Obama's DOJ: Whites have no civil rights

[joeydb]

The above statement is the conclusion that must be drawn if the Department of Justice is selectively prosecuting cases based on the racial identity of the victim.

Excerpt:

"Commissioner Peter Kirsanow asked Adams 'to what extent' the department believes equal treatment before the law applies to all voters.

'That's the problem,' replied Adams. 'They assume Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act doesn't apply to white voters.'"

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=175729

Similar, previous article here:
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=173117

As for politics, this is not the smartest move when 61% of your voting support in the last election is Caucasian.

[geeker2]

not to worry...soon we will hear the outcry's from Rev Jesse and Uncle Al as we know they are the champions of civil rights and justice for all.

[notyep59]

Originally Posted by joeydb

The above statement is the conclusion that must be drawn if the Department of Justice is selectively prosecuting cases based on the racial identity of the victim.

Excerpt:

"Commissioner Peter Kirsanow asked Adams 'to what extent' the department believes equal treatment before the law applies to all voters.

'That's the problem,' replied Adams. 'They assume Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act doesn't apply to white voters.'"

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=175729

Similar, previous article here:
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=173117

As for politics, this is not the smartest move when 61% of your voting support in the last election is Caucasian.

Is the Worldnetdaily any kin to the World News Daily?? After one read of each, I think I am smart enough never to read either again, and definitely not quote anything from them. If I need information on how to get accepted to Glen Beck's online university or need to hear more of how Pat Buchanan thinks Richard Steele is right, I"ll try to find Fox news on tv. What a joke!

[geeker2]

Originally Posted by notyep59

Is the Worldnetdaily any kin to the World News Daily?? After one read of each, I think I am smart enough never to read either again, and definitely not quote anything from them. If I need information on how to get accepted to Glen Beck's online university or need to hear more of how Pat Buchanan thinks Richard Steele is right, I"ll try to find Fox news on tv. What a joke!

don't forget the NYT


http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/07/us/07rights.html

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by notyep59

Is the Worldnetdaily any kin to the World News Daily?? After one read of each, I think I am smart enough never to read either again, and definitely not quote anything from them. If I need information on how to get accepted to Glen Beck's online university or need to hear more of how Pat Buchanan thinks Richard Steele is right, I"ll try to find Fox news on tv. What a joke!

OK, the story does appear in many places, how about the Associated Press:
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/...BEi4QD9GMHAS82

Excerpt: He wrote that some people see selective enforcement of civil rights laws "as a backdoor way to achieve reparations for slavery and discrimination. If the American public won't tolerate monetary reparations, which they won't, then a one-way approach to civil rights laws is seen as the next best alternative."

"This aggressive one-way approach toward the civil rights laws is central to understanding why the voter intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party was dismissed by the Obama Justice Department," he wrote.


By the way, I think you mean Michael Steele. Richard Steele used to be a boxing referee -- he had a few controversial TKO calls.

[notyep59]

Originally Posted by joeydb

OK, the story does appear in many places, how about the Associated Press:
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/...BEi4QD9GMHAS82

Excerpt: He wrote that some people see selective enforcement of civil rights laws "as a backdoor way to achieve reparations for slavery and discrimination. If the American public won't tolerate monetary reparations, which they won't, then a one-way approach to civil rights laws is seen as the next best alternative."

"This aggressive one-way approach toward the civil rights laws is central to understanding why the voter intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party was dismissed by the Obama Justice Department," he wrote.




By the way, I think you mean Michael Steele. Richard Steele used to be a boxing referee -- he had a few controversial TKO calls.

You are right, Michael Steele.

Those were much better articles that you and Geeker sent this time. I will say, though, that i don't recall reading once in that first one, anything about these people being appointed by the Bush administration.

You guys seem like alright guys to me and I was always told not to argue about politics or religion, so I will save the rest of my wittyness for "nascar".
He is much more fun to argue with!

[geeker2]

Originally Posted by notyep59

You are right, Michael Steele.

Those were much better articles that you and Geeker sent this time. I will say, though, that i don't recall reading once in that first one, anything about these people being appointed by the Bush administration.

You guys seem like alright guys to me and I was always told not to argue about politics or religion, so I will save the rest of my wittyness for "nascar".
He is much more fun to argue with!

I can use Clyde as a character witness if necessary

[notyep59]

Originally Posted by geeker2

I can use Clyde as a character witness if necessary

Sorry about that! It's gotta be a million to one that that is the first time anyone has said, or written, or thought, that line!!
Lets hope Joey is an alright guy then.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by notyep59

Is the Worldnetdaily any kin to the World News Daily?? After one read of each, I think I am smart enough never to read either again, and definitely not quote anything from them. If I need information on how to get accepted to Glen Beck's online university or need to hear more of how Pat Buchanan thinks Richard Steele is right, I"ll try to find Fox news on tv. What a joke!

You haven't come up with any sort of defense for Obama, Holder and the DOJ. You mentioned that World Net Daily is not a good source but that is irrelevant since the facts of this story are not in dispute.

I don't know how you can defend Holder on this one. If you like a DOJ that allows this type of behavior and only prosecutes certain races, then I don't know what to say.

I'm still not sure what your position is on this case. Are you saying that you approve of the way the Department of Justice handled this case?

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

You haven't come up with any sort of defense for Obama, Holder and the DOJ. You mentioned that World Net Daily is not a good source but that is irrelevant since the facts of this story are not in dispute.

I don't know how you can defend Holder on this one. If you like a DOJ that allows this type of behavior and only prosecutes certain races, then I don't know what to say.

I'm still not sure what your position is on this case. Are you saying that you approve of the way the Department of Justice handled this case?

I love it when logic is used in a discussion -- it's very refreshing.

I've been waiting to see who's going to defend Holder on this, and the silence is deafening, as it should be, since there is no valid defense for this. The government is overtly acting in a racist manner. Period.

This even defies the invalid rules many proponents have put forward about discrimination, citing that civil rights are only violated when the responsible party "has power over you". This is to ensure a one-way enforcement like what we are now seeing. A white guy gets mugged at gunpoint in a black neighborhood, and somehow that's not a hate crime or a civil rights violation, but the reverse would be. This is the fantasy world of law enforcement they actively try to sustain. But now, since the president is half African American, he arguably "has power over" the disenfranchised caucasian litigants.

[notyep59]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

You haven't come up with any sort of defense for Obama, Holder and the DOJ. You mentioned that World Net Daily is not a good source but that is irrelevant since the facts of this story are not in dispute.

I don't know how you can defend Holder on this one. If you like a DOJ that allows this type of behavior and only prosecutes certain races, then I don't know what to say.

I'm still not sure what your position is on this case. Are you saying that you approve of the way the Department of Justice handled this case?

I'm not defending anyone in this case and I have NO idea of what the facts are. Should I pretend to, like some others here might?? All I know is that you folks are upset with some group that was appointed by the Bush administration, and evidently their views changed since we have a black president. That's my simple position on this case, and if I'm wrong I will suggest that they string Holder (whoever he is) up by his sack and charge admission. My biggest question from all of this is, how is this Obama's fault?

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by notyep59

I'm not defending anyone in this case and I have NO idea of what the facts are. Should I pretend to, like some others here might?? All I know is that you folks are upset with some group that was appointed by the Bush administration, and evidently their views changed since we have a black president. That's my simple position on this case, and if I'm wrong I will suggest that they string Holder (whoever he is) up by his sack and charge admission. My biggest question from all of this is, how is this Obama's fault?

he's the attorney general of the united states.

[notyep59]

Originally Posted by Danzig

he's the attorney general of the united states.

Thank you, Danzig. If I had to name an attorney general in the history of the U.S., I could only name two, Kennedy and Reno. You probably will never see me on "Jeopardy".

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by notyep59

I'm not defending anyone in this case and I have NO idea of what the facts are. Should I pretend to, like some others here might?? All I know is that you folks are upset with some group that was appointed by the Bush administration, and evidently their views changed since we have a black president. That's my simple position on this case, and if I'm wrong I will suggest that they string Holder (whoever he is) up by his sack and charge admission. My biggest question from all of this is, how is this Obama's fault?

So why are you even responding to the thread if you don't know the facts of the case? The facts of the case are not in dispute. Bartle Bull, a longtime civil rights activist and aide to Bobby Kennedy witnessed the whole thing. He was working at the polling place where the incident took place. He said it was the worst case of voter intimidation he had ever seen. He said it was worse than anything he had seen in the south in the 1960s.

The Department of Justice brought charges against the guys who were intimidating voters. It was a slam dunk case. But then inexplicably, the Obama appointees at the DOJ, forced the DOJ lawyers to drop the case. Eric Holder is the AG. He is the head of the DOJ. He was appointed by Obama and he forced the DOJ lawyers to drop this case. That is what the big deal is.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...cube_position1

[clyde]

I do not feel American Negroes think any of this is funny,