https://x.com/bskimike22802/status/2069397281699180790?s=46&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
"
OBAMA: THE MOST RACIST PRESIDENT SINCE LBJ. PROVE ME WRONG. A Juneteenth Story Nobody in the Media Wants to Tell You.
— THE SETUP —
June 19, 2026. Juneteenth. The federal holiday marking the day in 1865 when word finally reached enslaved people in Galveston, Texas, that they were free — two and a half years after Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation had already said so on paper.
The first Black president of the United States chose THIS day to open his $850 million monument to himself on Chicago's South Side.
In a historically Black neighborhood.
Where the Black families who BUILT that neighborhood's identity are being priced out by the very legacy project supposedly built to honor them.
I want you to sit with that for a second before I start dumping data on you.
I am going to make a claim that a lot of people reflexively dismiss without engaging a single piece of evidence. My claim is this: Barack Obama is the most racist president the United States has had since Lyndon Baines Johnson. Not in terms of personal animus. In terms of DOCUMENTED OUTCOMES for Black Americans under his leadership, his policies, and now his legacy project.
That is a falsifiable claim. So here are the numbers. Respond with data or do not respond at all. I have had enough of the alternative.
— THE MONUMENT AND THE FAMILIES IT DESTROYED —
Original budget: $300 million. What it actually cost: $850 million. And climbing. The Obama Foundation told the city of Chicago it would maintain a $470 million endowment to keep the thing financially self-sufficient without a taxpayer bailout. The most recent publicly available filings show exactly $1 million deposited into that fund. One million out of four hundred and seventy million.
That is not a rounding error. That is a promise nobody kept. And if this thing goes under? The taxpayers of Illinois pick up the check. Again. As always.
The Obama Center sits on 19.3 acres of public parkland that the city handed over on a 99-year lease. Cost to the Obama Foundation for that century of prime Chicago real estate: TEN DOLLARS. You read that correctly. A $10 payment for 99 years on publicly owned land in Jackson Park.
Meanwhile, the African American Contractors Association president Omar Shareef told Fox News that SEVEN TO TEN Black-owned subcontractors came to him in the months before the opening with the same story. Unpaid invoices. Ranging from hundreds of thousands of dollars to tens of millions. Some of these men and women put up their HOMES as collateral to take on this project. At least two minority-owned firms — Vision Painting and Decorating Services and Glass Management Services — filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 2024 and listed the Obama Center contract in their filings.
One African American contractor told Fox News, quote, "I haven't had eight hours or six hours sleep in over a year. I'm cooked emotionally. I feel like an aluminum can thrown in front of a steamroller. We're crushed."
The Obama Foundation pointed the finger at Lakeside Alliance, the primary contractor. Lakeside said projects of this size take time to close out. Nobody cut the check. And now Adamson Plumbing's president, Mike Owen, who showed reporters his spreadsheets outside the center, says his company is nearly FOUR MILLION DOLLARS in the red. He watched the star-studded celebration from the outside. Bruce Springsteen performed. Stevie Wonder performed. John Legend performed.
Mike Owen's company may not survive to see next year.
"If they would have known it was a Trojan horse or a Pandora's box," Omar Shareef said, "I don't know if they would have raced as much as they did to be a part of it."
A monument built by Black hands, ON Black land, IN a Black neighborhood, DISPLACING Black families, WITH unpaid Black contractors, opened ON Juneteenth.
Quinn's First Law of Liberalism: Liberalism always generates the exact opposite of its stated intent. You do not need a laboratory. You need a calendar.
— THE OPENING DAY. ALL OF IT. —
Let me describe the opening, because it is too ridiculous to summarize.
While President Trump was at the White House hosting a Medal of Honor ceremony honoring the actual bravery of American service members, Barack Obama opened his library. A library, by the way, that is not technically a library. It has no presidential documents. Those are at the National Archives. What it has is an NBA-sized basketball court, a vegetable garden, a Chicago Public Library branch, and a building one architecture critic described as having "an ominous presence, its mostly windowless heft recalling a menacing sci-fi headquarters." Another writer compared it to a trash bin. A very expensive trash bin.
Valerie Jarrett opened the ceremony with a land acknowledgment. She named the original Indigenous inhabitants of the land upon which they were gathered and expressed respect for those peoples. Which is fine. I have no objection to acknowledging history.
But here is my question. If the land is stolen, and you feel the need to acknowledge that publicly at the ribbon cutting, and you are standing in front of an $850 million building erected on a 99-year lease for $10... who is doing the stealing NOW?
Joe Biden wandered around on stage. I am not being unkind. The man was literally standing there after everyone else had departed, waving at nobody. He had done this when he was PRESIDENT — stood on stages after the moment passed, looking uncertain which direction to walk. At his own vice president's library opening, he was described by commentators as wandering "like a Roomba." That someone with this level of cognitive confusion was running the most powerful country on earth for four years is a different article. But it is worth noting who likely filled that void. And we will get there.
Michelle Obama was asked to describe her next chapter in one word. Her answer? "Me."
That was it. "Me." Her former boss just opened his legacy center and she responded to what the next phase of her life holds with the word "me." I am not analyzing the marriage. I am noting that the woman who has given speech after speech about empathy, community, and service answered a question about the future with the word "me," without a trace of irony, and then called it dropping the mic.
Gavin Newsom was so moved by the occasion that he ACTUALLY TEARED UP. He said he was crying because he missed Barack Obama so much. The governor of California, whose state has the highest poverty rate in the country, adjusted for cost of living, whose homeless crisis is visible from space, whose energy policies have driven some of the highest electricity rates in the nation, who once said Greg Abbott "doesn't have the backbone" — you know, the governor who is IN A WHEELCHAIR due to a SEVERED SPINE — stood at the Obama Center and wept. Because he missed Barack Obama.
Meanwhile, outside on the streets of Woodlawn, the neighborhood surrounding the center, longtime residents are being offered $2,000 by investment firms to vacate apartments their families have lived in for decades.
Those residents did not make the program.
— THE UNIFIER WHO DIVIDED, AND THE CASE HE BUILT AGAINST HIMSELF —
Barack Obama stood at that podium on Juneteenth and told the crowd he believes in American values that transcend party. He invoked John McCain. He invoked Mitt Romney. He talked about turning toward each other instead of away.
I want to tell you what his campaigns actually did to John McCain and Mitt Romney, because this is what I mean when I call him subtle.
His 2008 campaign cast McCain as George W. Bush Part Three. His 2012 campaign ran a super PAC ad implying Mitt Romney was responsible for a woman dying of cancer — linking her death to Romney's private equity career with zero causal connection. His vice president, Joe Biden, told a crowd that Romney wanted to "put y'all back in chains." His campaign spread a story that Romney had forcibly cut the hair of a gay classmate in prep school. They strapped a dog to the top of a car story into the rotation. They treated a decent man like a monster.
And then he stood at his library opening and praised the values he shared with Mitt Romney.
That is not complexity. That is OJ Simpson's book, If I Did It, telling you that you did it. A 2016 CNN poll found 54% of Americans believed race relations had gotten WORSE under Obama — including 57% of white respondents and 40% of Black respondents. The man who built his entire 2008 campaign on racial healing left office with the country more divided, and a plurality of his own community saying conditions had deteriorated on his watch.
— THE WEALTH HE LEFT BEHIND: THE RECEIPTS —
This section contains no Fox News. No conservative websites. These numbers come from the National Community Reinvestment Coalition, from , and from the Urban Institute.
Black household median wealth stood at roughly $10,700 in 2007, before the recession. By 2010, two years into Obama's first term, it had fallen 36% to $6,900. Then it kept going. By 2013, Black median household wealth had collapsed to approximately $1,700 — while white household wealth had already begun its recovery and was climbing to $120,000.
Let me restate that. By the midpoint of the Obama presidency, the median Black household in America had seventeen hundred dollars in wealth. White households had one hundred and twenty thousand.
That racial wealth gap, by the latter half of Obama's presidency, was the LARGEST IT HAD BEEN IN THIRTY YEARS. Comparable, in the findings of multiple economic research organizations, to wealth gaps that existed in the 1950s and 1960s. During Jim Crow.
The first Black president oversaw the largest racial wealth gap in a generation. You may want to read that sentence twice too.
Black homeownership fell from 49% to 44% on his watch. Black homeowners with NEGATIVE equity exploded by twenty-fold during the crisis — from 0.7% to 14.2%. And unlike white families, Black homeowners did not reach their foreclosure peak until 2013, well into the Obama years. Average white home equity in 2016 was 3.5 TIMES greater than average Black home equity. And white equity had recovered 84% of its pre-crash value. Black equity had recovered only 73%.
These are not my calculations. They are from researchers who were actively trying to make the case for more intervention. They found the exact opposite.
The researchers at Jacobin — not exactly a right-wing outlet — published an analysis titled "How Obama Destroyed Black Wealth." Their conclusion: Obama had the legal tools, the legislative leverage, and the Treasury mechanisms to sharply blunt the foreclosure crisis and protect Black homeownership. He chose not to use them. Wall Street banks received trillions in rescue funds and discount loans through TARP and Federal Reserve programs. Black families got HAMP — the Home Affordable Modification Program — which set ambitious targets, fell catastrophically short, and left many borrowers in worse shape than if they had simply defaulted and started over.
The banks got made whole. The neighborhood got a $10 lease.
— SIX POLICIES THAT HURT BLACK AMERICANS. ON PURPOSE OR NOT, THE OUTCOMES ARE THE OUTCOMES. —
Thomas Sowell, one of the most respected economists in American history, spent a career making one point: good intentions are NOT a data point. Results are. You judge a policy by what it produces, not by what the press release said it would produce. Here is what the policy produced.
ONE. THE CASH FOR CLUNKERS CATASTROPHE.
Obama's 2009 stimulus included a program that gave rebates of up to $4,500 to trade in older vehicles for new ones. It scrapped approximately 700,000 perfectly functional used cars. Removed them from the market permanently. Literally crushed them.
Who shops for used cars? People who cannot afford new ones. What demographic is significantly overrepresented in that population? You already know the answer. Cash for Clunkers destroyed the affordable used vehicle supply just as the Black community was losing wealth and income at the steepest rate in a generation. You needed a car to get to work. You could no longer afford a car because the supply had been crushed to subsidize new car purchases for people with better credit scores.
The government took a functional economic resource OUT of the hands of the people who most needed it. Then called it a stimulus.
TWO. THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT AND THE LABOR TRAP.
The ACA expanded Medicaid coverage and that coverage gain was real. Millions of Black Americans who had no insurance got insurance. I am not going to pretend that did not happen.
What also happened: The employer mandate on businesses with 50 or more employees was tied to a 30-hour weekly threshold. Businesses in low-wage sectors — retail, food service, hospitality — responded by converting full-time positions to part-time below the threshold. Low-wage sectors where Black workers are significantly overrepresented. The mandate to provide health coverage created a structural incentive to make sure nobody hit 30 hours.
And the states with the LARGEST Black populations — Southern states — mostly refused Medicaid expansion, creating the coverage gap. The people who most needed the coverage, in the states with the least prior safety net, got left out of the program that was supposed to help them. Not because Republicans were blocking it from Washington. Because state legislatures exercised exactly the authority the framers gave them.
Also: since the ACA's full rollout in 2014, the seven largest health insurance companies TRIPLED their revenues, from $511 billion to $1.5 trillion. The Democrats spent fifteen years screaming about corporate healthcare greed. Then wrote the law that turbocharged it. That is not an accusation. That is a spreadsheet. Look it up.
THREE. MINIMUM WAGE ADVOCACY AND THE ENTRY-LEVEL TRAP.
Obama pushed hard for federal minimum wage increases, from $7.25 toward $10.10 and beyond. The federal floor never moved — Congress blocked it — but the rhetoric drove state and local action across the country.
Walter Williams spent his career documenting what happens to Black teenagers when the minimum wage rises. Unemployment increases first and fastest for the least experienced workers. Because here is the economic reality: when you mandate that a business pay $12 an hour for every hire, the business starts asking whether a 17-year-old with zero work experience is worth $12 an hour on day one. The math often does not work. So the 17-year-old does not get hired.
Pre-federal minimum wage expansions, Black teen unemployment was often comparable to white teen unemployment. After major hikes, the gap widened dramatically. Williams made this argument with historical data for DECADES. It was not controversial among economists. It was inconvenient politically. So it was ignored.
The person who most needs that first job to build a resume, develop work habits, and create a reference — who often happens to be a young Black man in an urban area — gets priced out of entry-level employment by the very policy designed to help workers. Quinn's First Law. Every time.
FOUR. THE SCHOOL DISCIPLINE DISASTER.
In 2014, Obama's Departments of Education and Justice sent what is known as the "Dear Colleague" letter to school districts nationwide. The thrust: if your suspension and expulsion rates are statistically higher for Black students than for white students, you may face a federal disparate impact investigation — even without any evidence of intentional discrimination. Just the numbers alone could trigger federal scrutiny.
School districts responded by lowering suspensions. By adopting informal quotas on discipline by race. By telling teachers they could not apply consistent standards because the outcomes would look unequal.
You know who suffered most from that policy? The well-behaved Black students in those schools. The ones who came to learn. The ones who needed a functional classroom to have any shot. The ones who sat through chaos, disruption, and reduced instructional time because the school was prohibited from removing persistently disruptive students when the numbers said they had removed too many already.
Thomas Sowell called this the mismatch problem applied to K-12. You cannot engineer statistical parity without sacrificing standards. And when you sacrifice standards, the students with the fewest outside resources to compensate — tutors, private schools, family support — pay the highest price.
The policy meant to protect Black students from unfair discipline made classrooms MORE chaotic for the Black students who were behaving. It is almost elegant in how completely backwards it went.
FIVE. DODD-FRANK AND THE DEATH OF COMMUNITY BANKING.
Dodd-Frank imposed sweeping new regulations on financial institutions following the 2008 crisis. Some of the regulations addressed real abuses. Fine. Nobody is arguing the subprime market was clean.
What also happened: the compliance cost was enormous and fell disproportionately on smaller community banks. Community banks that could not afford teams of compliance lawyers started consolidating, merging, or closing. The number of Black-owned and minority depository institutions declined sharply. These were the banks that served the neighborhoods the big banks historically avoided. They approved higher percentages of loans to Black applicants. They made relationship-based lending decisions that factored in the local knowledge a Citigroup risk model cannot capture.
Dodd-Frank made the big banks more compliant and smaller banks less viable. And the people who most relied on those smaller banks — Black entrepreneurs and home buyers in underserved communities — lost access to credit at the moment they most needed it to rebuild from the recession.
SIX. IMMIGRATION AND THE INVISIBLE COMPETITION.
Obama deported 2.7 million people over eight years. His own immigration advocates called him the "Deporter in Chief." He set deportation records. I give him that, because it is true and it drives the left insane.
But here is what is also true. Overall low-skilled immigration inflows remained high throughout his administration. And the economic research — not my opinion, peer-reviewed economic research, including work associated with the National Bureau of Economic Research — documents that a 10% increase in immigrant labor supply in a given skill category correlates with roughly a 3.5 to 4% wage decline and a 3.5 percentage point employment rate drop for competing native-born workers.
Who competes most directly with low-skilled immigrant labor? Workers with high school diplomas or less. What demographic is significantly overrepresented in that category? The United States Commission on Civil Rights published findings acknowledging this exact dynamic — that unauthorized immigration tends to depress wages and employment for low-skilled American citizens, and that Black men are disproportionately represented in those affected groups.
You cannot simultaneously demand living wages for American workers AND maintain open-border-adjacent immigration policies that flood the low-wage labor market. One of those things cancels the other out. The left has spent a decade pretending this is not a basic supply-and-demand question.
— THE THIRD TERM NOBODY ELECTED —
Here is where it gets interesting. And uncomfortable for people who have convinced themselves that the Biden years were separate from the Obama years.
They were not.
Obama lives ten minutes from the White House. Not ten miles. Ten minutes. During the Biden years, he spoke to Biden by phone infrequently, according to people close to both men. But when he showed up — at the White House in April 2022, for the ACA anniversary event — the room treated him like a conquering hero. Staffers mobbed him in the hallways. Democrats who served under him were visibly more excited to see him than to see the sitting president. The Heritage Foundation noted that Biden "cut a lonely and forlorn figure" as Obama was swarmed.
Obama quietly advised the Biden White House for five months on artificial intelligence policy, holding Zoom calls with top West Wing aides, before Biden's October 2023 executive order on AI was signed. NBC News reported this. Not Fox. NBC. Biden's chief of staff Jeff Zients confirmed it. It was the first time Biden had formally tapped his former boss to shape a key policy initiative. But only the first time that was publicly documented.
The Biden White House was staffed heavily with Obama-era personnel. Susan Rice returned as Domestic Policy Advisor. Ron Klain, who served under Obama, was Biden's first Chief of Staff. The policy priorities of the Biden years — ACA expansion, climate regulation, administrative agency activism — were continuous with, and in many cases extensions of, Obama-era groundwork.
I am not saying this was a shadow government. I am saying the separation between Obama's two terms and Biden's term is largely cosmetic. The personnel overlapped. The policy agenda overlapped. The Overton window had been established. And the man who established it was ten minutes away, available on Zoom, and walking into his former home to be received like a returning pharaoh while the man nominally in charge wandered around a stage not knowing which direction to exit.
I want you to think about what that means for the policies we spent the last several sections discussing. The ACA expansions that Democrats voted to make temporary and then screamed were being taken away. The immigration enforcement theater. The regulatory framework that choked small businesses and community banks. The school discipline guidance still rippling through urban school districts. All of that continued, expanded, or found new expression in the Biden years. Under the supervision of a man who was, by multiple credible accounts, actively involved in shaping that administration's direction.
And that same man just opened a monument to himself. On land taken for ten dollars. On Juneteenth. In a neighborhood his monument is pricing out of existence. While Black contractors who built the thing are filing for bankruptcy.
— THE LBJ FLOOR AND WHY OBAMA IS BELOW IT —
I set Lyndon Johnson as the floor deliberately. LBJ is documented — on his own White House tapes, confirmed by serious historians — using racial slurs in private with regularity. He referred to Black staffers as "furniture." He continued the Kennedy administration's wiretapping of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. He was a product of the segregationist South who made the most cynical calculations about what political loyalty was worth.
He also signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Whatever his private ugliness, those two laws dismantled Jim Crow by statute. That legacy is real.
What is Obama's equivalent? What law, signed by his hand, materially and durably improved Black economic outcomes? The ACA expanded coverage and helped insurance companies triple their revenues. The stimulus saved the banks and let Black homeownership fall five percentage points. The school discipline guidance made urban classrooms more chaotic. The minimum wage advocacy contributed to entry-level job scarcity for young Black men. The foreclosure crisis response left white equity recovery at 84% and Black equity recovery at 73%.
LBJ was a racist who did something transformative for Black Americans despite his personal ugliness. Obama was celebrated as a racial healer who presided over the largest racial wealth gap in thirty years while delivering policies that, on the evidence, made Black economic outcomes measurably worse.
I know which one I can hold in more complicated regard. And it is not the one who opened a monument on Juneteenth while Black contractors called his project a Pandora's box.
— THE COMMUNIST GOALS MOMENT —
On January 10, 1963, Representative A.S. Herlong Jr. read into the Congressional Record a list of 45 Communist Goals for America, drawn from Cleon Skousen's "The Naked Communist." I want to flag exactly two.
Goal Number 40: Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity.
In the 1950s, Black American families had intact two-parent households at a rate of roughly 80 to 85 percent. After decades of welfare expansion — which accelerated through the Obama years — the rate of Black children living in two-parent homes fell below 30%. Sowell documented this correlation extensively. Williams called it the destruction welfare accomplished that slavery could not. The Obama years added benefits, expanded the safety net, and the structural incentives that penalize marriage and work in low-income families continued producing their predictable outcomes without anyone being required to acknowledge the mechanism.
Goal Number 17: Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda.
The Dear Colleague letter on school discipline. The federal influence on curriculum standards. The expansion of Department of Education reach into classrooms that the Constitution designates as state and local responsibilities. All accelerated under this administration. The students in the schools most affected — urban schools serving predominantly Black populations — got disrupted classrooms and federal ideology in exchange for declining educational outcomes.
I am not saying anyone read this list and followed it. I am saying the outcomes match the list regardless of intent. Trees are judged by their fruit.
— THE MOMENT OF CLARITY —
Let me bring it back to June 19, 2026.
An $850 million building opened. Tripled over budget. On land that cost ten dollars. With a promised $470 million endowment that has $1 million in it. With an architecture critic describing it as a sci-fi menacing headquarters. With the African American Contractors Association president saying seven to ten Black-owned firms came to him financially ruined for having worked on it. With Black families in the surrounding neighborhood receiving $2,000 offers to vacate homes they have lived in for decades. With home prices in the area up 4.6 times since the project was announced.
A Nobel Peace Prize winner was applauded. A Roomba wandered the stage. A governor from California cried. A former first lady said "me." The local residents who have been fighting this project for a decade were not on stage.
They were outside. Wondering where they are going to live now.
Quinn's Second Law: If you want to know what liberals are up to, pay attention to what they accuse conservatives of doing.
They told you Trump was the one who did not care about Black America. They told you conservatives wanted to keep Black communities poor and dependent. They told you the man who built his career on images of unity and hope was the answer to structural racism.
The structural racism is still here. The wealth gap is still here. The neighborhood is changing in exactly the direction the residents feared. The contractors are still unpaid. And the man with the Nobel Prize is taking a bow on Juneteenth.
I want you to tell me where I am wrong. Actually wrong. With data.
The comments are open. I will be here.
But what do I know. I am only a medically retired Army combat medic who spent twenty-three years watching outcomes matter more than intentions, a science teacher who grades by results and not effort grades, and apparently the one person still willing to say that a Juneteenth ribbon cutting does not absolve you of the seventeen hundred dollars.
IF THIS ARTICLE MADE YOU THINK: LIKE this article so the algorithm shows it to people who need to read it. SHARE this -- every share really helps get the word out. Use it. COMMENT below with your take. Where am I factually wrong? Bring specific data. Tell me."
103 comments:
Speaking of great presidents like Obama and contrasting them with awful ones like your pervert, I'm curious: you've heard your idiot in chief claim that "vandals" were messing up the reflecting pool. You don't really believe that do you?
And, If you don't, does it bother you that he just makes such stupidly false claims over and over and over? I mean, that's the least of his awful claims but it's just one of the many recent ones.
It goes along with the stupidly false claims about people he's killed, claiming they were drug dealers, or agreements he made that clearly were not made. Does it not bother you that he lies all the time and that facts, reality, and truth matter nothing at all to him? Do you think conservatives are okay with all that? If so does that not say something terribly awful about conservatives today?
Dan
I always appreciate some good comic relief, and diversion.
Classic spineless brainless dodge. DOES IT BOTHER YOU how easily, regularly and stupidly he makes up ridiculously false claims?
IF NOT, WHY NOT?
Why not answer reasonable questions about things that are happening RIGHT NOW with the idiot you kept voting for rather than posting (no doubt) nonsense claims from "somebody on X..."?
Today's GOP will live on in infamy and they will be a source of endless shame to their children and their children's children.
When you start with personal attacks, it doesn’t reflect well on you.
But your impatience and assumption make you look foolish.
Unfortunately my life doesn’t revolve around immediately answering every single thing you say or every question you ask. As I’ve done repeatedly elsewhere, I often post your idiocy with a short response, and go back into the details later. I’ve been very clear that I don’t go into detail when I’m responding from my phone.
Once again you apply a standard to others, that you don’t apply to yourself.
But I do appreciate you providing such an excellent example of your impatience and hubris.
This is Dan demonstrating humility.
Classic spineless brainless dodge. DOES IT BOTHER YOU how easily, regularly and stupidly he makes up ridiculously false claims?
IF NOT, WHY NOT?
Dan
"You don't really believe that do you?"
I've seen enough conflicting stories that I haven't reached a conclusion. It's not something I'm particularly concerned about.
"And, If you don't, does it bother you that he just makes such stupidly false claims over and over and over?"
The fact that I've written multiple posts and a vast number of comments criticizing Trump when he's said things that are either stupid or inaccurate should be answer enough for this idiotic question, but apparently my being critical on my own isn't enough for Dan.
"It goes along with the stupidly false claims about people he's killed, claiming they were drug dealers, or agreements he made that clearly were not made."
By al means, prove these claims objectively. I'll wait.
"Does it not bother you that he lies all the time and that facts, reality, and truth matter nothing at all to him?"
It bothers me enough that I've posted and commented about it quite often. It also bothers me when y'all on the left do it, which doesn't seem to concern you that much at all.
"Do you think conservatives are okay with all that? If so does that not say something terribly awful about conservatives today?"
I don't speak for all conservatives. But choosing the more conservative of two less than perfect presidential candidates doesn't bother me at all. Especially as Biden has a decades long political career filled with blatantly stupid lies.
"Classic spineless brainless dodge. DOES IT BOTHER YOU how easily, regularly and stupidly he makes up ridiculously false claims?"
Asked and answered above. That you are too impatient and disrespectful of my time to restrain yourself isn't particularly Christ like, nor are your personal attacks. I'd wait for an apology, but I know one will not be forthcoming.
"IF NOT, WHY NOT?"
Because this is what passes for adult conversation in Dan's tiny little brain.
"Why not answer reasonable questions about things that are happening RIGHT NOW with the idiot you kept voting for rather than posting (no doubt) nonsense claims from "somebody on X..."?"
1. Given you aversion to answering questions, and my willingness to do so (within some broad limits), this is freaking hilarious. I literally had a post where I asked you 4 simple direct questions, and you quit after 3.
2. Your insistence on making assumptions about substance and attacking the medium makes you look like you are scared of addressing substance and hide behind absurd excuses to avoid addressing substance.
3. If the claims made in the post are baseless, then it should be easy for one with such a superior intellect to deal with them The fact that you don't speaks volumes.
Not nearly as much shame and infamy as the left wing British political parties who have overseen wholesale rape on a scale that is beyond belief.
There, now you can calm down.
The stunning originality of Dan's riposte is breathtaking. The impatience, arrogance, entitlement, hubris, and vitriol is staggering.
The lack of substance, humility, or grace, is expected.
I think I'm back to letting Dan demonstrate the wonders of his character in his own words. He reveals more about himself in his comments than I ever could in my responses.
Coming from someone who is a master of the "spinless, brainless, dodge", this is (as expected) hilarious. That I was not in a position to respond to Dan the instant that he wanted me to, in precisely the way he wanted me too, is one more example of his classic double standard.
I really get tired of Obamanation being called our "first black president." He ISN'T BLACK!! He's mulatto, just as much white as black. To say he is black is racist.
You're not wrong on some level, but the whole argument (on both sides) seems pointless. He's black because he chooses to identify as black. I find it much stranger that Harris was magically declared to be black.
He identifies as black because he is a rank racist and he started the whole racist war we have nowadays.
It seems more likely that he identified as black because it benefited him, he received various preferences throughout his youth due to his choice to identify as black. While not denying that he did very little to improve race relations in the US, it seems driven be self interest more than anything. Something that his bank accounts and real estate portfolio seem to confirm as a good choice.
The hypocrisy is world class. Dan clearly isn't bothered by the many, far more truly dangerous and harmful lies his kind tell routinely as if they're passed down from God Himself. Obama told many. Biden told them throughout 50 years in government. The Democrat Party has them in their party platform. DAN tells lies about God/Christ/Scripture constantly.
Trump doesn't say anything which comes close to the level of evil falsehoods told by Dan and his kind.
Glenn:
He ISN'T BLACK!! He's mulatto, just as much white as black.
And there it is. The language of the racist confederates always exposes the racist/fascists. Arrogance and racism are a sick mix, gentlemen. Learn more, be better.
Just like Dan, get outraged at something irrelevant and ignore the point.
Yes, Dan is a world class hypocrite. If it wasn't for double standards, he'd have no standards at all.
Dan,
How is it racist to speak facts?!?!? In prior times, especially in the south, if you had "one drop" of black blood you were considered to be a black ("negro"). I'm pointing out that just because he's half black, he ISN'T the first "black" president.
So where is this the language of racism, or fascism and how is it arrogance, and how does it make me "a sick mix"?!?!?
It is racist to deny that he is half-white!
You ignorant racist pissant. Using the term "mulatto" is what racists did in the 1800s and 1900s to further marginalize and abuse and oppress black people. Even if they had a drop of so-called "white blood." It's a racist term. Educate yourself.
You're a full-grown adult. You should know this kind of thing. You are demonstrating that you are choosing to live in a racist world.
Dan
Look at Dan and how he's demonstrating the grace that he demands of others. Look at how Christlike and grace filled he is.
The term mulatto was a very specific term used to describe someone with a "50/50" white/black ancestry. There were other terms used to describe the various possible "mixtures".
While I personally wouldn't use the term (mostly because it'll trigger this sort of overreaction) it is a technically accurate description of P-BO based on his parentage.
As always, thank you for showing your True colors and inability to embrace the grace you demand of others.
The term "mulatto" is not racist. "Half breed" would be, perhaps, but "mulatto" is a simple word meaning half black and half white. Only a racist like you would think the word is racist.
Of course some states, cities, and even countries consider the word racist because they consider just about everything they disagree with to be racist.
So would you prefer we say he is a half-breed. The whole point is that he is not black, unless you are a racist who considers one drop of negro blood to make one a negro. By they way, the word "negro" simply means "black" and was used among blacks until marxist racists determined the word was racist and then "African-American" became popular even though virtually no one in the USA is an African- American any more that I am a "Scottish-American" or "Irish-American," or "Welsh-American," or "German-American," or "English-American." Since they have at been in the USA for at least three generations they are just American. Of course the LEFT hates America and if a black person (really shades of brown) hates American they can always leave--since been 160 years since their progenitors were bound here in slavery.
Obamanation is NOT black and therefore was not our first black President, you racist pig!
And while Dan continues to pretend Trump is corrupt and dangerous, he has absolutely no response, no defense, no counter argument to the facts presented in this post, which as detailed as it is, doesn't cover every destructive act of the Obama presidency. Somehow, we're the conned! So, I will save this post and present it every time Dan tries to assert that we've supported a corrupt person who is a danger to our nation, despite the many examples of him having improved it for all Americans.
Can a word really "be racist"? Aren't words themselves morally neutral? Isn't the use of a word which makes it problematic?
Could you argue that the worldview that thought that it was valuable to categorize people based on their "racial makeup" is a "racist mindset", sure. Could you argue that declaring that every citizen of a particular country is
"Black" regardless of their actual ethnic makeup is racist, probably.
What's interesting is that back in the day (in certain societies) "one drop of black blood" was enough to categorize a person as "black" and used to discriminate. Now, folx like Dan will refer to anyone who has "one drop of black blood" as "Black" and use that to celebrate them merely for their "racial" makeup. Even to the point of discriminating against others to favor the "Black" person with only "one drop of black blood" (yes I know that the whole black/white blood thing is stupid and makes no sense, yet it is still being used as a litmus test to this day)
Glenn is correct on one level. P-BO's parentage makes it clear that P-BO is just as white as he is black. Which is literally the definition of "mulatto".
It's almost like Dan is just looking for excuses to be graceless, impatient, and angry.
I meant to note Dan's first sentence at the top of the comments: "Speaking of great presidents like Obama...". Clearly as just this post's assemblage of failures presents, Obama is not in any way worthy of being regarded as a "great" president. Only true racists revere him. Dan is such a person.
The word is an old term. The word is not racist. Racists have used that word to abuse and oppress, just like the N-word.
Rational moral adults understand this. You expose yourselves.
Dan
For someone who worships "DATA", Dan sure doesn't provide any actual "DATA" to prove his claims. He relies on the 3 incredibly questionable legal cases against Trump and ignores the problems with them.
This indeed is all Dan is doing. He does the same with the mention of words like "whore" or "slut" as if the mere mention is somehow derogatory towards womanhood in general. He doubles down with this intentional lie by suggesting "misogynists" use those words, despite the fact that I've heard more women refer to other women as "whores" and/or "sluts" than I've heard from men. Indeed, most men refer to actual tramps as "potential dates".
He's done it with the word "thug", as if it can only and current is only used in reference to blacks acting criminally. Well, given actual law enforcement data, it isn't unreasonable to presume someone using the word is indeed referencing a black person. But that doesn't mean that it EVER means black people in general and thus "only racists" use the word. This again is merely Dan lying...ON PURPOSE...with the purpose of denigrating as much as possible those with whom he not only disagrees, but with whom he is woefully and totally incapable of countering in an honest, fact-based manner. It is both comical and reprehensible, and worse than that, this putz votes.
On the one hand, it's too early to grade P-BO. On the other, it seems incredibly absurd to call him "great" this soon after his term. It's interesting to watch "great" presidents drop in esteem (FDR) and mediocre presidents rise (Truman) as time goes on. P-BO will probably be judged to be middle of the pack in the future, and it's too early to make any judgements about Trump.
Marshal ridiculously said...
"Obama is not in any way worthy of being regarded as a "great" president. Only true racists revere him."
Of course this is just a stupid and blindly partisan, spoken from a place of irrational hatred, not data or reasoned thinking. Historians consistently rank Obama in the top fourth of all presidents, often in the top ten. The deviant that y'all voted for is consistently in the bottom five. That is in some way worthy of being regarded as a great president.
That is, if experts and scholars and historians consistently agree that Obama was a good or great president, that is reason to take the claim seriously. If, on the other hand, it's the racist, the Klan, and MAGA heads that find Obama to be awful, who cares what they think? What are their credentials?
You don't have to agree with all the experts and scholars, historians, and serious students of politics, but you can't say there's no reason that many people consider Obama a great president. Expert opinion IS a reason.
And not only amongst experts. Obama consistently, in polls across the U.S. and across the world, is found to be a president worthy of respect. Unlike the guy y'all keep voting for.
Dan
Yes, as I noted several comments ago. Thank you for agreeing with me.
Your problem now is that you referred to Glenn as an "You ignorant racist pissant." because he used a word that was (sometimes) used by (some) racists at some point in the past. That's quite a leap, yet also thoroughly lacking in the grace you demand of others.
"It's a racist term. Educate yourself."
Dan at 12:01
"The word is not racist."
Dan at 12:51
A complete contradiction in less than one hour.
Damn, that's hilarious.
Craig:
A complete contradiction [speaking of my noting that the TERM, Mulatto, is racist] in less than one hour.
Reality, in the world of the educated and informed:
a 'word' has a specific meaning,
whereas,
a 'term' is a 'word' or a group of words that have
a particular meaning WHEN THEY ARE CONTEXTUALIZED..
https://langeek.co/en/grammar/course/1416/word-vs-term
The word, "boy," is not racist. The TERM, "boy," when used by white oppressors to attack a black man IS racist.
You all can't be this under-educated (and here, I'm not talking about levels of schooling, I'm talking about rational adult-level educational responsibility that comes with being a free human in a free republic.). It is a privilege of white men to choose to be uninformed on such matters.
And speaking of chosen ignorance, on Obama's popularity amongst experts AND normal citizens, at home and abroad:
Obama is viewed positively by 57% of Americans, a new CNN poll conducted by SSRS finds, far surpassing the ratings for his two Oval Office successors. Only 34% of the public offers a favorable opinion of President Donald Trump
https://www.cnn.com/2026/06/18/politics/cnn-poll-presidents-obama-biden-trump
In Pew's last extensive multination surveys that asked specifically about Obama, he maintained a global median confidence rating of 65% across 40 countries, proving significantly more popular abroad than his predecessors...
Across 36 nations polled, a median of 23% of adults express confidence in his leadership of world affairs. In many countries, confidence in Trump has slipped since last year.
https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2026/06/23/trump-gets-negative-reviews-internationally-as-fewer-say-u-s-is-a-reliable-partner/
Obama top ten, the Deviant, bottom five:
https://www.c-span.org/presidentsurvey2021/?page=overall
https://eurweb.com/obama-vs-trump/
Because opinion polls represent reality perfectly.
I understand that reading what I wrote can be difficult, but.
This could be one of the funniest excuses you’ve ever conjured up. Your semantic manipulation is impressive.,
According to MW, word and term are synonymous.
I’m simply going to note the complete lack of refutation of any of the specifics in the post. Just semantic BS, bitching about the source, and charges of racism.
At a grade school level, perhaps. And yet, not in the adult world.
Grow up. Be reasonable, son.
DO YOU RECOGNIZE the canyon of difference between saying to a father of a young male, "That's a fine boy you have there!" and of a racist saying to a black man, "Hey boy, what you doing in my neighborhood?"
Don't be obtuse. Be better.
Your post is diarrhetic gossip-mongering, suitable for grade school kids, not adult reasoning. You HAVE no "specifics" in. your post. You have someone on X making claims, none of which indict Obama. And I can say that in complete confidence EVEN WITHOUT having read it because this is what you do: Post rumors and slander and "what ifs..." from "some guy" as if they mean one damned thing in the adult world of moral reasoning.
AND, at the same time, dismissing the reasoned opinions of scholars, experts, historians and rational adults... ALL so you can defend the rapists, pedophiles, racists and idiot corrupt con men.
More rating, name calling, and BS. About what’s expected.
Oh, plenty of unproven claims.
The idea of someone expressing their opinion on a subject, with examples and support, somehow sets Dan off.
Many people would rebut the points, but not Dan the master of adult conversation and grace.
I don't respond to unsigned, anonymous vaguely accusatory rants by party/parties unknown.
By all means, cite some actual human who is an expert in what has and hasn't happened there with documentation, then we can talk.
You see, I don't accept gossip and innuendo as responsible, moral adult conversation. I get that this is sort of your collective "thing," you X-citers, but reasonable, responsible adults prefer reasonable, responsible conversations.
And I'm noting that you still are not addressing your corrupt leader's ridiculous false claims. I mean, if you can't even recognize and call out such stupidly false claims as he's always making, then you're not a responsible adult to engage in adult conversations with.
Hint:
"They" did NOT eat the dogs and cats.
"They" did NOT steal any election.
"They" did NOT vandalize the reflecting pool.
Empty, stupidly false claims only expose the corruption of those who make them and the gullibility of those who believe/defend them.
Be a better person.
Then you are a moron, I’ve addressed the topic here and elsewhere,
That Biden repeated the same false claims for years, didn’t bother you enough to address those.
I could address your false/misleading claims again, but it won’t do any good.
Yet, here you are responding to the post. The writer is identified in the link. This notion that researching publicly available material somehow requires an expert is stupid. Of course it invalidates anything you say because you don’t hold yourself to the standards you demand of others.
I suspect that you could research any of the points yourself, even though you are not an expert. But you’d rather bitch about irrelevant nonsense than prove him wrong.
Yet, here you are responding to the post. The writer is identified in the link. This notion that researching publicly available material somehow requires an expert is stupid. Of course it invalidates anything you say because you don’t hold yourself to the standards you demand of others.
I suspect that you could research any of the points yourself, even though you are not an expert. But you’d rather bitch about irrelevant nonsense than prove him wrong.
It's exactly as I have stated....Dan decides when the use of any word can be said to indicate a negative trait he WANTS and NEEDS to be inherent in an opponent in order to promote in others the same grace embracing contempt Dan has for that opponent. He does so when he has no legitimate criticism he can level against that opponent. Honest people call it "lying" or "slandering".
This is quite the lie given the post itself, focused on one single aspect regarding Obama's actions doing great harm to the black population, is itself evidence in support of the truth I've related. "Historians" are not truthful. At least not those YOU'VE cited, as your links did absolutely nothing to show any substantive consequences (good OR bad) of any policy or action taken by any of the presidents they ranked. Again, how can Trump grade out lower than a guy who died within a month of being elected? And Dan...being a very hateful child...pretends his "historians" have been honest in their assessments.
What has Obama done which hasn't been a clusterf**k? You can't point to anything he's done which has improved the lives of average Americans, nor can you point to anything Trump has done which hasn't. I don't need "historians, scholars and (so-called) experts" to see what is so blatantly clear about both men. One's an American who has indeed made America...if not great again...far closer than it had ever been under the empty suit you wish you could prove was a better man OR president.
Expert opinion is just another opinion. In order to of any value, it must be based on actual evidence, for which there is none to suppose that Obama could rank higher than a president who died in the first month of his presidency. Knowing what we know about this buffoon, he'd rank among the best if HE died one month into his presidency, thereby sparing the nation of all the harm his actions and policies imposed upon the nation.
Polls, too, are no better than baseless opinions. They, too, need evidence to support the opinion that Obama was worth more than a steaming pile of feo.
You're not making a case, fake Christian. You're stomping your feet and insisting that worthless bastard elected on the basis of his skin color wasn't the eight wasted years his presidency was.
We're not so "obtuse" as to fail to recognize your racism and hatred for better people. Even those alleged nazis are better than you for acknowledging the truth of the sinfulness of homosexuality. But when you constantly insist that someone is using a word...or wearing a symbol which white racists might wear or use and thus can be regarded as a racist, too, based on what actual racists to or say, you're simply exposing yourself as the liar we've long known you to be. I don't believe any of us have used that tactic against you except to mock you because you use it all the time in lieu of an honest argument when none can be had to defend your vile, Godless positions.
First of all, who are the nations ranking these two in this manner and one what basis are they doing so? You can't say because you have no idea. You just hate one and are ready to kneel before the other to do whatever. Many dislike Trump because he's not doing things the way they expect him to do after having a chump like Obama bend over like one of your beloved community members whenever they demanded something from us. They dislike Trump because he doesn't take their shit and won't allow our nation to be taken advantage of again as your first gay president allowed them to do.
Shove your polls and historians, Dan, and bring receipts. We already know you hate.
Well...at least this putz admitted he didn't read the post. If he had, he'd have the sources the guy used, which are not at all conservative sources. Instead, Dan pretends his "scholars, experts, historians and rational adults" have "reasoned opinions" about Obama while never citing those reasons. Dan, being a lying fake Christian, doesn't care about the reasons. He cares only that they say nice things about one of the worst presidents ever. Indeed, I don't even know why Dan wastes his time weighing in on the subject since he clearly doesn't pay attention to the real world. Then, being a scumbag of the highest order, he dares accuse us of defending "rapists, pedophiles, racists and idiot corrupt con men" despite having never voted Democrat in our lives. No one has been more conned than those who give Obama the time of day. Those are some really stupid people.
But he can't because he never read it.
"You see, I don't accept gossip and innuendo as responsible, moral adult conversation."
Says the lying God-hater who accepts gossip and innuendo as responsible, moral adult conversation when its directed at Trump and those of us who acknowledge his superiority as president over Dan's line-up of clowns....like Biden, Obama and Carter!
Unless the gossip and innuendo trashes Trump.
But as you note, he’s making these judgements without actually having read or checked anything in the post.
What a moron.
The feasting on dogs and cats (mostly cats, I believe) is not a news flash to any familiar with the foreigners in question. That one woman was arrested for actually cooking a cat on a spit is, I guess, not to be evidence of the claim.
It's more than interesting that when one of Dan's says something proven false or not yet proven at all, he is quick to defend his own by saying they were only reporting what they've heard or been told. But Trump's just lying. That's Dan for ya! Once again treating those he hates differently than those for whom he bends over like everyone else in his "beloved community".
There's still evidence pointing to the 2020 being a stolen election. The fact that 17% of Biden voters say they wouldn't have voted for the chronic liar had they known of the Hunter Biden's laptop is but one piece of evidence which affirms the fact the election was stolen. To suppress such news from the public's ability to learn of it constitutes election interference. Subtract that 17% from Biden's alleged 81 million votes, and the popular vote total is substantially lower than those for Trump. How that great number would have affected Electoral votes carries a high probability. And that's without considering the thousands (at least) of ballots mailed out haphazardly to addresses which cannot possibly have housed all the people said to live at them, including stores, warehouses and empty lots. Then there's still the dead people voting, double voting, illegals voting, and the Georgia situation when well over the amount which gave the win to Biden should have been disqualified on residency rules alone. Other legitimate cases were denied a hearing on the basis of "standing", as if any legitimate American citizen lacks standing in a case which impacts his own life, as does the election of another incompetent Democrat.
As to vandalizing the reflecting pool, here again Trump is repeating what he'd heard had happened. YOU have absolutely NO idea whether or not any of these claims are true or not. YOU have done absolutely NOTHING to confirm whether they are true or not. Without any doubt whatsoever, you have absolutely no evidence for ANYTHING you wish to assert is true or false. You're a useful idiot for the God-hating, America-hating marxist cause. A text-book example of the truly conned. A pathetic joke in human form.
Stop telling better people to be better persons. Be one yourself. Repent while you're still allowed to breathe.
Dan does like to make pronouncements about things, doesn't he?
The problem with the whole eating pets thing is that it ignores the fact that Haitians eat cats and dogs. Why would Haitians magically stop this cultural practice simply because they've moved here?
As far as the rest, it's just Dan spouting talking points.
Why would Dan bother to actually read something? He doesn't have enough time in his busy schedule to bother with reading and checking the things discussed in the piece. It's so much easier to make assumptions and spew talking points, than to do research. It's also easier to dismiss it because the author used Twitter as his medium to communicate. Prejudice is always the path of least resistance.
As noted in a post elsewhere, the ASPL are simultaneously trying to normalize pedophilia as merely, while simultaneously trying to smear Trump as a pedophile. Clearly consistency isn't a primary focus. No slander for thee, but more slander for me.
Craig...
"The problem with the whole eating pets thing is that it ignores the fact that Haitians eat cats and dogs. Why would Haitians magically stop this cultural practice simply because they've moved here?"
The problem, once again, is that there is NO EVIDENCE IN ALL OF HISTORY ON IN HEAVEN AND ON EARTH that immigrants are eating cats and dogs in Springfield. It's the lack of evidence that makes you all sound so insane for saying "but maybe, but, but, but they might... I mean, maybe they used to."
It's insane.
Even if your claim was true about Haitians in Haiti, the rules are different here and these are adult humans capable of following the rules. What do you think they are? Some kind of monsters? What the hell is wrong with y'all?
THERE IS NO EVIDENCE that immigrants are eating the cats and dogs in Springfield. THERE IS NO EVIDENCE that it was a stolen election. THERE IS NO EVIDENCE of vandals messing up Trump's swamp that he created himself. There is no evidence!
If the evidence was there, your pervert king, would have presented it. There is no evidence. Don't be empty-headed blind stooges to an idiot.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Springfield_pet-eating_hoax
P.T. Barnum was speaking of MAGA.
Dan
Since when is pointing out the reality that Haitians eat cats and dogs in Haiti "insane"? Since when is suggesting that there is no reason why Haitians would magically stop eating cats and dogs just because they move to another country.
"Even if your claim was true about Haitians in Haiti, "
Who exactly are you calling a liar here? Me, or the Haitians who told me this?
"the rules are different here and these are adult humans capable of following the rules."
Really? This is quite a claim that you are making with absolutely zero proof. Because adult humans are known for following every single rule, right?
"What do you think they are?"
I think that they are Haitian immigrants who likely retain some of their culture and practices. Just like virtually every other immigrant group.
"Some kind of monsters?"
Nope. I don't consider eating dogs and cats to be monstrous. Just because it is frowned on in the US doesn't mean that those who do so are monstrous.
"What the hell is wrong with y'all?"
The list is too long to write here, but it probably doesn't include your assumptions.
I do appreciate how much effort you have put into attacking a claim that I haven't actually made.
In my hometown of Springfield, OH they actually had a video of a Haitian cooking a dog!
WOW, Wikipedia claims Haitians eating pets in Springfield is a hoax. Wiki is know for supporting the LEFT. People in Springfield have witnessed pet eating and I saw a video of a Haitian cooking a dog. But Wiki, being LEFT wing, will defend them and say it's not happening. They have no business in Springfield to begin with and have caused lots of crime, etc. Thanks to Demokrats, of course.
That wouldn't matter to Dan, because he's decreed that all immigrants are adults and follow every single rule in the countries they immigrate to.
Which would be a surprise to the courts who have allowed reduced sentences or dropped charges for immigrants who raped women and girls, because the immigrants didn't know that Western countries frown on raping children.
I wouldn't say that Wiki is useless, but it's hardly an unbiased and objective source.
Dan dares accusing anyone of lying? That's so precious! Dan's lying that he "knows" there's no evidence for amy of the three claims! He's done nothing to refute any of them. He simply asserts. There's clearly evidence for at least two, if not all three of those claims, particularly 2020 election fraud.
Glenn...
"People in Springfield have witnessed pet eating and I saw a video of a Haitian cooking a dog."
Well if Glenn claims to have seen it then clearly it must be true because y'all aren't fucking insane.
You're a crazy bunch of conspiracy mongers willing to pass on gossip and slander. To hell with y'all in the most biblical sense of the meaning
If you had proof, you would put it out there. You don't have proof. Y'all are pissants. You're idiots. Y'all don't have jack shit in your brains. You are being fooled by an idiot con man who is clearly perverted and corrupt and evil as hell... y'all are stupid dupes.
Shame on you.
Repent.
Dan
https://www.reuters.com/fact-check/no-evidence-haitian-immigrants-stealing-eating-pets-ohio-2024-09-10/
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/-just-exploded-springfield-woman-says-never-meant-spark-rumors-haitian-rcna171099
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c1l4g6g5d97o
But to hell with reality and truth and decency and not being a fucking stupid idiot willing to pass on the damned lies of a perverted corrupt conman willing to take advantage of idiot marks like y'all. To hell with your idiocy.
One day you will wake up and be ashamed of how very abundantly stupid you were. How very gullible you were to believe idiot claims that you could not prove just because indecent, vulgar charlatans told you to believe it. You're idiots.
But sure, blame Wikipedia.
Stupid is as stupid does.
Dan
I will say that I appreciate Dan's commitment to being right to the point that he's arguing that synonyms have radically different meanings. That he's not apologized for what he's said about Glenn says so much about his vaunted moral character.
Popularity does not equal greatness.
Dan,
For someone who highly values lived experience, and expects us to believe everything you claim about yourself, this hypocritical refusal to hold yourself to the standards you demand of others is childish and absurd.
Speaking for myself, I haven't made any of the arguments you are ranting about. That you haven't addressed the arguments I have made isn't a surprise.
Your big offer of proof (that immigrants always follow the rules of the counties they immigrate to) is simply absurd in the face of overwhelming evidence of immigrants committing crimes and continuing to engage in cultural norms from their culture even though those behaviors are frowned upon (rape, FGM, honor killings, slavery, child marriage, to name a few) in Western cultures.
Pointing out that Wiki is not some paragon of accuracy isn't blaming Wiki, it's simply noting the reality that Wiki isn't an objective source by any rational measure.
Well we watch what you do and conclude that you are stupid, so there's that.
AH, Dan cites LEFTIST media to 'prove" no Haitians were eating pets.
DANNY girl, I know a lot of people in Springfield (remember, my home town where I graduated high school, etc) and they report just about every crime imaginable by the Haitians (like they did in their own country), but of course LEFTISTs are there to protect them as voters.
Glenn, you sad, unhappy little man, I'm citing legitimate news sources who are, in turn, citing law enforcement officials. There is NO DATA to support your idiot claim. If you had it, you would provide it.
You need to understand that I don't care - I deeply do not give a single damn - about your little anecdotal stories and gossip. They are meaningless. Cite the arrest records. Cite proof. Gossip is for little girls, you pagan pissant.
Those who bear false witness, gossip like girls, slander... such as these do not inherit the realm of God and are not part of the realm of God according to the holy text. If you want to take it seriously.
Dan
Again, Dan has to resort to ad hominem attacks. I'm happy as can be because I am a Christian and my life is filled with Christ. LEFTIST media is know for not telling the truth. You are obviously self-centered and feel insecure so you have to insult everyone else.
YOU believe the media and I believe witnesses. You know, the media who doesn't report on the thousands of girls and women gang-raped by Muslims or a report on the thousands of Christians killed by Muslims in other countries, or fail to report the high incidence of murders by "transgenders" etc.
Haitians destroy Haiti and now they are destroying American cities where they have no right to be!
The amount of arrogance, hubris, gracelessness, and hypocrisy in this one comment is impressive. Especially coming from someone who regularly uses himself as a source or proof, and offers lived experience as proof as well.
Given my lived experience, I have no reason to doubt Glenn's anecdotes. Which is not the same as arguing that they are True.
This
Dan is pretty fond of the Ad Hom thing.
I would think "legit" news services would do a bit more than merely "cite" law enforcement yet never interview locals who claim Haitians are doing the things attributed to them. Citing one side only doesn't suggest a willingness to find the truth, as if local law enforcement....for whatever reason...is totally trustworthy. Don't forget, ICE and Border Patrol us LE, too, and you "progressive " liars don't believe a word they say!
If there's anyone gullible and conned by one's political overlords, it's YOU, Dan. But then, I have zero confidence you make the slightest effort to divulge the truth, as truth has never been that in which you've ever demonstrated the slightest concern.
Says the fake who supposes God would bless a same-sex union.
---Art
"Today the Supreme Court let Trump strip legal protection from over 350,000 Haitians. And in her dissent, Justice Elena Kagan did something extraordinary: she quoted the president's own words back at the country, because the majority wouldn't.
She wrote that Trump's statements about Haitians were "so repellent and racially inflected that the majority declines to put them in print." So she put them in print herself.
That Haitians were "eating the dogs, eating the cats, eating the pets of the people." That they "probably have AIDS." That Haiti is a "filthy, dirty and disgusting" country. That Haitian immigrants are "poisoning the blood" of America.
These aren't fringe quotes dug up by enemies. This is the President of the United States. And Kagan wrote that his words "fairly shout" that race drove the decision to throw these people out. As she put it: Haitians are Black. Norwegians and Swedes, not so much.
It was never about pets. It was about telling hundreds of thousands of human beings they're filth, disease, vermin, a problem to be removed. And here's the part that should stop you cold: it worked. The Court shrugged and handed him the win anyway."
Racism and those who embrace it have ways of making themselves clear. "Ad hom" attacks, indeed. Those who embrace/allow/turn a blind eye towards racism ARE engaging in racism as well as ad hom attacks themselves each time they criticize those who merely point out the truth of what someone is doing.
Be better.
One day, I'm confident your eyes will be opened and you will stand, shame-faced before a grandchild, a poor immigrant and/or God almighty and will be confronted with how wrong you have been. Make the change sooner, repent today.
SCOTUS clarified that temporary means temporary,.
I’ll note the reality that leftist celebrities were extolling the virtues of Haiti not that long ago.
As for your alleged quotes, I see no reason to deal with un sourced/second hand claims.
As the person in this conversation with the most experience in Haiti, and I can say that the large cities are pretty bad, the government is ineffective, and the Clinton’s screwed them.
I have no problem with defining temporary as temporary. They’re free to explore more permanent options.
Personally, I’d much rather that someone fix Haiti so that they can flourish there.
Dan’s in off topic rant mode.
Like the rest of the LEFT, with Dan everything is about racism. Those people were given TEMPORARY residence, and that's exactly what SCOTUS pointed out. TEMPORARY means it's time to send them home..
Kagan's grandstanding was a pathetic attempt to accuse Trump as a racist, because lying lefties have no legitimate criticusms of this man who is so much better than they are. You getting a single in your lady parts as a result is just you embracing grace again because you love when Trump is attacked and you don't care if the attack is warranted in any way. You only care that someone in a position like her says the same stupid crap you do and thus you pretend her doing so makes it true. That's how desperate you are to rationalize your irrational and baseless hatred of a man you're not fit to question in any way. And you confirm THAT fact with alarming regularity.
---Art
It’s not like Kagan or Brown are the finest jurists ever put on the court.
Temporary means temporary. It’s not a difficult concept.
Dan treats Kagan as if her words are holy writ, but doesn’t give Thomas the same respect.
https://x.com/ocraziocornpop/status/2070696715154268196?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
https://x.com/saltygoat17/status/2070887878906048728?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
So TPS was supposed to (per P-BO) last for 18 MONTHS, but got dragged out for 16 YEARS. I think that’s plenty.
https://x.com/westernlensman/status/2070878574408503461?s=46&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
Once again, we see that Dan has no idea regarding anything related to the issue at hand. All he knows is how badly he hates Trump and that everyone must hate Trump, too.
From AI, (for brevity's sake):
How TPS Durations WorkShort-Term Grants:
TPS is designated by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in increments of 6, 12, or 18 months.
Extensions vs. Terminations: Before an extension expires, DHS assesses your home country's conditions.
If conditions remain unsafe, the designation is renewed.
If conditions have improved, the designation is terminated, and the protection is removed.
No Cap on Time: There is no legal limit to how many times a country's designation can be renewed, meaning some nationalities have held TPS for over two decades.
The more you know, the more you know.
Do you think Haiti is a safe place to return to now?
Would you want a loved one returned to Haiti right now?
Are you at all familiar with the teachings of Jesus? Or even just basic human decency?
Dan
Gotcha, so temporary means permanent.
As far as the conditions in Haiti, it’s very location dependent. Personally I’d go back to St Louis du Nord tomorrow.
I’m pretty familiar with the teachings of Jesus and am pretty sure that He didn’t spend lot of time teaching specifically on 21st century immigration issues. I’m also familiar enough with the foundations of the US government to conclude that US immigration law isn’t based on the teachings of Jesus.
FYI, if Haiti is still the shithole y’all went to such lengths to deny (evidence above), then why did no one change TPS to another status? Why not invite the whole country to immigrate? Why not fix the problems? Why not take legal action against the Clintons and their cronies to recover the money and use it for its intended purpose? Why just be content with endlessly extending TPS, instead of fixing the problem?
I could be wrong, but I don’t think that there is anything requiring those on TPS to remain on TPS, and nothing preventing them from seeking other avenues to stay in the US.
If the US took the steps necessary to make Haiti “safe” you’d bitch and moan about the US trying to take over or colonize the place. You don’t bitch and moan about the Cilntons and their cronies stealing shotloads of money, and you don’t bitch and moan about the government in Haiti for the last decade and a half or its failures, but sending Haitians back to the paradise that leftists went to great lengths to praise, you bitch and moan about.
I’m gonna guess that you won’t say anything negative about the leftist campaign to portray Haiti as a paradise because you thought it was great at the time. Now that it doesn’t fit the current narrative, you’ll ignore it.
If the number I keep seeing is correct, it seems problematic doesn’t it?
65% of those on TPS are on welfare seems excessive and seems like maybe they aren’t qualified or motivated to get jobs.
As we learned over the weekend, the Trump administration is prepared to allow those on TPS to apply for other avenues to stay in the US or to facilitate them returning to their homelands.
https://x.com/dhsgencounsel/status/2071301616586592402?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2010/01/obama_gives_haitians_in_us_ill.html
So TPS allowed illegal aliens from Haiti to live and work in the US for 16 years due to the 2010 earthquake. Per the holy grail of news reporting, NPR.
Things were back to normal after the earthquake by the time I was there in 2012, so why exactly was TPS extended indefinitely. TPS was granted for those affected by the earthquake, not because of the shitty conditions in Haiti generally.
https://x.com/ericldaugh/status/2071203293515165937?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
https://x.com/roguelou18/status/2070988143235608678?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
"the rules are different here and these are adult humans capable of following the rules. What do you think they are? Some kind of monsters?"
Dan
https://x.com/alibradleytv/status/2070604893325513012?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
https://x.com/ImmigrantCrimes/status/2070536816130675174
https://x.com/dailymail/status/2070120712199676180?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
They should never have been allowed to be on any sort of welfare--PERIOD!
How in blazes was/is this allowed?!?!?!
https://notthebee.com/article/liberal-man-tries-to-drum-up-sympathy-by-revealing-that-30-of-migrants-with-temporary-status-have-home-loans-
You'd think not.
The amount of housing infrastructure (both rental units, homes purchased, mortgages, and mortgage assistance) taken up by illegal aliens is amazing. I've seen data that suggests that illegal aliens in the housing market drive costs up significantly.
Post a Comment