BlackPerspective.net

Back in New Hampshire I told you this would be her continuing strategy.

First she sent out Whites, then she and Bill did it them selves, then they rolled out their Top Negroes, now they’re sending their Hispanics to race-bait.

According to CBSTV11 A prominent Hispanic Clinton supporter, Adelfa Callejo, in Dallas said recently that:

“When Blacks had the numbers, they didn’t do anything to support us,” said Callejo. “They always used our numbers to fulfill their goals and objectives, but they never really supported us, and there’s a lot of hard feelings about that. I don’t think we’re going to get over it anytime soon.”

Moreover she said “Obama simply has the problem that he happens to be Black”.

CBS11TV continiues that:

Callejo attended Sen. Clinton’s rally in Oak Cliff last Friday morning. In a satellite interview Wednesday, Sen. Clinton said she was unaware of what Callejo has said.

“I believe strongly that the fact that we have an African American and a woman running for the Democratic nomination is historical and I’m very, very proud of that,” Clinton said. “I want people to look beyond race and gender and look at our records.”

CBS 11 asked Sen. Clinton if she would reject or denounce Callejo’s support because of her comments. She responded, “People have every right to express their opinions. I just don’t agree with that. I think that we should be looking at the individuals who are running. That’s what I intend to do.”

This was Wednesday when Clinton was asked this. Less than 24 hours after she lectured Obama in the Ohio debate that denouncing Farrakhan was some how not good enough and that rejection was neccessary.

Clinton said in the debate: Tim, I just want to add something here because I faced a similar situation when I ran for the Senate in 2000 in New York, and in New York there are more than the two parties — Democratic and Republican — and one of the parties at that time, the Independence party, was under the control of people who were anti- Semitic, anti-Israel, and I made it very clear that I did not want their support. I rejected it. I said that it would not be anything I would be comfortable with and it looked as though I might pay a price for that. But I would not be associated with people who said such inflammatory and untrue charges against either Israel or Jewish people in our country.

And you know, I was willing to take that stand and, you know, fortunately the people of New York supported me and I won but at the time, I thought it was more important to stand on principle and to reject the kind of conditions that went with support like that.

So let me get this straight…her supporter basically says Obama should not be voted for because he’s Black, and Hillary does not reject her but supports her “right to exress [her] opinion”. Therefore she’s saying she is comfortable with racism against black people just not against New York Jews. Hmmmm.

She’s not okay with Farrakhan having opinions (I guess because he’s Black) but she’s fine with anything her supporters say, even if racially devisive.

Hillary Clinton’s fork tongued, utter hypocrisy just continues. As I said about the speech palaigerizing thing, if you’re going to set a standard and scold people on it, you better first stick to it yourself.

I denounce and reject Hillary Clinton and her devisive politics, race-baiting, and dirty tricks.

You owe him an apology.

Elder Dick Gregory at Black State of The Union:

That’s right!

You got all mystified and fell in love. Now the mystification is wearing off, and y’all left him swinging in the wind. What up wit that?

Michael Baisden and The Mystification of the Negro

For The Back Story You Can Read: Elections Spark Mass Violence In Kenya

Hopefullly this will signal and end to the tragedy there; but what’s still a tragedy is that this type of thing can breakout so easily.

Kenya rivals sign power-sharing deal
By Duncan Miriri and Giles Elgood

NAIROBI (Reuters) - Kenyan President Mwai Kibaki and opposition leader Raila Odinga signed an agreement on Thursday after talks on power-sharing to end a post-election crisis.

In a televised ceremony, the two political rivals inked an deal hammered out under the mediation of former U.N. chief Kofi Annan, who had earlier said the two sides had reached agreement on the terms of a coalition government.

Annan said after the signing: “We have a deal.”

A key part of the deal included the creation of the post of prime minister, as demand by the opposition, he said.

Thursday’s talks brought Odinga and Kibaki to the same table for the first time in a month, after discussions between negotiators for the two men hit a deadlock earlier in the week.

Rest of the article

Kenyan Rivals Agree To Share Power

Kenyan President Mwai Kibaki and opposition leader Raila Odinga have signed an agreement to end the country’s post-election crisis.

At a ceremony in Nairobi, the two men put their signatures to a power-sharing deal brokered by ex-UN head Kofi Annan.

A coalition government comprising members of the current ruling party and opposition will now be formed.

Some 1,500 people died in political violence after Mr Odinga said he was robbed of victory in December’s polls.

International observers agreed the count was flawed.

Violence has mostly receded, but tensions are still running extremely high.

The rest of this story can be seen at BBC News

The Bush administration uses terrorism and 9/11 to create a Boogeyman justification for all of its warrentless wiretapping and data mining and spying on Americans.

The fact of the matter is that warrentless spying was begun by the Bush administration almost as soon as he took office, at least 7 months before the September 11th attacks; proving that the warrentless wiretapping that was initially uncovered had nothing to do with the need to rapidly respond to 9/11 to prevent more attacks as claimed by the Bush administration; but was a power grab and frontal assault on the constitution and our freedom

This article details how the Bush administration went to the telecommunications industry to get American’s phone calling info months ahead of 9/11.

This article details the NSA’s comprehensive spying from the time Bush took office.

This is why the Protect America Act that expired the week before last should be allowed to die; and why the House leaders must be both implored to maintain the protection of the Restore Act (sponsored by Reps Reyes and Conyers) and reject amnesty for the criminal telecoms that violated well established law and the constitution.

You can call or email the Democratic House Leadership. Here’s a letter that I’m sending, feel free to use it in whole or in part:

Senate democrats have already sold the people down the drain in giving amnesty for Corporate Telecoms crimes. An act that if passed would also virtue end investigation into illegal spying by the Bush administration and government culprits.

The democrats as a whole have again and again given lip service to protecting civil liberties; but then voted to shred the constitution through patriot act spying and informant powers and through the various updates to FISA and the Protect America Act.

The House leadership and individual House members are being given another chance to do the right thing and turn back the tide of increased and unconstitutional usurping of power to the Executive branch and to the government in general.

Uphold the Fourth Amendment. Don’t negotiate amnesty for crimes by the rich and powerful, don’t negotiate more warrentless wiretapping powers, and make sure all the protections of the Restore Act are apart of any spy bill!

Here are the email address of the four principle house leaders. The first two are Speaker Pelosi’s, then Judiciary Chair Conyers, Majority Leader Hoyer, Intelligence Chair Reyes, and Majority Whip Clyburn AmericanVoices@mail.house.gov, sf.nancy@mail.house.gov, John.Conyers@mail.house.gov, steny.hoyer@mail.house.gov, Silvestre.Reyes@mail.house.gov, james.clyburn@mail.house.gov

General Switch Board for the House of Representatives, where you can get anyones number 202-224-3121

Call these people as well as emailing them.

Well it’s not now just beginning but they’re revving it up.

Obama’s swift boat, clearly, from the republicans, the Clinton Campaign and from the media; is that he’s either an outright Muslim Manchurian candidate sleeper, or at least an anti-Jew sympathizer.

Tim Russert asked Obama about Farrakhan endorsing him, more or less, at a Nation of Islam (NOI) conference. I wrote about Obama denouncing Farrakhan in my piece
Did Barack Obama Just Pull a Bill Clinton “Sister Souljah Moment”, back in January.

It’s funny that Russert would bring it up now when he denounced or rejected; which ever term makes Senator Clinton feel good in her Clintonese speak of “it depends on what the meaning of the word is, is”, when he denounced it 5 weeks ago. I guess I follow presidential news more closely than NBC New’s Washington Bureau Chief who gets paid to follow this stuff fulltime, all day long. That’s real curious.

As to the quote where Obama’s pastor has said that if Obama’s supporters found out that he (Jeremiah Wright) had taken a trip to Libya with Farrakhan in 1984 that his Jewish support would dry up; I read that back then as well when researching the aforementioned piece. I guess Tim’s just finding out, because if he’s not it’s curious he didn’t ask the last time he moderated a debate.

This the day after the Clinton campaign leaked a pic showing Obama in traditional Muslim dress [edited 3/3: we’ve founded out that it isn’t even muslim dress, just tribal elders gear] over his kakis and polo during a five country African tour, something that a great many politicians, including Senator Clinton has done her self; and only hours after a McCain surrogate at his rally today made a point to referring to him as “Hussien” repeatedly. But the subtext is that this guy has called Obama a “sleeper cell” and “Muhammad” on the radio airwaves recently.

This is all again not new in and of itself, for instance; right before the Iowa Caucus vote and in early primary states, just days before the vote; massive emailing went out claiming Obama as a sleeper Muslim. Coincidently I’m sure…that it happened specifically in the states that were about to vote…just coincidence.

Thing is now the operatives seem to be revving it up; and loving the salaciousness that “Willie Horton-ing” Dukakus brought to the “news” airwaves and “swiftboating” Kerry brought; the media is all for going right along with it.

The media wants to look like it actually has integrity by going hard against candidates, particularly if its one they’re accused of having favor for; plus this type of stuff fits into their simpleton, doldrum, yellow journalism way of doing “news” these days, as opposed to breaking down the candidates positions on important issues.

Expect more of this. I’ve already been hipped to some of the “kitchen sink” tactics coming down the pike.

And Hillary can stop with her fiegning of Jewish loving integrity, Bill’s good best buddy from Arkansas Paul Fray says she called him a “fucking Jew bastard”

According to Deidra at Black and Missing But Not Forgotten America’s Most Wanted has finally done a profiled of the missing and feared to be kidnapped teen.

It’s still mostly old news and a paltry amount of information.

It does however give good photo’s of believed kidnapper Andrew Tafoya’s tattoos.

The site state’s that:
“For over two months, authorities in Calif. have been on the lookout for a missing Ventura, Calif. high school student, Chioma Gray. At midnight on Dec. 13, 2007, cops say Chioma’s boyfriend, Andrew Tafoya, was released from his work furlough program and then stole a white 2008 Acura TSX. According to police, phone records show that Tafoya and Chioma were in contact up until the time that Chioma was dropped off at school. From there, authorities believe that Tafoya picked Chioma up at her high school and drove to the U.S.-Mexico border where the Acura’s plates were recorded as entering the country. Neither Chioma or Tafoya have been seen or heard from since.”

This was posted on youtube just two days ago featuring Chioma and Rilya Wilson

The barbs from the two sides have gotten increasingly sharper over the last 3 days. Lets examine both fronts.

On Saturday Cliton was “handed” two mailers, at a rally; that were from the Obama camp, being sent to Ohio voters.

One is nothing new, it’s the same healthcare mailer that led to Clinton surrogate, Len Nichols, comparing Obama to Nazis in a conference call set up by the Clinton campaign on Febuary 1st. It all kind of reminds me of Godwin’s Rule of Nazi Analogies . I guess that applies to the longer a political campaign goes, as well as to the longer an internet debate goes.

The other mailer regarded a NAFTA criticism.

It goes like this. Hillary Clinton campaigned for NAFTA as First Lady; she claims her years as First Lady as part of her 35 years of experience that make her superior and ready to lead on day one; her husband signed the NAFTA she supported; NAFTA took away a lot of American manufacturing jobs, which blue color Ohio unionist don’t like; the Obama mailer quoted and cited Newsday as saying Clinton still thought NAFTA was “a boon” as of her 2006 Senatorial campaign; that citation was correct, Newsday did say that and admits it.

You can see pictures of all three pages of the mailer here. They may be hard to read on that website, but if you save them to your computer as jpegs and open them up there, they’re very clear. The words “a boon” are in quotes on the cover page as they should be, being that they are not the campaign’s words, but Newsday’s. Then after making the statement that Clinton thought NAFTA was “a boon” it tells you to look inside for details.

Inside, the full sentence by Newsday is quoted as a full sentence, and is cited to Newsday. The way the sentence reads there is no doubt possible that a third person is speaking in the quote and not Hillary herself. So last week Barack was called a plagiarizer for saying “just words” in a rhetorical argument that the person who used it before told him to use, because he didn’t’ cite that person. This week he specifically cited his source, and they still cry foul.

Newsday, for its part is shucking and jiving on the issue. You can read Newsday’s fork tongued “analysis”, where they waffle saying “The word [boon] was our characterization of how we best understood her position on NAFTA, based on a review of past stories and her public statements”…“Obama’s use of the citation in this way does strike us as misleading.”…“That said, we should have been clearer”.

All Obama did was quote Newsday and say Newsday said it. Newsday did say it, and they admit they said it; so what’s misleading? Newsday is trying to blame Obama for their sloppy ass “journalism” instead of taking repsonsibility.

Stop shilling for a candidate Newsday. At least my blog is admittedly my partisan views.

Obama stood behind the mailer on Sunday saying “Let’s be clear: It was her husband who got NAFTA passed. In her own book, Senator Clinton called NAFTA one of ‘Bill’s successes’ and ‘legislative victories,’ Obama said, referring to her memoir, Living History;” according to The Chicago Tribune

The other issue, The Obama Picture

The Drudge Report today reported on a leaked internal email within the Clinton campaign of Obama Dressed in Muslim garb over his Kakis and polo shirt while in Somali on a five country visit; with the emailer “complaining that if Clinton had dressed similarly to Obama, the picture would have made a news magazine cover story.”

Oh really, you mean like this:

Funny, I haven’t been seeing this picture around in the media. I guess the Clinton staffer’s assertion is not true, like much of the rhetoric from the Clinton Campaign

David Plouffe of the Obama camp called the email “shameful, offensive fear-mongering.”

In her excoriation of Obama on Saturday over the mailers, Clinton asked “since when do democrats attack democrats on universal healthcare”? Obama answered back in Akron on Sunday saying “Well, when she started to say I was against universal health care, which she does every single day.”

The Clinton campaign daily continues to craft “the biggest fairy tales that I’ve ever heard”; well, since the last time the Clinton’s were in office with rhetorical gems such as whether you did something or not “depends on what the meaning of the word is, is”.

Congress is back in session today after a one week recess, and we could have a warrentless wiretapping compromise between the House and the Senate being brought to the floor any day now.

Just getting most people to pay any attention, much less to act on this most important of issues - our Freedom – is a challenge.

Government has chipped away at the privacy and freedom of our people little by little over the decades, and then by big chunks during this latest administrations; but we have an opportunity to turn back the tide by defeating immunity for corporate telecoms who handed over our communications information to the government, and by override past legislation that practically allows for warrentless wiretapping against Americans.

You needed to call the House Democratic Leadership today; and tell them not to sell us out on our civil liberties, again (numbers are at the bottom of the post).

One of the fathers of American civil liberties, Patrick Henry, in making the case for revolution against the British crown stated that:

“ Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and, having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it.”

We cannot turn our eyes from this issue, pretended like it’s not there, and hope everything will just be okay. We must contact the Democratic Leaders in the house and let them know that the people will support them in finally standing up to Bush, and threat that we will get rid of them if they don’t.

This weeks Democratic weekly radio address was delivered by Judiciary Chairman John Conyers. In it, he talks about the Restore Act, which was passed by the House in November of ’07; that is to restore protections that some of the pervious spying legislation either did not have, or was ambiguous about; including the protect America Act that was signed into law in August of ’07.

We must implore the Democrats to stand strong in not even bringing to vote anything that doesn’t have the protections of the Restore Act, or for anything that gives amnesty to criminal telecoms.

Conyers says in the radio address that “We expect the House and the Senate will produce permanent legislation in the next few weeks. But as we continue to move forward, there should be no question in anyone’s mind that the United State intelligence agencies have the legal ability to take all actions necessary to protect the security of the American people. For anyone to suggest otherwise is irresponsible and totally inaccurate.”

Well if that’s the case, then we really don’t need the expired Protect America Act, nor the the Senates amnesty renewal version of it, right? Here the full address:

Tyrants and fascist will always tell you that there trampling of your rights is for your safety and protection; but no one is safe under tyranny.

Patrick Henry: “It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace– but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!“

House Democratic Leadersip:

Nancy Pelosi - House Speaker 202-225-4965

Steny Hoyer - Majority Leader 202-225-3130

James Clyburn - Majority Whip 202-225-3315

John Conyers - Judiciary Chair 202-225-5126

Sylvester Reyes - Intelligence Chair 202-225-4831

General Switch Board for the House of Representatives, where you can get anyones number 202-224-3121

House website: www.house.gov/

If you’re going to run a campaign making fake claims of plagiarism, you had better not be engaged in doing the exact same thing your making accusations about!

In this NPR roundtable I talk about why Clinton’s claim of Obama plagiarism is false.

Moving beyond that, what’s really so unbelieviable about it, other than it being so petty, is that Hillary routinely as a matter of course does the same thing. And even worse, she lifts stuff from Obama himself! And he didn’t give her permission.

For one, she routinely repeats Bill Clinton rhetoric from days gone by. Here’s one example:

Hillary Last Night: “You know, the hits I’ve taken in life are nothing compared to what goes on every single day in the lives of people across our country.”

Bill In ‘92: “The hits that I took in this election are nothing compared to the hits the people of this state and this country have been taking for a long time”, according to CNN

An article at Democratic Undergroud shows these lifts of repitious phrasology by Clinton, that is identical to the type of usage that she says is plagiarizing for Obama:

Here’s a major problem for Senator Clinton’s campaign if her staff and surrogates really want to engage in this so-called “plagiarism” debate. At the Jefferson-Jackson Dinner, Senator Clinton employed what’s called “anaphora” — a common technique of repeating a word or phrase for emphasis in a speech:

I see an America where we stand up to the oil companies…

I see an America where where we say that 47 million people uninsured…

I see an America where where we have schools worthy…

I see an America where where college is affordable again…

And so forth. It was a seriously awesome section of her Jefferson-Jackson speech. It’s a shame that (again, as long as the gloves are off and there has to be this ridiculous “plagiarism” debate) she lifted the “I see an America” anaphora from other politicians, including then-Governor Jimmy Carter. June, 1976:

I see an America poised not only at the brink of a new century, but at the dawn of a new era of honest, compassionate, responsive government.

I see an America with a tax system that does not steal from the poor and give to the rich.

I see an America a job for every man and woman who can work, and a decent standard of living for those who cannot.

I see an America in which my child and your child and every child receives an education second to none in the world.

I see an America in which Martin Luther King’s dream is our national dream.

I see an America on the move again, united, its wounds healed, its head high, a diverse and vital nation, moving into its third century with confidence and competence and compassion, an America that lives up to the majesty of its Constitution and the simple decency of its people.

I also discovered that the “I see an America” line has been used by Congressman Kucinich:

I see an America where equal access and equal rights are obtained by all

And John Edwards with the “I see and America” anaphora:

I see an America where last year the CEO of one of the largest health insurance companies in America made hundreds of millions of dollars in one year. I see an America where ExxonMobil’s profits were $40 billion just a couple of years ago. Record amounts, record profits.

Hell, a Republican running for Congress in the New York 20th named John Wallace used the “I see an America” anaphora (pdf file — there’s a whole page of it, but Wallace is not worth quoting here).

Is “Yes We Will” any different than “Yes We Can”?

How about forgetting a one word difference, Hillary Clinton used “Yes We Can” as a campaign slogan ONE DAY AFTER accusing Obama of plagiarism:

It’s her stance that using even a phrase that someone else used is plagiarism; so she’s not just a plagiarizer, she’s an utterly hypocritical plagiarizer.

Can we steal somebody else’s campaign slogan, Hillary Clinton says, Yes We Can!

I spoke yesterday on what Michelle meant to convey when talking about being proud of her country for the first time in her adult life, in this NPR interview.

But really it’s irrelevant what she said or meant one way or the other.

Here’s Bill O’Reilly’s response to her comment:
“I don’t want to go on a lynching party against Michelle Obama unless there’s evidence, hard facts, that say this is how the woman really feels. If that’s how she really feels—that America is a bad country or a flawed nation, whatever—then that’s legit.”

Wait a minute; you’re saying this is not a flawed country. You’re saying that America is as Godly perfection?

Anyway, moving past the nonsense of that premise; this guy has the gal to say its “legit” to lynch her if her opinion is not to his liking. I guess he’s going to be really upset when he finds out she was allowed to learn how to read.

Maybe Billo can get the same people that Kelly Tilghman was going to have lynch Tiger Woods to go get Michelle – ya know, a two for one.

This is easily far worse than what Imus said. Still, I can’t muster any outrage though, because it’s so expected and par for the course coming from O’Reilly, it’s kind of like being surprised that a baby pooped its diaper.

Maybe Kelly and Bill can be co-grand marshals for the lynch party parade.

Nooses are not a joke, and lynching isn’t either.