Wednesday, August 28, 2013

Sharpton and Obama: One and the Same

Wow.  There has been quite a bit going on in the last week or so.  The usual Obama protectors from the MSM are doing their thing and not reporting on anything significant about the ongoing news regarding Fast and Furious, Benghazi, the NSA spying and the IRS targeting of citizens (especially the Tea Party and other conservative groups) and his using the death of a black teenager as a convenient distraction to all of them.

Each link is new items that the mainstream media should be reporting on as soon as it crosses their desks, or one would think.
There's also the biggest racist on the planet Mr. Al Sharpton, who continues to portray himself as a leader of the black community while continuing to divide, smear and outright lie about his detractors.  Now the fool just reaffirmed to being the total coward and hypocrite that he is when he finally spoke up about the Chris Lane murder.  The astronomical jackhole even managed to say the murder of Lane by two black teenagers (plus a white accomplice after the fact) wasn't race-related.  Get that?  A white teen murdered by two black teens because they were "bored," isn't race-related and that the "system worked."  Yep.  A Hispanic man shoots an unarmed black teenager who looks suspicious (with a history of theft and drug use) and is exonerated in court with a verdict of not guilty; he's still a "cold-blooded murderer.  But yet when a black man shoots an unarmed white teenager who was originally no threat to him as the black shooter was in his house before the shooting, then the black shooter is just a legally-armed concerned citizen.  Nah.  That's not hypocritical (and clearly racist on Sharpton's part)   The Daily Caller's Lisa Fritsch has a nice take on the "good" reverend.  Part 1 & part 2.
Does Sharpton know about shooter James Edwards racists tweets about "knoccin out 5 woods (that's the racist term 'peckerwoods') since Zimmerman court?"  Or "90% of white ppl are nasty.  #HATE THEM"  Of course he does, but it wasn't race-related.  No.  Not at all.

The police in the Lane case (according to Sharpton) said it was an "isolated incident" and "there was "no racial motive for the killing."  Um, the police said the exact same thing in the Trayvon Martin shooting, but that didn't stop the racist Sharpton from causing (along with Obama's lapdog, the equally racist Eric Holder) even more racial tensions and hatred; most likely influencing the beatings of Hispanics and whites by blacks days and weeks after the George Zimmerman verdict.

For the record, I agree with the verdict of Mr.Scott (that you will read about in a following link) it's just how can one not want to slap Sharpton and his followers upside the head when he brazenly lies and obfuscates the facts of obviously closely related incidents.  But you see, the victims in two of the three incidents weren't the same skin color as Sharpton, so of course the "system worked" in only one of them.

If you recognized the circumstances of the above description, guess what certain case in which the system supposedly didn't work in Sharpton and every race-hustler's eyes, thanks to a divisive and irresponsible media?  Nope.  Not this one in New York.  Or this one in Washington State.  And since Obama had a white grandfather who also served in World War II, why hasn't the Chosen One made mention of how if he had a (living) grandfather, he would look like Belton?  Don't hold your breath waiting for that one.  And if this so-called president apparently chooses thugs for sons (if he had any) could one theorize that Belton was killed by two of them?

Speaking of the Lane and Belton murders, the left is already on the offensive, trying to minimize the effect of the two black-on-white murders by printing preemptive strikes against the obvious hypocrisy and racism of Sharpton, Obama and their ilk.  Nevermind "conservative hate-talk" (as far as the moonbats think) and "targets" on a Sarah Palin election map a few years ago that supposedly led to the shooting of Gabriel Giffords (also nevermind the fact that the hateful death cult of the left would have said Giffords deserved it if she were a Republican and the fact that in a 2008 campaign speech, when talking about his conservative opponents then Senator Obama said "if they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun.") it's apparently o.k. for the left to jump to those inane conclusions and use violent rhetoric and imagery, but the right should never, never make the same, and perhaps even more relevant argument about Obama being some what responsible for these deaths given that he helped to burn the flames of racism even further?
(For the record the Democrats were using "target maps" a good year before Palin did)
No, for you see to the moonbats like Chauncey DeVega over at Alternet thinks if you merely say something like, "Conservatives are desperately searching for their white version of Trayvon Martin..." and once someone even remotely compares these crimes (without the media hardly saying boo about the white victim crimes) they can then claim "See?  See, I told you they would do this," as if raising the question about their coincidences has no merit.  Then the race card comes out and the other side is supposed to immediately shut up or be shut down.

Of course Sharpton just participated in the 50th anniversary of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s "I have a dream" speech and preached about equal opportunity and equal rights.  Although he did so without Tim Scott, the only black senator in the country who was not even invited.  The only black senator in either party was not invited to the 50th anniversary of one of the most paramount speeches in the 20th century.  It goes to show you that the organizers don't care about influential or successful blacks, unless they're race-baiting "progressives."
Does Sharpton even realize what century he's in? Does he know there's a half-black president occupying the White House?  He's only black when he wants to be. (that's from Harry Reid folks, not me) And why doesn't anyone interview Bernice King?  The youngest child of Dr. King?  Is it because she shares some conservative and/or traditional family and social values?

Finally, I'm not one to agree with Margaret Carlson, but she pretty much nailed this one.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

  • /* Profile ----------------------------------------------- */ #profile-container { margin:0 0 1.5em; border-bottom:1px dotted #444; padding-bottom:1.5em; } .profile-datablock {