Tuesday, June 29, 2010

"Negrophilia?" What IS that? And why does it matter?

What Is "Negrophilia" and Why Does It Matter?
By Sylvia Thompson | Published 06/25/2010

(Sylvia Thompson is a black conservative writer whose aim is to counter the liberal spin on issues pertaining to race and culture. She is a copy editor by trade currently residing in Tennessee.) BOOK REVIEW:
I recently finished reading the book "Negrophilia: From Slave Block to Pedestal--America's Racial Obsession," by Erik Rush, a black American author whose articles sometimes appear on ChronWatch. I thought it worth sharing what this term means in the context of what is happening in America. The information in Rush’s book needs to be disseminated throughout the country if we are to survive Barack Hussein Obama.

If I may paraphrase, the condition of negrophilia, spawned from political correctness (PC), is the irrational state of refusing to see evil in some blacks and attributing to all blacks a mythical “holiness*.” Sort of a twisted reasoning that blacks can do no wrong because they have suffered so much. Never mind that other races and groups have suffered as much or more, whites (even the sane ones) have been so indoctrinated through PC that they can’t see the idiocy in this thinking. That is deadly.

Consider these examples.

Obama has tried as best he can to put obstacles in the way of efforts to protect the Gulf coastline from the oil spill. He literally denied state officials the resources that they needed and requested. Governor Bobby Jindal of Louisiana went around him. Equipment is now being employed to dredge the oil away from the shore. Obama (through the Coast Guard) recently stopped the dredging. The excuse is that moving the sand harms the environment. The oil, of course, will do more damage to the environment and the economies of the states affected.

Why then would conservative leaders, such as Newt Gingrich, still be attributing the abysmal responses on Obama’s part to “incompetence.” Any right-minded person can see that these actions are by design. They are to destroy the oil industry and eventually the nation. Why can’t a man as intelligent as Gingrich grasp this fact? I think negrophilia fits here. Gingrich can’t bring himself to admit that Obama is an evil, disturbed man, because Obama is half-black.

Obama and his sycophants posed a six-month drilling moratorium until they can determine how to prevent another spill of this magnitude. Newsflash: As long as humans run an endeavor, there will always be accidents and mishaps. The evil in this move is glaring. Thousands of Americans will lose their jobs. If they do receive the shakedown money stolen from British Petroleum (BP), what are they to do after six months? The jobs won’t be there; they will go to foreign countries. These people are self-sufficient workers; welfare does not work for them.

Why won’t the Republican conservative leadership get behind the people taking legal action against Obama on this issue? Why aren’t they announcing broadly that the behavior is not against BP but against average Americans? What besides a disorder such as negrophilia can possibly account for this craven weakness in the opponents of Barack Obama?

Governor Jan Brewer and the citizens of Arizona decided that they would take action to protect themselves against the incursion of illegal aliens. Attorney General Eric Holder and Obama (both black men) immediately attacked their actions, without first having read the law that Arizona citizens proposed. Why was there such a tepid response from Republican leaders on this behavior? As an American, it shamed me that there was not more damaging outcry from so-called leaders.

Further, why is there not an actionable response to Obama’s disrespectful treatment of Governor Brewer? He simply ignored her as she pleaded for assistance. What white president could get away with that kind of crap? Not one. Yet the fear of Obama’s blackness, the disorder of negrophilia in play, ensured that the airwaves would be silent of people who could actually do something about the behavior: political leaders. I am livid witnessing the degree of spinelessness in face of such unprecedented lawlessness from Obama. It’s enough to make a sane person do something drastic--like join a militia.

And more, a general and his staff have made statements that reflect their true disgust toward a weak, pansy of a commander-in-chief, who despises them all. Obama has done more to cripple the American military than any enemy past or present could ever have hoped to accomplish. He is set on corrupting unit cohesion with open homosexual behavior in the ranks; he shows disdain for the fighting forces by rubbing his affinity for Muslims in their face, when Muslim Islamists are the very people they are fighting; and he despises the Judeo-Christian faith to which the majority of the soldiers adhere. That all Americans who oppose this miscreant Barack Obama are not standing before the White House gates with pitchforks and flaming torches (or the 21stt Century equivalents) is a sickening travesty. How much more will Americans allow this despicable person to do before they get in his face and say “No More!”?

Sadly, the only outcome that I can foresee (barring a real game changer at the polls in November 2010) is that the vast majority of Americans--the non-elites, the non-talking heads, and particularly, those who are not afflicted with negrophilia--will revolt. Whichever side wins that confrontation, Americans or Obama and the left, will face the task of rebuilding the nation, either in the image that the Founders relying on Judeo-Christian principles intended or the image that Obama and the left intend. If the left wins, there will be no America, as we once knew it.

Z: WELL! This book's quite something, isn't it........At least two Black Americans aren't afraid of saying what they think of Obama and NEGROPHILIA. By the way, Eric Rush is the Black musician/author who broke the Jeremiah Wright story.
What do you think of the ideas presented in the book review? It's pretty 'hot' stuff. I'm curious.

Pictures are Astronaut Higgenbotham, Lena Horne, Booker T Washington, and Thomas Sowell.......bright, independent, talented and self-made. They didn't rely on anybody thinking there's anything 'holy*' about them because of their skin color, did they.
(thanks, HAM..xxx)
z

46 comments:

Craig and Heather said...

What do you think of the ideas presented in the book review?

One of my regular blog stops is a lady who writes from a "black" perspective.

She's also sick of the race-baiting and stereotyping that just never seems to die in our country.

Perhaps the reason some people get whipped into a frenzy over skin color is because "cultural relevance" and "individual identity" have been so firmly attached to physical appearence?

The concept that an individual can do no wrong simply because he has a certain level of skin pigmentation is ridiculous. But I suppose it's possible that many Americans have bought into it.

H

Ducky's here said...

Regarding the suit against Brewer.

The primary petitioner is the Chamber of Commerce. Now I wonder what they have in the game that they would want to encourage illegal immigration.

I also get a kick out of this moron's Islamophobia.

The pure stinky cheese.

Why didn't Jindal call out the Louisiana guard to assist in the cleanup?

I Ain't Got No Blog said...

Please don't use such big words so early in the morning.
Good bloggin.. By this point I'm sure even you pinheaded Liberals like Wubber Ducky got the picture

Karen Howes said...

Someone recently said, "Race only matters to racists." I think that says it all.

Craig and Heather said...

Regarding the suit against Brewer.

The primary petitioner is the Chamber of Commerce. Now I wonder what they have in the game that they would want to encourage illegal immigration.

I also get a kick out of this moron's Islamophobia.

The pure stinky cheese.

Why didn't Jindal call out the Louisiana guard to assist in the cleanup?


G'morning, Sunshine.

Opus #6 said...

Can't we all just be judged on the content of our character?

Z said...

H, some of our Black bloggers are just plain Americans first and they're excellent to read, aren't they. I think many Americans have bought into the concept of color protection from criticism and it seems the election of Obama has supported that more than equalized matters, sadly.
I long for the day when an interviewer will not ask any black political candidate, Right or Left, any questions about color at ALL.
on the subject of equality, I was dismayed when Pelosi became Speaker of the House and SHE accepted the gavel holding her arms up like Popeye and alluding to her and making other allusions to her being a woman instead of just plain accepting the honor like a PERSON.
If one reads either of Obama's books, one can see how very important his color is to him, too...
this isn't helping anything.

Karen, good quote.

Z said...

Ducky, that Jindal situation is puzzling .... the leftist sites imply one reason the right implies others.......
It's time we stop maligning political sides and clean up the mess. Jindal's a very good guy or he wouldn't have been elected in a very dem state...why do you think this is happening?

If the leftist sites are right, why doesn't Obama lash out at Jindal, it would be VERY effective .."I'll take the blame, I'm president, but I have to have people working WITH me and if the governors won't accept the help I'm trying to give with the National Guard members I've released, will someone tell me why they're not?"
simple

Z said...

I'm flipping between CNN, MSNBC and FOX to get bits and pieces of the Kagan Hearings. CSPAN `1 and 2 aren't carrying it.
Anybody know where they're focused on that?

Anonymous said...

I remember the flap when somebody either on the radio or the telly used the word 'reneged'. I thought the end of the world had come.

Silvrlady

Anonymous said...

OOOPS! I meant 'niggardly'.

Silvrlady

HAM said...

Jindal did try to get "permission" to have the Louisiana Guard make sand barriers to protect the wetlands... Obama's response... "they would have to wait for them to study the effects and impact of redistributing the sand, on the environment!!!" Like millions of gallons of crude oil isn't going to have a negative effect beyond what "rearranging sand into a barrier would???" Ducky, you really need to find out why you have no common sense (either that or you can read anything that isn't left wing shill!!! You can lead a liberal to the truth, but you can't make them THINK!!!!

Z said...

re KAGAN: Did they not show ALL THE HEARINGS for Alito and Roberts? This is interesting, isn't it? It's just clippets on each channel between their own commentary..WHY?

HAM...I didn't find that Obama retort...good for you for digging it up. Thanks for coming by!

Z said...

http://dailycaller.com/2010/06/17/obama-promises-17000-national-guard-troops-for-gulf-oil-clean-up-but-only-1600-activated-so-far/

that's a pretty fair view of national guard and the oil spill.

Boy, it's hilarious watching CNN's coverage of the "Brilliant" Kagan! I'm loving this, as much as they're covering it...I wish they'd show Petraeus' hearing, too!

He just guaranteed "long term commitment" to Afghanistan. RUHROH

Faith said...

Sounds like an interesting book.

I haven't seen any of the Kagan hearing yet but I've had this website open for a while now to catch whatever they have of it -- it says it's "live coverage."

Always On Watch said...

Negrophilia -- another consequence of white guilt, I think.

Mustang said...

The federal government does some things well; for the most part, they are mostly responsibilities enumerated in the Constitution of the United States. Sadly, the tasks performed by the federal government that come to us through its violation of constitutional authority fails to meet even the basic standards of acceptability. In the case of Gov. Jindal, he is the senior official in his state and ought to have an unrestricted ability to respond to the oil spill disaster.

I think it is possible for the federal government to offer the governor unlimited access to resources, and to coordinate among the Gulf States without ‘taking over’ functions the federal government is least qualified to manage. The results of this disaster would appear to bear this out. Gov. Jindal can activate the Louisiana National Guard, but if he does, the state has to pay for them. If the federal government nationalizes the Guard, then the federal government has to pay for them. So far then it would appear that Gov. Brewer isn’t getting the help she asked for (and was promised), and Gov. Jindal isn’t getting the help he asked for, either. The question then is this: where is all the outrage that we witnessed directed by the press at President Bush? Any leftist who argues there is no double standard at work within the State Run Media is a damn liar.

But this post was about 'Negrophilia'; I agree with Karen’s statement (above). The first people to make claims of racism are racists —but I would add to this, also Democrats. It is gratifying to note that not all black Americans sign up for the enslavement offered to them by the Democratic Party since the end of the Civil War. One might recall that initially it was the vile and overt application of so-called Jim Crow Laws. Later, enslavement took the form of welfare programs designed to keep black Americans “in their place.” It worked for far too long, and I must say that I am gratified that we are seeing black Americans shun the politics of race. Unfortunately, the number of black conservatives was insufficient to keep Obama out of the White House but if we are fair, as AOW suggests, we must acknowledge that white moderates propelled Obama into the White House.

Ducky's here said...

And that was AFTER my coffee, Heather.

Z said...

Thanks, Faith, I'll check that out.

AOW, I think that's so true....and ridiculous...
and the right's let the media and our teachers rewrite history...all anybody has to do is read the David Barton book on Blacks in America to know that...astonishing news that even Blacks in his audience recently were shocked to know how proud they should be of the blacks who contributed so mightily in this country and are being IGNORED (even in textbooks) because that doesn't back the left's views on them and doesn't keep them dependent on gov't........This is why I included the pictures of highly successful black Americans on this post...and that's just a FEW.

Mustang...I read that, too, that Jindal was asking the Fed Gov't to please PAY for the National Guard when and if they are sent. Thanks for that input.

And, oh, yes...just IMAGINE how the press would be treating Bush?
Oh, wait...we don't have to IMAGINE, just see the Katrina coverage.

Craig and Heather said...

This might be a really pointless observation, but I've often wondered why a person can be at least half- Hispanic, Indian, Asian, Caucasian etc and still identify as "Black".

And those people are typically stereotyped as "Black".

Are we really so shallow as to assume that one's skin color tells us everything we need to know about a person?

H

Craig and Heather said...

And that was AFTER my coffee, Heather.

LOL!

cube said...

Negrophilia is a new term. I have heard of this before but it was referred to as the Magical Negro. Pop culture is rife with examples of them and the mystical native american.

Z said...

Cube, I hate the term, but I guess I have enough darned PC which turns me off the word that begins with Negro...
Am going to find that explanation of 'half black' and the way it was originally used by the founding fathers when I get back this afternoon, hopefully..busy day.

If anybody else has a few minutes to find it, it'd be by Googling David Barton, his new book, maybe Glenn Beck, because we've been lucky enough to get this information only thru his show, and it's very important...
thanks..

see y'all later. (I'm from SOUTHERN California, y'all!) :-)

Ducky's here said...

Stuff you only hear from Glenn Beck? Yeah, there's also stuff you only hear from Pam Geller but there's a reason for that.

See if you can figure it out.

Hint: It doesn't involve a media conspiracy.

Why does the right hang on to these gibones. I quit the Democracy Now ! podcast when Amy Goodwin really started going over the top with the conspiracy theories but the far right can't seem to join the world of reason.

Glenn Beck? The man may be insane.

Ducky's here said...

PBS is carrying the complete hearings, z.

Really, give it a try.

Speedy G said...

Glenn Beck? The man may be insane.

Insanity still beats a quacker from al Jib.

Mustang said...

“Why does the [left] hang on to these gibbons: Noam Chomsky, Saul Alinsky, Hillary Clinton, Karl Marx, Joseph Stalin …

David Barton is an Evangelical minister (this automatically warrants criticism from Daffy), a conservative political activist (strike 2 from Daffy) from Texas (Strike 3). His book American History in Black and White received widespread criticism from academia (otherwise known as the left) because even though Barton doesn’t have a PhD in history, he revealed that black Americans had a much larger role in the founding of our country than previously thought. He did the research, of course; he produced primary source evidences, but the left —who consistently go out of their way to keep black people in their place —have called Barton a revisionist and a pseudo-historian. These terms, of course, intended to diminish Mr. Barton. It makes you wonder why a group of people would so conspire to attack a man personally who is doing no more than revealing the product of his research over several years. Actually, I think we know the answer. And Daffy, of course, as part of the left, refers to Glenn Beck as insane and so many other epithets simply because Glenn Beck has the nerve to express his point of view.

I should note that these people, these so-called progressives, are using the same exact tactics the Soviets and Chinese Communists used to silence opposition (minus the proverbial bullet to the back of the head). Amazing, isn’t it? So what do we think Barack Obama will do once he can legally shut down the internet?

Hello? Is anyone out there?

Z said...

Mustang, I couldn't respond re Beck any better than you, so thanks.
Here are people who've never watched, but THEY KNOW HE'S INSANE! You can't make this stuff up.

Barton's too fine a man for most people..scarey to them.

Speedy, you haven't watched Beck, EITHER? You'll be surprised. No matter what else he is, he's never ONCE been refuted.>EVER..not with facts and figures. NEVER.

CRIME INC, as he calls those surrounding this WH is thriving thanks to people who won't open their eyes.

Z said...

Ducky..thanks for the PBS, I never even looked there. Good.

gramma2many said...

Thinking I better read the book:)

Z said...

This thing about Blacks being only THREE-FIFTHS a person is finally explained HERE by David Barton:

This is based on Gore's belief that the three-fifths clause of the Constitution was a pro-slavery provision - a provision declaring blacks to be only three-fifths of a person. Significantly, however, the three-fifths clause was not a pro-slavery clause, and it did not relate to human worth; rather, it was an anti-slavery apportionment provision designed to limit pro-slavery Southern representation in Congress.

The Constitution allowed one Representative to Congress for each 30,000 inhabitants in a State. Since slaves accounted for more than half the population in some Southern States, slave-owners in the South therefore wanted to count slaves as if they were free inhabitants, thus potentially doubling the number of their pro-slavery representatives to Congress. The abolitionists from the North strenuously objected to counting the slaves, knowing that the fewer the pro-slavery representatives in Congress, the sooner slavery could be eradicated.

Interestingly, the anti-slavery Founding Fathers, in debating this representation question, actually used many of the South's own arguments against them. One such example was that of William Paterson of New Jersey, a signer of the Constitution later appointed to the U.S. Supreme Court by President George Washington. Adopting the Southern arguments that slaves were property, Paterson argued that since "Negro slaves. . . . are no free agents, have no personal liberty, no faculty of acquiring property, but on the contrary, are themselves property, and like other property, entirely at the will of the master," then those slaves should not be used to calculate representation to Congress because, according to "the true principles of representation," legislative assemblies were the result of citizens sending representatives as their "substitutes."37 Since slaves could not attend a meeting of citizens or send a substitute in their stead, they therefore should not be used to allow slave-owners to gain more representatives to Congress.

Further exploiting the absurdity of the Southern reasoning, other anti-slavery Founders argued that if slaves were nothing more than property but still were to be counted for the purpose of congressional representation, then livestock in the North should also be included as the basis of calculating Northern representation. For example, according to the records of the Constitutional Convention:

Mr. [Elbridge] Gerry [signer of the Declaration from Massachusetts] thought property not the rule of representation. Why then should the blacks, who were property in the South, be in the rule of representation more than the cattle and horses of the North?38

James Wilson of Pennsylvania, a signer both of the Declaration and the Constitution, agreed:

Z said...

HERE IS THE REST:

Are they [slaves] admitted as citizens? Then why are they not admitted on an equality with white citizens? Are they [slaves] admitted as property? Then why is not other property admitted into computation?39

The anti-slavery leaders fully wanted Free Blacks to be counted, but not slaves, since counting slaves would increase the influence of slave-owners. Furthermore, Benjamin Rush of Pennsylvania, a signer of the Declaration of Independence and a co-founder with Benjamin Franklin of America's first abolition society, argued that if only Free Blacks were counted, it would have the "excellent effect of inducing the colonies to discourage slavery and to encourage the increase of their free inhabitants."40

When the issue finally came to a vote at the Constitutional Convention, slave-owners proposed that slaves be counted as full persons for purposes of representation. The motion lost, with only the most strident slave-owning States supporting the measure.41 With it clear that slaves would not be used as the means of doubling Southern representation, Benjamin Harrison, a slave-owner in Virginia, proposed a compromise, suggesting that two slaves be counted as one freeman.42 The slave States, however, rejected this proposal, wanting all slaves fully counted.43 The final compromise was that only sixty percent - that is, three-fifths - of slaves would be counted to calculate the number of Southern representatives to Congress.44

Yet, even though this measure reduced the number of slave-holding representatives to Congress, it was still seen as unfair by many in the North. In fact, the Massachusetts legislature passed a resolution objecting to the three-fifths clause because, in slave-holding States, "a planter possessing fifty slaves may be considered as having thirty votes, while a farmer of Massachusetts, having equal or greater property, is confined to a single vote."45 Clearly, the three-fifths clause was only a ratio used to calculate the amount of representation and had nothing to do with the worth of any individual.

Based, therefore, on the self-evident historical records, two prominent professors summarize the meaning of the three-fifths clause:

[T]he Constitution allowed Southern States to count three-fifths of their slaves toward the population that would determine numbers of representatives in the federal legislature. This clause is often singled out today as a sign of black dehumanization: they are only three-fifths human. But the provision applied to slaves, not blacks. That meant that free blacks - and there were many, North as well as South - counted the same as whites. More important, the fact that slaves were counted at all was a concession to slave owners. Southerners would have been glad to count their slaves as whole persons. It was the Northerners who did not want them counted, for why should the South be rewarded with more representatives, the more slaves they held? Thomas West, Professor of Politics 46

It was slavery's opponents who succeeded in restricting the political power of the South by allowing them to count only three-fifths of their slave population in determining the number of congressional representatives. The three-fifths of a vote provision applied only to slaves, not to free blacks in either the North or South. Walter Williams, African-American Professor47

Many of today's leaders, both black and white, tend to misrepresent the meaning of the three-fifths clause. Al Gore's invoking the three-fifths clause against George Bush is proof of this fact, and even Jesse Jackson makes the same uninformed claim. In the Shadow Convention of Los Angeles in August, 2000, Jackson complained: "There was a lot of talk a few weeks ago [at the Republican National Convention in Philadelphia] about the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia. In that Constitution. . . . African-Americans were considered three-fifths of a human being."48

Z said...

http://www.wallbuilders.com/libissuesarticles.asp?id=132

There is the site I got the information... excellent research and facts on Blacks in America.

Ducky's here said...

z, I hope you were watching Coburn's (R - The Planet Mongo) questioning.

Somehow he Federal deficit is the fault of judiciary interpretation of the commerce clause. Just stunning.

Z said...

Ducky, I didn't get to watch any of it...i had to leave just when you alerted me to PBS.
The Commerce Clause is such an umbrella for so much now (too much) that I can't even get a grasp of what you're saying.

I have to admit your (R-Planet Mongo) is pretty funny, tho.

tell me why you think he's wrong in 50 words or less (smile)...no nasty insults, just talk to me.

Ducky's here said...

BRACE FOR IMPACT, Z.

I agree that interpretations of the commerce clause have been overly broad.

Just what it has to do with the deficit alludes me at the moment, however.

Fun day, a woman I date (sorry Beamish, I'm straight) lives two doors down from the two Russian moles they uncovered yesterday. ever would have suspected them, real deep cover.

Z said...

Ducky, 'real deep cover' is right.
I heard some mole who called herself CYNTHIA MURPHY as dealing with some bigwig supposed friends of Dem Hillary Clinton. I'm wondering how long before the whacko left blames this on Republicans? :-)

But, seriously...that is very interesting, that they lived so close. Is that the couple I just heard had E. European accents they couldn't explain since the wife was supposedly from Brussels and the husband from Pennsylvania? Do you know? A married couple, right? I believe there's only one married couple.

And, BRACE YOURSELF, Ducky...they wanted to own their home in their names, but Russia'd said NYET!
CAPITALIST RUSSIANS? OH, NYET! :-)

Anonymous said...

With a few exceptions, the Republican politicians are spineless. What they fear is the media, which goes to great lengths to keep it that way.

As to the topic at hand, this (Negrophilia) is what comes with not dealing with black people honestly, and patronizing them for years, which I believe is racism and creates resentment which is a normal reaction to being patronized.

If we viewed people as individuals as we find them, and not a group to be "taken care of", or careful of not offending, with honest dialogue and discussion, we wouldn't be talking about this.

No group is special, and no group is above criticism. But, if we see people as peers and individuals, we don't fall into that trap of putting an entire group of people in a box from which they are expected not to stray.

There would be no "race card", no affirmative action, no "gender card", no "sexual orientation" card, etc., only an American card which everyone represents.

And certainly, no Negrophilia.

I think all of this is very sad, and has always been unnecessary. We cannot change the past, but we can learn from it, and affect the future positively, by shedding multiculturalism, shedding polarizing demographical statistics, and seeing each other as Americans who are all equal under the law, and who must be respected as citizens, with no particular license for exceptional treatment.

Pris

Ducky's here said...

Well, z, from accounts, this was a pretty clumsy operation. The couple didn't give any hint of being foreign and were pretty ordinary.

Obama sits down and talks with the Russians and then this. It's as if someone sandbagged him ... naugh.

Ducky's here said...

Hey mustang is the guy an ex marine? That would be hitting for the cycle.

"And Daffy, of course, as part of the left, refers to Glenn Beck as insane and so many other epithets simply because Glenn Beck has the nerve to express his point of view."

Charles Manson expresses his opinions, do you think he's sane. You kinda got lost there.

Z said...

Cucky..fascinating...so you think this is someone out to get Obama? You said "Obama sits down and talks with the Russians and then this. It's as if someone sandbagged him ... naugh."

Funny that the oil disaster, the 2nd fairly large one in 50 years happened about the day after he announced drilling needs to be done, even tho he knew he's ticking his base off BIG TIME and doesn't want to do it himself, anway. You think someone "sandbagged him" then? Maybe himself?

Anonymous said...

Too funny...watching everyone twist and turn themselves into PC'd acceptable commenters. To prove what? Their love of Blacks? Come on....if you all knew that a black family from Detroit or any other black ghetto in the US was moving in next door....you'd be thinking of selling and moving...pronto. Why? Before the neighborhood went to shit...that's why. And you know it.

Generally...there's not enough blacks who want off the plantation. Why? Cause it's easier to blame someone else for their failures. Someone else to blame for the offices they held which were given to them...and they betrayed. Yes...there's exceptions to the rule...but not enough to say that they're competent enough to lead. To free themselves of the handouts, ignorance, violence and poverty...that we've tried to lift them out of for the last 50 years. Blacks in America...live better that any black in Africa. Yet they continue to be...after trillions of our dollars...the least productive and most violent members of our "society".

Let's take a look: Camden, Trenton, Philly, Detroit, Newark, Rhodesia, South Africa, South LA, Liberia, Ghanna, Nigeria, Kenya, Wash. DC, Greensboro, NC, Baltimore, MD, and too many other places to mention.

Hey...sorry to burst your hopeless bubble...but some people just can't hack it. Even if we're all..."equal". Think about it....50 years after Israel was given it's place by a UN mandate...it's one of the most productive countries / people on the planet. 50 years after the civil rights act...we have a "post racial" affrimative action community organizer...elected by tribal votes and white guilt...and we're facing an America that will reflect the condition of any black ruled...failure.

Sorry...but...I'll await the ones who say...I have black neighbors...some of my best friends are black / gay / single moms / divorced / atheists...blah, blah...

Mustang said...

Charles Manson expresses his opinions, do you think he's sane. You kinda got lost there.

Um ... Ducky ... it's time for your meds, okay?

beamish said...

Ducky,

Does the "woman" you date have a mustache, or have his laser treatments paid off?

Craig and Heather said...

Um ... Ducky ... it's time for your meds, okay?

Probably just ran out of coffee

:)

H

Tiffany said...

The term ‘Negrophilia’ goes back to the time period after the Interwar in France. Especially after WWI, there was an increased desire for something new. The emergence of the jazz era and the arrival of entertainers such as Josephine Baker grabbed the attention of the masses. I understand where you are coming from on the topic of ’Negrophilia’, and how it can be applied to the election of Barack Obama. Although, I strongly feel that ‘Negrophila’ can also coincide with an educated decision; it’s not necessarily one of the other. You may argue the reason of Obama’s election is that America was merely tired of the same routine of white Presidents ruling and they wanted a change. But I will also argue that although the election of a “black” man has marked a milestone in America’s history, we should not lose sight of the fact that Obama was NOT elected merely on his race, but his qualifications. He was not just elected because he was black, but because he had eloquence and a platform that people desired. Many times we coin blacks as ‘incompetent’ (as you mentioned in your blog), so when they rise to power, we are awed that their success was possible. We say, “Good job.. for a black person”, or phrases with that underlying tone of belittlement. An example would be Johnnie Cochran, his success was not attributed to his blackness, it was attributed to how great he was as a lawyer; his success was only determined on his skills. So in closing, I’d like to say, I wholeheartedly agree with Opus #6, we should all just be judged on the content of our character. We are all equal; when this issue of race appears, it categorizes people into levels of superiority and inferiority. At the end of the term, if Obama fails, then he fails as a regular human being (as many white ones have done before), not as just a black one. And if he is successful, then he is successful as a regular human being just the same.