons for people not to support him, how can we as a society possibly have a real discussion about the issues Ms. Arana poses?

Clearly, since Obama received more “white” votes than any candidate since Carter, the ‘racist’ narrative he imposed is not an applicable one. He is a bi-racial President-elect. Why can’t this be celebrated as a way to move us forward just as much as him being the first black President?

It will be interesting to see if he now tries to mend the fences of the pain he caused. Somehow, I tend to doubt it will be addressed at all.