Racist Teabagging Assholes, Texas Secession, and the Secret Service
Apr. 17th, 2009 @ 01:03 pm
You don't get to blindly support an expansive and expanding federal government (Patriot Act, etc) for 8 years under a white president and suddenly decide that you oppose a big federal government the second a black man becomes president without revealing your true motivation. Nothing but racist bastards. To be sure, many of the signs being waved at the Teabagging events leave no doubt that hatred of "nigger president" is their true motivation.|
Now the moronic governor of Texas, Rick Perry (who they said would make Bush look good when he took over as Texas' governor, and has not disappointed in that regard), is talking secession. Yes, Texas wants to leave the union - again. The first time was because Texans wanted the power over black people. Now they want to secede a second time because they don't want a black person to have power over them as U.S. president.
I say let Texas leave. Let Florida leave too. America will be far stronger and suffer less with those two states out of the union.
Of course some conservative idiots like Perry and Tom Delay are talking about an old urban legend that says Texas has the right to decide itself to split up into up to four separate states. While there is some language in the Texas Annexation Bill that on the surface makes this sound plausible (though it doesn't specifically say that Texas gets to decide to split on its own), Article IV, Section 3 of the US Constitution clearly states that in order for a state to be split up into more than one state, it requires both the approval of that state's legislature AND the approval of Congress. An Annexation Bill (a law passed by Congress that brings a state into the union... which is normally done via treaty but was not with Texas), like any other law, cannot provide for something inconsistent with the Constitution. It's funny that these people talking about secession are also claiming "the muslim nigger president" they all hate is violating "state's rights" under the same Constitution. But they want to take unconstitutional action by unilaterally leaving the union or splitting into multiple states without the approval of Congress in violation of Article IV of the Constitution. Duhhhhhhhhh.
But I say let 'em go.
My only concern is that the Secret Service won't be able to protect Obama and his family from these crazy racist bastards. One of them is most likely going to make some attempt on Obama's life over the next 4-8 years, as they get even more rabidly anti-black under the Obama Administration. We've already seen one of these wackos shoot and kill some police officers over the purported "fear of Obama taking his guns." As I have said before, I question that motivation, but let's take it at face value for the moment. It would be very easy for these racist facists to want to martyr themselves "to save America from Nigger Communism" ... and I worry that because so many in law enforcement tend to lean towards the right wing, that some Secret Service agents won't protect Obama as vigorously as they protected Bush. Is there any validity to this concern? I'd conservatively hope that 98-99% of Secret Service agents are extremely dedicated, competent professionals who can put their duty before their own ideology. But what about the other 1 to 2 percent? Also, what if they see their "duty" as "protecting America" over protecting the President, such that they would believe their "duty" requires them to not protect Obama? I'm sure all Secret Service agents take an oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. What if they convince themselves that doing so requires the death of President Obama? I wouldn't put it past anyone who sees himself as a patriot to think it's worth a death to protect the country from enemies both foreign and domestic. Surely, it is worth an American life to protect the country - that can't reasonably be debated. All it would take is for one Secret Service agent to be unable to tolerate a black man as president. I really hope that such people have been adequately weeded out.
So, to the Secret Service agents who are bound to read this blog entry because of the keywords it contains (assuming they're doing their job), please do your very best to protect President Obama from all these right-wing racist jackfucks. They don't have the balls to actually say why they are whining and protesting and holding up signs (well a few of them do, but most will say it's about "taxes" or "big government". They were happy with the white president expanding government's size a few months ago - never said a word about it - and most will get tax cuts under Obama since most are in the lower to middle classes, at best. So it's not really about taxes or big government. It's about black skin and not a thing more. And they'd lynch Obama from a tree given the opportunity. Please do your job and don't let this happen. These guys are a much bigger threat to Obama than foreign terrorists (who are still a threat, of course).
|Date:||August 26th, 2009 02:43 am (UTC)|| |
Do you ever wonder why no one really posts comments on your blog? Maybe it's the unfounded accusations of racism, the name-calling reminicent of McCarthy, or the demagogic hatred of anyone who disagrees with you. At worst, the protesters are guilty of party-blindness--I doubt you actually are acquainted with any of these protesters, though, because if you were, you'd know that most protested the war in Iraq as a disastrous waste of money. But don't let the facts stop you! Calling them "Teabaggers" isn't a substantive attack on their position; pointing out alleged hypocricy on their part doesn't lessen the legitimacy of their claims. Wildly claiming racism whenever someone disagrees with Obama is the worst kind of populist demagoguery; it should not be tolerated in the Public Sphere, not to mention that it trivializes real instances of racism.
Also, I'm not sure if this site isn't some ingenious Neocon scheme to convince independents that leftists are hateful, ignorant, bile-spewing ochlocracists. Is that you from beyond the grave, Robert Novak?
|Date:||August 26th, 2009 06:00 am (UTC)|| |
Or maybe it's because I never advertise it anywhere. Unless someone looks for it, they'll never find a link to my little blog anywhere.
Also, for every 2 Anti-Republican posts, I have one anti-Democrat post. So I offend everyone (though not quite equally).
But the occasional post by some offended moron makes it all worth it.
|Date:||August 28th, 2009 06:04 am (UTC)|| |
I presume that 'offended moron' is me. But I have not revealed my relative intelligence because I am not so presumptuous as to blog. Whereas you have shown yours. Claims need warrants. Also, it doesn't hurt to maintain some degree of civility. It isn't so much that I disagree with what you say--I don't, in general, aside from perhaps your paranoid delusions concerning racism--as the fact that you fail to meet these two criteria mentioned previously. Especially the first. That one's really important in substantive discourse. Keep quiet and nobody knows whether or not you are a fool. But open your mouth and you remove all doubt.
|Date:||August 28th, 2009 06:32 am (UTC)|| |
|(Link)|I presume that 'offended moron' is me.
Being offended is the most useless, wasteful emotion a human being can express. What has anyone ever gained by being offended? I speak the truth here, no matter how ugly it is, and nobody has the right to be offended by the truth. Claims need warrants.
I'm not writing a law review article here. This is a blog - and a semi-private one at that. While I sometimes do link to websites that provide evidence for a particular statistic, I tend to avoid "political statistics" because they are all calculated with an agenda - the agenda of the group doing the study - and for every political statistic there is an equal and opposing one. The NRA's number of gun deaths in America per year is vastly different (and vastly lower) than the Brady "I Was Shot so Let's Ban Firearms in America" Group's number of gun deaths in America per year. I try to avoid political numbers as much as I can, though sometimes it's unevoidable.
As for other claims, I shouldn't have to explain why a cat is a mammal, or other such widely-known and easily verifiable facts.your paranoid delusions concerning racism
Such as? The only time I've mentioned racism lately is with respect to the "tea baggers" who are yelling and screaming (and packing heat) over "wanting their country back" from the Black President. These are the same people who had no problem with Bush and his Patriot Act, Bush and his huge deficit, Bush and his unilateral wars, Bush and his highly irresponsible spending of taxpayer money, ec. After 8 years of supporting huge, expensive government under Bush, when these people suddenly decide the government should be small and frugal the second the president becomes a black man, it is clear that their complaints about Obama's government are merely a pretext for hating the black president for being black. Obama has not raised anyone's taxes (that's something Congress does anyway), he has not taken away anyone's guns (I am an avid supporter of the 2nd Amdendment and I believe we should be able to purchase automatic weapons at walmart without so much as an ID, with no waiting period, and even children should be allowed to buy them), and he has not declared mandatory abortions for cute white fetuses. It's clear Obama was born in Hawaii, is a US citizen, and has a pathological desire to compromise with everyone, for everything, at any cost, no matter the reason.
I rarely talk about racism. The only time I do is with respect to the teabaggers.
|Date:||August 28th, 2009 03:43 pm (UTC)|| |
You need not fear; I am not offended--I thought you interpreted my rhetoric as that of an offended person. But, since I am always right, I don't get offended. Although I doubt this was a concern of yours.
The birther conspirators are not the same people as the "teabaggers" (although I am sure there is some overlap). While I respect that you do in other cases link to actual evidence when positing other claims (yes, claims need warrants, even outside of legal publications, even on the internet, even in a personal blog--you have, after all, exposed your worldviews to public scrutiny), your only warrant for why these "teabaggers" (again, making fun of their poor choice of names isn't a substantive argument) are racist is that they don't support Obama and are vocal about it. You also go on to claim that the "teabaggers" didn't protest Bush; I don't know if you know any of the participants, but I do. And you are wrong, at least in their case and a few others--they protested the Iraq War quite vocally--I believe I mentioned this before. So yeah, I would call it paranoia. Again--and I've said this before--those that didn't complain about Bush were likely just mindless followers too stupid or afraid to toe the party line. I get pissed off when people find racism where it isn't because it does trivialize real instances of racism. Not to mention (funny story about that phrase--clearly, one does mean to mention something, or else one would hold one's tongue. It's a rhetorical device called "praeteritio," which means "I pass over" in Latin) the whole aspect of me knowing some of the participants. They aren't redneck hillbillies who hate black people. They are doctors, so it can be said that they are contributing members of society.