WaPo says Obama’s massive primary fail is “racism”

Tuesday night, Barack Obama was handed two more embarrassing near-defeats in the Democratic primaries held in Arkansas and Kentucky.   In the Arkansas primary, challenger John Wolfe won nearly 42% of the vote, and in Kentucky 42% of Democrats selected “uncommitted” over President Obama.  So far, four states — AR, KY, WV, and OK — have given over 40% of their primary vote to someone other than Barack Obama.  All of these races were closed primaries, meaning that only Democrats were eligible to vote in them.

If this kind of inter-party rebellion had struck a Republican presidential incumbent (and I’m specifically thinking of George W. Bush) it would be the lead story on every cable news network, and an above-the-fold front page story on every major newspaper for the remainder of the week.  Yet it barely gets mentioned these days, with the exception of this curious headline from the Washington Post: “Kentucky, Arkansas primaries: Is it racism?”

Ha-ha.  And by the way, have you stopped beating your wife yet?

Naturally the article brings up the infamous “Bigot Belt” graphic that showed Redneckland to be the only area of the nation that rejected Barack Obama outright in 2008.  Certainly it wasn’t Obama’s elitism, or his anti-Americanism, or his sleazy Chicago cronies, or his youthful infatuation with cocaine and Marxist professors, or his long-time association with a radical domestic terrorist, or his membership in a church led by one of the most inflammatory Black separatist pastors in the country.  Nah, it couldn’t possibly be any of those things that disinterested voters in the South.  It must be because he is half African.  Because that’s all we ever think about down here.

You know what?  I’m actually kinda proud of that map.  Seems we Okies ain’t as dumb as they think we is.

___________________________

CORRECTION: The Arkansas primary was indeed an open primary, meaning it was open to all voters regardless of registered political affiliation.  But the KY, WV, and OK primaries were closed.  You can view a list of open primary states here.

And a big thank you to Instapundit, Pajamas Media, Stop the ACLU, Brutally Honest, Pirate’s Cove, and Hardastarboard for linking.

What Would S.E Cupp Look Like With A Donut In Her Mouth?
It must stink to be a birther.
  • GarandFan

    When you run UNOPPOSED and still can’t all your party’s votes – PLAY THE RACE CARD!

    There will be enough Kool Aid drinkers who will believe it.

  • cirby

    Apparently, Southern Democrats are so dumb it took them nearly four years to notice President Obama is black, so their racism could finally kick in.

  • ackwired

    I doubt there is any more evidence that it is racism than there is that it is any of those other goofy thing you mentioned. 

    • jim_m

       Are you denying that obama has sleazy Chicago cronies?  Perhaps you should ask Tony Rezko.  He can be found in the penitentiary.

      • ackwired

        Obama is a politician, and a politician that has been elected president.  They sell a piece of their soul each step along the way, both the D’s and the R’s.  If you have to believe that he is evil, that is OK with me.  I don’t see anything unique about him.

        • herddog505

          Ah, but the lefties promised us that he was a “different kind of politician”, remember?  Post-racial, a uniter, a healer, a lightworker, blah-blah-f*cking-blah.

          Now, he’s “just another politician”.

          Oh, how the once-mighty have fallen.

          • ackwired

            He was always just a politician.  The fact that a personalit cult developed around him doesn’t make him less so.  And the fact that he is not a deity does not make him less human.

          • herddog505

            You know that and I know that, but many of his voters and Cwissy Matthews certainly don’t.

          • Banjo12

            So he is a victim of the personality cult that formed around him? I didn’t think victimhood could be stretched any further, but you’ve managed. Thank you for your contribution to language and understanding..

          • ackwired

            I was just giving you the facts.  If you wish to draw the conclusion that he is somehow a victim, you are welcome to it.  But please do not attribute that view to me.

        • http://www.rustedsky.net JLawson

          Where do you get that ‘You think he’s evil’ crap anyway?

          • Sky__Captain

             Must be more of the “projection” thing.

          • http://www.rustedsky.net JLawson

            Sigh.

            The saying goes that Republicans think Democrats are fools, and Democrats think Republicans are evil.

            You can deal with a fool, but you can’t deal with evil.  Might explain why ‘Progressives’ are just so difficult to have a dialog with…

            BTW, I’m reading ‘Freedom’s Forge’ by Arthur Herman.  It’s … interesting to see how the liberals wanted to mobilize the economy, and how their ideas were long on committees and appointments of the ‘right’ people, but really short on actual results. Without folks like William Knudsen and Henry Kaiser, we’d have been in deep trouble.

          • jim_m

             You can deal with a fool, but you can’t deal with evil.

            Almost.  You can try to reason with a fool and enlighten them.  But you can only exterminate evil.  I have heard enough eliminationist rhetoric from the left to believe that they would do exactly that if given the chance.  History of leftist totalitarian movements backs that up.

          • http://www.rustedsky.net JLawson

            Especially when you look at the leftist ecological movements.

            Or, as some call them – proponents of genocidal eco-fascism

            http://www.zerohedge.com/news/guest-post-face-genocidal-eco-fascism.

            Just as only one out of 100,000 has the talent to be an engineer or an acrobat, only a few are those truly capable of managing the matters of a nation or mankind as a whole. In this time and this part of the World we are headlessly hanging on democracy and the parliamentary system, even though these are the most mindless and desperate experiments of mankind. In democratic coutries the destruction of nature and sum of ecological disasters has accumulated most. Our only hope lies in strong central government and uncompromising control of the individual citizen.

            Lovely people…

          • herddog505

            Man, this guy needs therapy.  Or something.

            But to say “lovely people”… that might be tarring with too broad a brush.  Yes, the environuts are… well… nuts, but I don’t think that very many of them espouse quite this level of totalitarianism.

          • http://www.rustedsky.net JLawson

            I don’t know, Herddog – the greens I’ve known (and not many of them, I’ve little tolerance for that sort of irrationality) all seemed to think mankind was a cancer on the earth, and it’d be best if there weren’t quite so many of us… by about 4-5 billion.

            (They also seemed to fantasize about the rural agrarian lifestyle – you know, oil lamps, horse-drawn farm equip and such, it all being more natural - and you can pretty well bet if they got their ‘dream life’ after a week they’d be ready to bail back to techological civilization.)

            (Or 20 minutes after they started mucking out the barn, depending…)

          • herddog505

            I think of them as more stupid / thoughtless than anything.  In my experience, the average greenie (there are unquestionably some real whackos out there) might yap about man being a cancer on the earth because it’s trendy, but their “policies” mostly only go as far as banning plastic grocery bags, demanding that we all drive electric cars, banning pesticides and other agricultural chemicals and other short-sighted, dimwitted, feel-good things like that.  Totalitarianism and genocide, not so much.

            JLawsonThey also seemed to fantasize about the rural agrarian lifestyle – you know, oil lamps, horse-drawn farm equip and such, it all being more natural - and you can pretty well bet if they got their ‘dream life’ after a week they’d be ready to bail back to techological civilization.

            Too much “My Side of the Mountain” as children and too much “Walden” as adolescents, I suppose.

          • ackwired

            A large share of the posts here are devoted to proving that Obama, liberals, and D’s are evil, as are many of the responses.  It is one of the primary tools political parties use to gain power and distract the voters from the real issues.

          • herddog505

            Really?  I personally use terms like stupid, idiotic, cretinous, moronic, selfish, corrupt, crooked, and just plain damned dumb to describe lefties, but I don’t recall asserting that they are evil, nor do I think many (if any) of the blog owners and regular commenters here do.

          • ackwired

            Have you ever seen any traits that might be desribed as evil attributed to them?

          • herddog505

            Sure: lying.  Cheating.  Stealing.  The usual things that are ascribed to just about ANY politician by his opponents (and sometimes his own supporters!).

            But “evil” carries a great deal of weight with many people, including me; it’s not a perjorative I toss around very lightly, and I think that most people feel the same way.  For example, I think that Slick Willie was a lying, fornicating, corrupt son of a b*tch.  But evil?  No.  That word is reserved for killers like Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, and other heroes of the left.

          • ackwired

            It sounds like you find it offensive if evil is spoken of openly.  Yet you expect it to be an underlying assumption when describing political opponents.  An example would be describing evil people such as Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot as heroes of the left.

          • http://www.rustedsky.net JLawson

            To some, they are.

            I don’t see them particularly heroic myself, and don’t really get the penchant for wearing Che shirts, or (in the 60s and 70s) carrying Mao’s little red book. 

            But hey, who’s to argue with fashion?

          • ackwired

            Even in the 60′s and 70′s, I think it was the outliers who admired Che or Mao.

          • http://www.rustedsky.net JLawson

            I agree with you on the range of definition of evil – minor moral stuff doesn’t really hit ‘evil’.

            Evil is when you’re going in knowing mass death is going to result from pursuing what you want – and doing it anyway because the lives of tens, hundreds, thousands, millions are nothing to you.  Hitler?  Evil.  MArx and Lenin?  Evil.  Stalin? Evil squared. Mao? Evil.  Pol Pot?  Evil.  Kim family in NK? Evil.  Castro?  Evil. School shooters like the idiots who did the Columbine massacre? Evil. McVeigh? Evil.  Bin Laden? Evil. Assholes on the planes on 9/11? Evil. That asshole over in Scandinavia a while back that shot up a summer camp? Evil.

            Our US Armed Forces in WW2?  Evil, at times.  Firebombing cities? Evil, even if the ends are good.  But after watching what Germany did to the UK, and after Pearl Harbor, an understandable evil – and a limited one.

            I think the difference between the evil we’ve done and the evil folks like Stalin did was that we turned away from it when the purpose was served, and then afterwards made amends.  (We didn’t HAVE to rebuild the German and Japanese infrastructures – we could have left them to rot.)

            True evil doesn’t turn away or limit itself, but glories in the carnage and destruction it causes – and then doesn’t rebuild.

          • http://www.rustedsky.net JLawson

            I think you confuse ‘evil’ with ‘disagreement’.  Or disagreement with evil, whichever.

            But anyway, thanks for the reply.

          • ackwired

            You are welcome.  It is my opinion that you can disagree with a person without denegrating them or accusing them of dishonesty.  If seeing these things as separate and distinct is confusing them, then you are correct.

          • http://www.rustedsky.net JLawson

            Part of it I think is reflexive thinking. You’ve got your set of beliefs – and a challenge to them can be seen as ‘evil’ if you’re really emotionally invested in them, or ‘disagreement’ if you’re more rational about them.

            If you can’t stand having your beliefs challenged because it hits you emotionally, I think you’re more likely to see anything that challenges them as ‘evil’ than if you’ve arrived at your belief system through long thought.

            And I may not agree with someone, but that doesn’t mean I have to be disagreeable doing it.  I think if we had more folks being willing to ‘agree to disagree’, we’d get a lot more done politically in this country.

            (Whether you see that as a good thing or bad… well, that’s up to you! LOL…)

          • ackwired

            I think you are right.

          • http://www.facebook.com/people/Pat-Fontenot/100002573954561 Pat Fontenot

            Once you realize that Obama hates this country, you will understand his policies.  His expressed wish is to dismantle capitalism and turn this into the United Socialist States of America.  It didn’t work in Russia, it didn’t work in China, but he’s so stupid he thinks he can resurrect a dead ideology.  And that is just until he can institute Shariah law here and force women to wear burkahs and make it illegal for us to drive or even own a business.  Some one should tell him that to bow to an ayatohlah and kiss his ring is against US law.

          • http://www.rustedsky.net JLawson

            Oh, but THIS time theyll have learned from everything else, and they’ll do it right!

        • jim_m

           I don’t think he’s evil.  I think he’s an ignorant thug.

        • http://www.facebook.com/people/Pat-Fontenot/100002573954561 Pat Fontenot

          Anything that sets itself up against God is evil.  One thing God and Obama have in common is no birth certificate; the difference is that God doesn’t think He’s Obama

        • GeoInSD

           Obama is not a normal politician.  How many have you heard promise to “fundamentally transform America”?  How many politicians have you heard believe they are on a mission that compares to Nelson Mandela and Mahatma Gandhi?  Obama is the only one I have heard.  He believes the US is so fundamentally terrible that it needs transformation (something completely different), not mere fixing.

          • ackwired

            I don’t know that this rhetoric is all that rare.  FDR wanted to transform the country.  JFK wanted to get the country moving again.  Reagan wanted to transform the country.  W spoke of God wanting him to be president.  Sarah Palin said similar things about God telling her to run.  Gingrich has spoken of things that would be a transformation.  So while the rhetoric is not universal among politicians, it is not uncommon.

          • http://www.rustedsky.net JLawson

            True – but there’s transformation (as in making things work better) and transformation (as in wrapping the Ferrari around the tree) – the trick is to try to figure out which kind the politician means.  And it’s not always clear from the campaign rhetoric.

            I’m really starting to think that above a certain point, government is much more of a hindrance on a lot of currently pressing social issues than it is a help – but that’s just me.

          • ackwired

            It’s not just you.  There are a few of us.  Welcome to the libertarian point of view.

        • Dmgdriver

          The things that are unique about Obama are many fold. He may have lost his first bid to be elected to the Senate, That was because  he was totally unknown beyond his community area where he was active as an organizer, what ever the heck that was. His second bid was successful due to the bully, thug type actions, prior to that he had no experience in anything outside of his lecturing career (not a professor) at a college. Part way through his first term as a Senator he decided to run for the Presidency, and such missed most of his first term as a senator. Every President in history, dating back to Geo Washington, at least had some experience in something… business, military (as a leader), several terms in Congress. Through the power of American Idol, and the guilt trip of race, he ended up as POTUS, but is still most completely, unprepared, unready, and unqualified for the position.
           

          • ackwired

            You are certainly right about his lack of experience  But if he were told that is important, he would probably point out that he has more experience being president than any other choice that we have right now.

          • Jwb10001

            If he’s got so much experience why doesn’t he run on his record?

          • ackwired

            I’m not on his campaign staff, nor even a member of his party.  So I would not speak for him, even though I did speculate as to how he might answer the experience issue.

          • Dmgdriver

            I would partially agree that Obama has more experience sitting in the White House than any other candidate, however he still has no idea how to be a leader for All American people, His whole term has been pitting one group of Americans against another. Unions Vs corporations. Everyone against Oil Companies. People against investors. Public against cops. Race vs race. He has traveled the globe leaving our countrymen wondering who he is representing. He is still looking for OJT and the new lies that he is perpetrating about his spending record is proof positive

    • jim_m

       Are you denying that obama has sleazy Chicago cronies?  Perhaps you should ask Tony Rezko.  He can be found in the penitentiary.

  • jaydee36

    The wapo racism article wasn’t written for the readers. it was self assurance for the authors.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/4OTVO6WHWHCVYPHFJSSUXJV5WY Larry

    My IRA has been flat for three years.  Is it racist to notice that or is it racist to want it to be different?

    • jim_m

       Neither.  But it is racist to point it out and it is a criminal act to criticize the President (or at least say the educational authorities in NC).

    • jim_m

       Neither.  But it is racist to point it out and it is a criminal act to criticize the President (or at least say the educational authorities in NC).

  • bflat879

    You know what’s funny, this is going to be one of the things that causes Obama to lose.  I jokingly had a signature line, on my e-mails, that said, “Vote Republican and only be called a racist one more time.”  The racist line has been so over-used people are just sick of hearing it.  It appears the only way to get rid of it, as a weapon, is to elect a White guy to the White House, then you can disagree with his/her policies and not be called a racist.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_GFS7MK7YRT7KVVOROOIXTJJLHI moron

    It could be racism. After all, Democrats created the KKK and created the Jim Crow laws.

  • tt11

    As a Dem KY voter let me explain my vote.  My local elections are all D so if I want a say in local politics I have to register that way.  I support gay marriage and the repeal of DADT.  I think the drug war is the silliest damn thing out there.  Marijuana should be legalized and put into the water supply like fluride.  I voted uncommitted and I’ll vote for Mitt in the fall.  Obama has been a disaster with the exception of the DADT repeal.

  • Aristotle120

    How come only 40% voted against him?I guess the other 60% are anti-Mormon bigots . .  .

  • Aristotle120

    How come only 40% voted against him?I guess the other 60% are anti-Mormon bigots . .  .

  • waterfowl

    I think you mean “intra-party rebellion.” Just sayin’.

  • waterfowl

    I think you mean “intra-party rebellion.” Just sayin’.

  • http://www.facebook.com/craig.mclaughlin2 Craig McLaughlin

    The Arkansas primary was an open primary. I am a registered republican and I voted for Wolfe.

  • http://www.facebook.com/craig.mclaughlin2 Craig McLaughlin

    The Arkansas primary was an open primary. I am a registered republican and I voted for Wolfe.

  • jim_m

    It’s just evidence of the truth of the statement, “In 2008 Americans voted for obama to show they were not racists.  In 2012 they will vote against him to prove they are not stupid/”

    • zen

       But it will be too late.

  • jim_m

    It’s just evidence of the truth of the statement, “In 2008 Americans voted for obama to show they were not racists.  In 2012 they will vote against him to prove they are not stupid/”

  • He_Wei_Jin

    Of course the Democrats will blame racism, but why should it bother them? Don’t they encourage ethnic groups to cherish their grievances and vote as racial groups rather than as individual Americans? Why would they think white Democrats to behave differently from others in their collection of interest groups?
    I don’t think that. I think that these Democratic voters voted against the Dear Leader because they are racists. I think that they voted against him because they are opposed to his policies.
    The Dear Leader certainly didn’t help himself with his antipathy to the coal industry. His promises to shut down coal plants and drive up energy costs, to say nothing of his other policies to expand the intrusive reach of the government in all aspects of life had more to do with his embarrassment than his complexion did.

  • He_Wei_Jin

    Of course the Democrats will blame racism, but why should it bother them? Don’t they encourage ethnic groups to cherish their grievances and vote as racial groups rather than as individual Americans? Why would they think white Democrats to behave differently from others in their collection of interest groups?
    I don’t think that. I think that these Democratic voters voted against the Dear Leader because they are racists. I think that they voted against him because they are opposed to his policies.
    The Dear Leader certainly didn’t help himself with his antipathy to the coal industry. His promises to shut down coal plants and drive up energy costs, to say nothing of his other policies to expand the intrusive reach of the government in all aspects of life had more to do with his embarrassment than his complexion did.

  • He_Wei_Jin

    Meant to say that I don’t think that they were racist. Unlike other Democrat voters they looked at his performance and found it wanting.

  • Fearsome Pirate

    It continues to mystify party officials why Democrats in Kentucky and West Virginia continue to reject candidates who declare war on coal and promise to bankrupt every coal plant and put every coal miner out of a job. Who can solve this impenetrable mystery?

  • Pingback: Ed Driscoll » Shorter WaPo: Why Do Those Bitter Clingers Hate Obama So?

  • http://profiles.google.com/mhjhnsn Martin Johnson

    When WaPo accuses you of racism, consider it a badge of honor.

    • wolfie773

      They’re just preparing to call us all racists when Romney gets elected.  Let’s give them that opportunity.

  • Lavaux

    It can’t be that Obama and the MSM are too far left for 40% of Democrats living in red states. Nope, it must be that red states are racist states.

    You know, this exercise in self-deception is one of ideological self-preservation. The leftists controlling the Democrat Party and the MSM must attribute their failures to faults inhering in the nation and her people. The leftists are out ahead of the regressive troglodytes, and so rejection must result in redoubled efforts to bring them the light of reason.

    Note how this mentality exposes the leftists’ notion of the state’s role in society: The state serves us by converting us to the state’s way of thinking, saying and doing. The state does not serve us by doing what we want it to do. To illustrate, a conversation between us and the leftists controlling the Democrat Party and the MSM:

    Leftists: You are using too much gasoline and electricity because they are too cheap, so we need policies that raise the prices.

    Us: No, we’re paying too much for gasoline and electricity and can barely afford them, so we want policies that lower the prices.

    Leftists: You’re killing the planet.

    Us: Nonsense. We’re changing the channel to Fox News and voting for Republicans.

    Leftists: Racists!

    • herddog505

      Hear him, hear him!

  • VictorErimita

    The far Left doesn’t understand, or want to understand, that making childishly absurd allegations against everyone who doesn’t go along with everything they want at any given moment offends and alienates more people all the time, including many who were their allies yesterday. This is a good thing. OWS, Wisconsin hysterics, a perfidious media, vile “comedians” and “entertainers,” a lying, sniveling president—all these things and more reveal the true nature of the Left and put to the lie the pop culture narrative that the Left is where the smart, moral people are.

  • LouAnnWatson

    They’re beating white citizens with a racist nerf bat at this point…we’re all out of guilt. Hussein got his afirmative action election, it’s time to finally close that program down and move on…

  • http://thevailspot.blogspot.com/ Rich Vail

    It’s only racist to the WaPo…to the rest of the country (outside the blue coastal states and urban centres), it has to do with everything he’s done has exascerbated the recession as well as sparking a tremendous inflationary spiral…after all, while the “government” says inflation is only 3% my grocery bill as well as what I spend on energy has risen by about 25%.  But it’s not inflation…

    Obama is a failed president and will go down in history as one of the worst ever, vying for that title with James Earl Carter and James Buchanan (Buchanan’s policies directly caused the Civil War)…

  • Pingback: Brutally Honest

  • Jwb10001

    Wait I thought our first black president came from Ark? How can they give us the first black president and be racists at the same time?

  • Pingback: Obviously, Obama’s Kentucky And Arkansas Beat Down Was Raaaaacism : Stop The ACLU

  • Pingback: Obviously, Obama’s Kentucky And Arkansas Beat Down Was Raaaaacism » Pirate's Cove

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Nancy-Lebischak/100000493555704 Nancy Lebischak

    I just love the way it’s always race. But, one thing I can not understand is that if the race calls are correct he would have never been elected in the first place, so that alone should make those that cry race shut up. 

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/LOXDD2UM4OCP7WRGOZENQVN75M madman

       The race card is all the liberals have and that makes them raciest for bringing that up.  With his very poor record,lies, and total dislike for our Constitution,Christian faith and our courts they have nothing positive to say for him. If the liberal clowns want a socialist government and a dictator than they will have one if he stay on as president,or rather dictator.  The man is a Marxist,socialist  ass out to destroy America and it has nothing to do with race.  Wake up you liberal half wits.

  • wilmarie_sena

    i just don’t feel hes right to be in office again it too much work for him

  • Woodbutcherjohn

    “Kool aid drinkers” is a reference to the Jonestown, where the followers trusted Jones and drank the concoction. Don’t try to make it a race thing.

    • Banjo12

       Congratulations for figuring out his meaning.

  • ChurchSox

     well said.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_JWQA7UNUUIIMBX4KGDE6MOT3EA Living the Life

    Why is any of this based on Racism?? Obama is 1/2 white and 1/2 black. To call someone that doesn’t like Obama a racist means you must hate white people to. Its beyond me why it was said in 08 and still being said now

    • 914

      Because liberalism is a mental disorder..

  • http://www.wizbangblog.com David Robertson

    Was the Kentucky primary a closed primary?

  • http://profiles.google.com/tallbass Daniel Schwartz

    Somebody once said that in 1980, people were not voting for Reagan, they were voting against Carter… and that if Reagan had run unopposed he would have lost.

    That’s been a joke for over 30 years, and I never thought I’d see the day that an unopposed candidate would lose an election.  President Obama seems determined to make it happen.

  • LarryBassett

    It could be enlightening were a good reporter to invest only a bit of time in analysing the election results by precinct and report on the disproportionate FOR Obama votes in those precincts that have very high, to majority, black population. Having done so, a legitimate article might be written alleging racism… but not the racism suggested by WAPO.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Peggy-Griffin/100000392233132 Peggy Griffin

    Is it racism?  What an utterly ridiculous excuse!  No, it’s because this President is trying with every fiber of his being to force marxism down our throats!  Nothing but the best for him and his family and a few of his nearest and dearest friends (who share his love of marxism), while the rest of the country labors under the stress of crushing taxes, regulations, and ever-growing federal debt.  His mantra is “tax the rich” but the middle class will of course be hit with tax increases too, and everyone who pays for food, fuel, clothing and housing knows they are paying more for everything.  The truth is that the majority of us have had our eyes opened since 2008, and seeing Obama’s true agenda raises the hair on the back of our necks and sends shivers down our spines.  Except for the talking suit news reader who is probably still so ignorant that he still gets tingles up his legs.

    They can try to play the race card, but it’s not going to work, and most of us deeply resent that they try to make this a matter of race.  It’s not the color of Obama’s skin; it’s his devotion to marxism, his contempt for our Constitution, and his determination to use every means possible to overthrow our rights and change our country into a socialist nightmare that will impoverish us and destroy our way of life.  

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Jack-Zimms/100003653414389 Jack Zimms

    Voting based on the candidates skin color is racist. Just
    think of all those racist who voted for Obama because he is black.

     

    • yarddawg8381

      I don’t dislike Odumbo because he’s 1/2 black, I don’t like the white half either!!  He’s a Racist/Marxist and a Socialist idiot is why I don’t like him!!

  • Yoshi

    The common sense “Oakies” see right through the snake oil salesman.  This mixed race president has some people mixed up but these southerns know better than to have him fool them twice. 

  • Pingback: Hard Astarboard » Blog Archive » Fraud? Deceit? Democrats? Gimme a break!

  • 914

    Barry may not be able to fool the fools who voted for him last go round. But there are enough idiots out there that he may take all the big blue states. God help us if the dead turn out again for him..

  • pj4me

    AWESOME!!!! You summed it up BEAUTIFULLY!!! “Certainly it wasn’t Obama’s elitism, or his anti-Americanism, or his sleazy Chicago cronies, or his youthful infatuation with cocaine and Marxist professors, or his long-time association with a radical domestic terrorist, or his membership in a church led by one of the most inflammatory Black separatist pastors in the country.”

    Yup, we don’t care if he’s blue — his policies and agenda are still the same.  And let’s push this further. Anyone like Pelosi or Reid? I happen to think THEY need to be impeached! Is THAT racist??? Hmmmm???

    So you called it like it was, and may the “Bigot Belt” do it again for 2012!!! I’m right there standing with you!

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tim-Hadds/100003760561328 Tim Hadds

    African for Africans, Asia for Asians, but White Countries for Everybody?

    The Netherlands and Belgium are just as crowded as Japan or Taiwan, but
    nobody says Japan or Taiwan will solve this RACE problem by bringing in
    millions of third worlders and quote assimilating unquote with them.

    Everybody says the final solution to this RACE problem is for EVERY White
    country and ONLY White countries to “assimilate,” i.e., intermarry, with all
    those non-Whites.

    What if I said there was this RACE problem and this RACE problem would be
    solved only if hundreds of millions of non-blacks were brought into EVERY black
    country and ONLY into black countries?

    How long would it take anyone to realize I’m not talking about a RACE
    problem. I am talking about the final solution to the BLACK problem?

    And how long would it take any sane black man to notice this and what kind
    of psycho black man wouldn’t object to this?

    But if I tell that obvious truth about the ongoing program of genocide
    against my race, the White race, Liberals and respectable conservatives agree
    that I am a naziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews.

    They say they are anti-racist. What they are is anti-White.

    Anti-racist is a code word for anti-White.

    Be Sociable, Share this message!

    • Jwb10001

      Hey Chico, Bruce, Grumpy, etal, he’s not one of ours.

Optimization WordPress Plugins & Solutions by W3 EDGE