The most striking thing about this video, other than the full-throated defense of the controversial Reverand Jeremiah Wright, is the manner in which Obama is speaking. This doesn’t even sound like the President who we’ve heard speaking over the last four years.
This is a Daily Caller exclusive, please read the full report here…
First, watch an edited version of the video (full version below) in which snippets of the President’s speech where he was forced to give to quell the controversy around the reverend, combined with snippets from the new video in which he lavishly praises Wright.
As the DC points out, the speech is charged with inherently racist tones and anger.
The racially charged and at times angry speech undermines Obama’s carefully-crafted image as a leader eager to build bridges between ethnic groups. For nearly 40 minutes, using an accent he almost never adopts in public, Obama describes a racist, zero-sum society, in which the white majority profits by exploiting black America. The mostly black audience shouts in agreement. The effect is closer to an Al Sharpton rally than a conventional campaign event.
Obama also adds that Wright is, “my pastor, the guy who puts up with me, counsels me, listens to my wife complain about me. He’s a friend and a great leader. Not just in Chicago, but all across the country.”
The reason this has never seen the light of day is because transcripts of the campaign speech do not match the actual rhetoric used. As the report indicates, Obama frequently goes off script and ad libs at length, injecting his own fiery sermon into the speech.
One such example:
In the prepared version distributed to reporters, Obama’s speech ends this way:
“America is going to survive. We won’t forget where we came from. We won’t forget what happened 19 months ago, 15 years ago, thousands of years ago.”
That’s not what he actually said. Before the audience at Hampton, Obama ends his speech this way:
“America will survive. Just like black folks will survive. We won’t forget where we came from. We won’t forget what happened 19 months ago, or 15 years ago, or 300 years ago.”
Obama of course, has been true to his word. Ge has not forgotten the ‘black folks’ from 300 years ago, introducing one of the most racially polarizing administration’s in American history.
Here is an excerpt from my AIM report on Obama’s racial agenda:
During a 2010 interview for the book, Family of Freedom: Presidents and African Americans in the White House, President Obama spoke of his desire to build a “race-neutral administration,” while also claiming that race doesn’t drive decision-making in the White House. When asked about race and how he conducts his business, the President responded, “You just don’t think about it, you really don’t.”
But the Obama administration’s agenda has been anything but race-neutral, and has to be considered race-driven when looking through a history of unprecedented prejudiced actions and rhetoric. Here is but a brief sampling:
In one of his more high-profile comments on race, President Obama waded into the charged waters of the Henry Louis Gates case, an incident which saw Gates, an African-American, arrested in his own home after reports of a possible break-in. Gates and police on the scene gave conflicting reports on the level of cooperation between individuals, and the facts of the case remained murky. That said, after confessing to being limited on facts, Obama acted as judge and jury, declaring that “the Cambridge police acted stupidly” in their haste to arrest Gates. To back up the suggestion that the police officers had acted inappropriately, the President cited “a long history in this country of African-Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately.”
The signature achievement of this administration, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, is not devoid of racial components. In 2009, the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights had already declared that the Obamacare plan was laced with race-based incentives, including giving “preferential treatment to minority students for scholarships,” and was littered with “sections that factor in race when awarding billions in contracts, scholarships and grants.” A few months after it was signed into law, the American Civil Rights Institute (ACRI) pointed out that the new healthcare reform had provisions in place to provide monetary rewards doled out on a criterion of racial preference. One such provision stated, “In awarding grants or contracts under this section, the Secretary shall give preference to entities that have a demonstrated record of the following:…Training individuals who are from underrepresented minority groups or disadvantaged backgrounds.”
As AIM has disclosed, even some of the Obama stimulus dollars have gone for racial purposes. Joshua Correll, a University of Chicago professor, received $154,563 in stimulus grant money for what is called a collaborative project at the University of Chicago which “outlines a series of studies investigating the role of individual differences in executive functions (EFs) in expression of implicit racial bias.” This appears to be academic jargon for identifying and naming alleged racists. In fact, Correll operates a “Stereotyping & Prejudice Research Laboratory” that has been working since 2000 to develop and refine a first-person-shooter video game that was originally designed to ferret out allegedly racist cops in order to re-educate them.
The President’s policy on terrorism seems to play the race card when convenient, but very inconsistently. In the summer of 2010, Obama suggested that race is what motivates the actions of Al-Qaeda, as opposed to blind, radical ideology. The discussion was in stark contrast to several months earlier, when the administration was unable or unwilling to mention race, religion, or creed when reporting on the motivations of Fort Hood terrorist, Major Nidal Malik Hasan. The Pentagon had released a report on the shooting rampage which failed to mention the word “Islam” or “Muslim.” In turn, while Obama did not wish to stir up anti-Muslim sentiments in the Hasan case, he was more than willing to play up anti-Muslim sentiments when he claimed that Israel is suspicious of him because his middle name is Hussein.
The Latino community has frequently been targeted as a key demographic in elections, but has equally been targeted by this administration in their attempts to racially divide a group through government policies. When Governor Jan Brewer and the state of Arizona tried to defend their borders, the President quickly tried to demonize them, insinuating that racial profiling could result in someone without papers being harassed while engaging in the simple act of having ice cream with their family. This approach led former presidential candidate Newt Gingrich to proclaim that Obama had engaged in “a racist dialogue to try to frighten Latinos away from the Republican Party.”
In March of 2010, the Obama administration filed a brief with the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals that supported the University of Texas’ use of racial preferences in their undergraduate admissions process. The brief had been filed by then solicitor general and current Justice, Elena Kagan, and stems from a battle over a 2003 ruling that narrowly permitted race-conscious policies in public higher education. Such blatant support for the exploitation of race in education was panned by the National Review’s Roger Clegg, when he described the brief as “a full-throated endorsement of such discrimination.” The Supreme Court has opted to review the affirmative action case, which is expected to occur in October—placing it squarely in the minds of voters just weeks prior to the presidential election.
Here is the blockbuster video in it’s entirety…
It was just a short while ago that vice-President Joe Biden was drawing laughter from a crowd for discussing the President’s “big stick“.
Now, clearly excited about the upcoming erec … er … election, Jill Biden is out on the campaign trail discussing her husband’s own ‘big stick‘, complete with visual aid.
Second Lady of the United States Jill Biden inadvertently made a penis joke during a campaign event in New Hampshire Friday.
“I’ve seen Joe up close,” Biden said while making a wide motion with her hands.
Biden giggled when the crowd reacted to her statement with laughs, cheers and cat calls.
“It’s in my remarks, really,” Biden said before continuing her speech.
With iconic game show host Richard Dawson passing earlier this summer, it was inevitable that somebody was going to make a Family Feud compilation video. Instead of highlights however, we’ve got an epic collection of lowlights for fans of the show.
The first question is – Tell me a man’s name that starts with the letter K…
Answer – Kentucky Fried Chicken.
It’s all downhill from there…
Via the Huffington Post:
Throughout its over 35-year run, “Family Feud” has produced more hilarious bloopers than we can even count. Now, with a fresh new supercut of the show’s biggest FAILs, we don’t have to.
Clip Nation did a pretty excellent job rounding up the best of the worst “Family Feud” responses, including more genitalia-related answers than we previously thought were possible. You can actually learn a lot from this video, like how pregnant women always start to show in September, “Alligator” is a three-letter animal and the worst thing a cop can find in your trunk is actually a jar of pickles.
Watch the video above and just try not to crack up at the :40 second mark (NEKKID GRANDMA!).
Politico is reporting on a disturbing new trend, in which Democrat campaign staffers are going to Republican official’s homes with camera in tow, and posting the video on the internet.
Politicians recognize they give up a degree of privacy when they run for office.
But Democrats are testing the outer limits of that understanding with a practice that raises questions about when campaign tracking becomes something more like stalking.
While most serious campaigns on both sides use campaign trackers — staffers whose job is to record on video every public appearance and statement by an opponent — House Democrats are taking it to another level. They’re now recording video of the homes of GOP congressmen and candidates and posting the raw footage on the Internet for all to see.
That ratcheting up of the video surveillance game is unnerving Republicans who insist that even by political standards, it’s a gross invasion of privacy. Worse, they say, it creates a safety risk for members of Congress and their families at a time when they are already on edge after a deranged gunman shot former Arizona Democratic Rep. Gabrielle Giffords 18 months ago.
Yes, privacy is diminished when running for public office, but this goes beyond any acceptable level of decorum. Politico’s assertion that this somehow blurs the line is false however. There is no question that the line has been crossed – these actions are flat-out stalking.
The report even goes on to interview a congressman who was videotaped while shopping for groceries, another who had people crouching in their bushes, and another who had video of their parents home publicly posted.
The most shocking aspect of the report isn’t simply the act of stalking political opponents. While you and I might see these videos and become unnerved about their potential use by somebody with a deranged agenda, the Democrats think otherwise – they insist it is all fair game.
They say showcasing the homes — most of which are spacious and neatly maintained —underscores what will be a key avenue of attack for the party this fall: communicating that Republicans just can’t relate to economically struggling voters.
“House Republicans have spent this entire Congress trying to hide that they’re protecting benefits for millionaires and perks for themselves instead of protecting the middle class, but we won’t let them keep it secret any longer,” Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee spokesman Jesse Ferguson wrote in an email.
Democratic officials said placing the videos on the DCCC’s website and YouTube serve a useful purpose, most notably making the footage available to friendly outside groups for use in TV commercials. That way, they don’t violate laws against coordinating with those groups.
Oh the horror of a spacious and neatly maintained home!
It’s unclear how videotaping somebody grocery shopping demonstrates a willingness to protect benefits for millionaires while leaving the middle class to fend for themselves.
See? This guy doesn’t choose the generic brand of Frooty Tooties … um … 1 percenter! Koch brothers! Tax the rich!
Call it what it is … Democrats have turned to stalking in a desperate attempt to win elections.
ABC News has been caught in a clear-cut case of journalistic malpractice this past week. No matter your feelings on the Trayvon Martin case, this is indisputable evidence of the media trying to advance a narrative – and failing miserably.
ABC was apparently so excited about having obtained exclusive police surveillance video last week, that they posted it and subsequently came to their own conclusions. The headline blasted, “Trayvon Martin Video Shows No Blood or Bruises on George Zimmerman.”
Other media lapdogs ran with it, to the point where the lawyer for Trayvon Martin’s parents referred to the video as “the smoking gun“.
You know who actually went out of their way to perform research and produce actual journalism regarding the video? Conservative blogs.
The Daily Caller posted a still image the following day which appeared to show a laceration on the back of George Zimmerman’s head. Liberal’s such as Mediaite’s Tommy Christopher mocked the Caller’s attempt at video analysis, while posting the original ABC video yet again.
But then, Dan Riehl over at Big Journalism followed up on the video report, finding further evidence that ABC had falsely presented the clip as evidence that Zimmerman had lied about being assaulted.
Riehl’s report read:
A new High Definition clip from the same video appears to make clear that Zimmerman had a gash or wound of some kind on the back of his head. That would be totally consistent with his version of events on the night in question and opposite the impression ABC News gave its viewers.
Big Journalism called the ABC video-based report reckless and revealing of nothing after it first aired. ABC’s presumed ability to enhance and review video before airing only makes their report all the more outrageous. Given analysis by Breitbart Media and the Daily Caller already performed, the ABC video appeared to be inconclusive, at best.
The new High Defintion clip from the police video Breitbart TV is releasing means that any determination beyond that the video is inconclusive is shoddy, if not intentionally unethical, journalism. To date, ABC has offered no official response to the broad and convincing criticism of the disingenuous nature of their aired report.
And now the DC and Big Journalism have had their vindication, with ABC News having to issue a ‘clarified’ version of the video, showing gashes and welts on Zimmerman’s head.
From the Orlando Sentinel:
ABC News has re-digitized video of George Zimmerman taken shortly after Trayvon Martin’s shooting.
The video was unveiled as an exclusive this morning on “Good Morning America.” ABC was the first news organization to show the original tape.
Reporter Matt Gutman said the clearer video shows “what appear to be a pair of gashes or welts on George Zimmerman’s head.”
Neighborhood Watch volunteer Zimmerman has said he shot 17-year-old Trayvon in self-defense. The video shows Zimmerman arriving at the Sanford Police Department within an hour after the shooting.
Gutman said the video had been “clarified” by Forensic Protection Inc. Former FBI Special Agent Brad Garrett told ABC that the clearer video shows “marks on the back of Mr. Zimmerman’s head.”
I’m glad ABC finally took the time to have the video reviewed by experts and clarified, but perhaps they should have done that in the first place.
Whether or not the clarified video will receive as much coverage as the original remains to be seen. But one thing is for certain – none of the hard working journalists at the Daily Caller and Big Journalism will receive any credit for revealing the failed media narrative pushed by ABC. ABC alone will receive praise, none of it deserved.
Let this video be your guide this St. Patrick’s Day weekend… a guide on what not to do in your drunken stupor. And remember, trees don’t kill people. People who can’t avoid slamming their dome into trees, kill people.
Via the Huffington Post:
What is Saint Patrick’s Day, really? A time to dress up in green, tear the town apart, and make a fool of yourself? For many people, the answer is yes.
While searching for the best Saint Patrick’s Day FAILS, we found an overwhelming number of green beer-drinkers making unfortunate decisions. From a collegiate girl trying to break a two-by-four to a drunk guy uncontrollably running headfirst into a tree, the Internet has more than enough documentation of this holiday’s worst decisions.
We think the Bowling Green State guy has the least luck of the Irish, but we’ll leave the decision of the best FAIL up to you.
This video at Fatherhood Is shows a baby girl absolutely amazed by her father’s ability to make motor boat sounds.
The Huffington Post writes:
Daddy blogger Fatherhood Is recently posted this video of a new way he’s discovered to calm his daughter Charlotte when she gets fussy, and it’s probably not the first thing you’d think to do to comfort a crying baby.
Granted, Charlotte’s facial expression is more one of sheer amazement than relaxation, but hey, if dad’s motorboat impression is enough to keep her from crying, it’s good enough for us.
Please place the child’s eyes back in her head. 🙂
Thank God for men like Allen West. The more I hear this great American speak, the more I think he is destined to attain an even greater role in the recovery of our country as a nation of morals, a nation of courage and conviction, and a nation that takes pride in its exceptionalism. Mitt Romney should give West serious consideration as his running mate. It would give him credibility in areas such as foreign policy and national defense, as well as giving him credibility with staunch conservatives.
In an e-mail to the Weekly Standard, former Army lieutenant colonel West, shows us once again that he and other men and women who have fought on the battlefield, understand what pompous pundits in the media will never understand.
“I have sat back and assessed the incident with the video of our Marines urinating on Taliban corpses. I do not recall any self-righteous indignation when our Delta snipers Shugart and Gordon had their bodies dragged through Mogadishu. Neither do I recall media outrage and condemnation of our Blackwater security contractors being killed, their bodies burned, and hung from a bridge in Fallujah.”
“All these over-emotional pundits and armchair quarterbacks need to chill. Does anyone remember the two Soldiers from the 101st Airborne Division who were beheaded and gutted in Iraq?”
“The Marines were wrong. Give them a maximum punishment under field grade level Article 15 (non-judicial punishment), place a General Officer level letter of reprimand in their personnel file, and have them in full dress uniform stand before their Battalion, each personally apologize to God, Country, and Corps videotaped and conclude by singing the full US Marine Corps Hymn without a teleprompter.”
“As for everyone else, unless you have been shot at by the Taliban, shut your mouth, war is hell.”