Obama’s Grandmother and related issues
By Bo Sears
Slurs that never happened
USA TODAY ran an article on 4/8/08 headlined “Obama’s grandmother set own trail”. It shines a light on US Senator Barack Obama’s willingness to lie about his own grandmother using negative language about one panhandling African-American at a bus stop in Hawaii:
Obama and Soetoro-Ng lived with their grandparents Stanley and Madelyn Dunham, and later with their mother, Ann Dunham, in 1970s Honolulu, where white people were routinely the target of discrimination.
Sam Slom, a Bank of Hawaii economist then, who is now a Republican state senator in Hawaii, recalls that as a part of the white — or “haole” — minority in Hawaii, he would regularly see housing ads that made no effort to hide racial preferences. He says he remembers ads that read, “No haoles” or “AJAs (Americans of Japanese ancestry) Only” or “No Japanese.”
“That’s the way it was,” Slom said. “Did people talk about race? We had local jokes … like that ‘pake’ (Chinese) guy or the ‘yobo’ (Korean) who did this or that. I certainly got my share of haole jokes.”
Madelyn Dunham’s views on race came into play in a speech Obama gave March 18 in Philadelphia designed to both denounce and defend his former pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright.
In the speech, Obama linked Wright and his grandmother when he said, “I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community. I can no more disown him than I can my white grandmother — a woman who helped raise me, a woman who sacrificed again and again for me, a woman who loves me as much as she loves anything in this world, but a woman who once confessed her fear of black men who passed her by on the street, and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe.”
Obama’s campaign declined to make Dunham available for interviews or to say whether the Illinois senator alerted her before delivering the speech.
Dunham has repeatedly declined to comment to reporters, and Soetoro-Ng declined to comment on Obama’s speech about Wright or their grandmother’s attitudes on race.
Others who know Dunham were caught off guard by that mention in Obama’s speech.
“I was real surprised that he indicated that,” said Dennis Ching, who was a 23-year-old management trainee under Dunham beginning in 1966. “I never heard her say anything like that. I never heard her say anything negative about anything. And she never swore.”
“I never heard Madelyn say anything disparaging about people of African ancestry or Asian ancestry or anybody’s ancestry,” Slom said.
One of Obama’s two books describes his learning of his grandmother’s allegedly abusive language from his slacker grandfather who confided that alleged information to Obama. But Obama in neither of his books mentions any slurs toward any demographic said in his presence by his grandmother. The article referenced above states that there is no record and no witness to corroborate Obama’s remarks. One witness even confirms that the grandmother never engaged in hateful speech. So Obama is not just involved in left-wing racialist politics and hate speech ("acting white,” “white resentment"), he appears willing to lie about his own grandmother ("a typical white person") on that point. In contrast, his former pastor, Rev. Wright, made remarks in his recent PR binge this past week that he would never accept slurs against his own parents—apparently that lesson didn’t stick with Obama.
Haole and beatings
But the second thing to notice in the article is the matter-of-fact way in which the writer (Dan Nakaso) speaks of “haole” as an accepted name for the diverse white Hawaiians even back in the 1960s, and of rampant discrimination against them.
This is a cautionary tale that says, while we wait for the general awakening and the return of the freedoms of association and contract, we must act to resist defamation for our children’s sake, to preserve their right to a decent sense of self-respect. Although it is not mentioned in the article, it is well-known on the West Coast that the last day of school in Hawaii is what we have on May 1 in schools here in California, namely a “beat-up whitey” day. In California it is known in graffiti as “JWD” day, an acronym for “Jump Whitey Day.”
Yes, even though Resisting Defamation is limited to fighting slurs, hate caricatures, negative stereotypes, and white-baiting canards, it appears obvious that a second measure that will need to be taken will be the creation of self-defense voluntary units to protect young diverse white American and European students. What can the white Hawaiian parents be thinking to allow their children to be targeted for slurs and beatings just because of the color of their skin?
Comments (5) | Tell-a-Friend
The trackback URL for this entry is: Trackbacks are disabled for this entry
Trackbacks:
Comments:
Page 1 of 1 pages
http://hearth--stone.blogspot.com/
We know that with our integrated minority population America has one of the highest violent crime rates in the industrialized world but without them, we would be on par with the crimes rates of Iceland! And Iceland has the lowest per capita crime rates in the world. Who would dare argue that 40,000 Black on White rapes in 2007 be a good thing? Well, we can solve it overnight with Segregation.
Who would argue against cutting the murder rate by 80%? Segregation is the answer.
Who wouldn’t prefer to keep exotic disease, parasites, and infections—fungal and viral at bay while simultaneously fixing our hospitals and the ‘health care insurance crisis’? Then close the border and deport our third world populations.
Want to get rid of gangs and all the maladies which accompany them? Deportation and Segregation will out-perform all of your community workshops and social programs hands down.
Want to help Non-Whites? Banish from their minds the idea that we owe them education, welfare or even citizenship. We don’t. And it is nothing less than a satanic yoke upon both groups to suggest that we must be their “surety” (Prov. 11:15). Segregation benefits them too because it puts our enabling to an end. Without our pandering they just might be forced to deal with their own issues. Let Christ be their surety, not us (Heb. 7:22).
Do we Christians want to live in a more God-fearing, Theonomic and Conservative country with smaller, less intrusive government and safer communities? Guess what? The answer is still the same. Segregation achieves all of these ambitions better than any other approach.
The 2008 edition of the Resisting Defamation syllabus is completed and available to you on our Internet web site. There were many changes including breaking down the concept of slurs into four categories—slurs, hate caricatures, negative stereotypes, and white-baiting canards. In addition and to focus more completely on defamation, we have used “demographic” in place of “ethnicity” and “race” whenever possible.
We have also added a new section ("Fighting Back") which provides samples of educational shock emails to advocates of slurs, and explains how to do it.
We are ready to take this syllabus on the road, and appear at seminars (at first in Northern California). All we need is an off-duty police officer, a conference room, and some advertising. The text is ready and available.
Bo Sears
http://www.ResistingDefamation.org
PS: Any critical or helpful comments on the new structure of the syllabus and its contents will be gratefully received. Just use the tab “contact” to send an email message.
PS: We are well aware that this comes under the rubric of little ideas, not big ideas. But this is one way individuals may participate in the necessary.
” ... it is well-known on the West Coast that the last day of school in Hawaii is what we have on May 1 in schools here in California, namely a “beat-up whitey” day. In California it is known in graffiti as “JWD” day, an acronym for “Jump Whitey Day.”
“We are ready to take this syllabus on the road, and appear at seminars (at first in Northern California). All we need is an off-duty police officer, a conference room, and some advertising. The text is ready and available.”
_______________
Bo, have you contacted conservative talk show hosts (both national and local) and requested on-air interviews; e.g., Glenn Beck, Neal Boortz, Tammy Bruce, or even Michael Savage, etc.? How about asking the editors and columnists at mainstream conservative magazines and newspapers to publish your research? The time is long overdue for your message to be marketed and disseminated nationwide. It’s a necessary counter-balance to the cruel-sadistic-anti-white inverted-reality of Jane Elliot style diversity seminars that pervade our public and private institutions.
http://www.vdare.com/fulford/years_of_rage.htm
Posted by 357 on Friday, May 9, 2008 at 05:22 PM | #
Don’t forget though, no matter whether Obama or Hillary gets the nod on the Dem side, look who the alternative’s going to be ... Here’s Vdare.com’s Alan Wall reminding us just how bad that alternative is:
<a href=”http://www.vdare.com/awall/080511_memo.htm”>Last week, on</a> May 5th, “Cinco de Mayo,” Senator John McCain once again showed his contempt for the Republican base by hitting it with a double whammy. In the same statement McCain announced that: 1) he was opening a Spanish language website, and 2) he was going to the convention of the Hispanic chauvinist agitator group the National Council of La Raza [NCLR].
[…] As time goes by, we can expect the McCain camp to hispanify more of the website.
[…]
But John McCain’s encouragement of balkanization is not really a surprise. In the past, he has expressed his contempt for American culture, saying,
“a nation conceived in an idea, in liberty, will prove stronger, more enduring, and better than any nation ordered to exalt the few at the expense of the many or made from a common race or culture or to preserve traditions that have no greater attribute than longevity.”
In other words, who cares about a common American culture (or race)?
But when speaking to Hispanic leaders, McCain waxed eloquent about the growth of their culture in the United States :
“This [is] one of the defining moments in American history that really does define what kind of nation we are. If there was ever such a thing as a noble cause, it is the one we are embarked on now. Anyone who is afraid that somehow our culture will be anything but enriched by fresh blood and culture, in my view, has a distorted view of history and has a pessimistic view of our future.”
So when John McCain promotes mass immigration it’s more than a desire for votes or big money. The man actually wants his country to be Hispanicized.
Nor is it surprising that McCain, in his Cinco de Mayo Double Whammy, announced a speech to be delivered to La Raza July 14th.
In case you’re not familiar with the National Council of La Raza [“La Raza” means “the Race” in Spanish, referring unapologetically to the Hispanic race which it places first and foremost], it’s a radical Hispanic pressure group funded by, among others, the Ford Foundation, Citigroup, Wal-mart, George Soros … and even by your tax dollars.
What does La Raza stand for? It supports driver’s licenses and in-state tuition for illegal aliens. It opposes a fence on the border and opposes immigration enforcement cooperation between state, local and federal authorities. La Raza has links with MEChA and sponsors radical Mexican charter schools. And it’s currently attempting to shut down debate over the illegal invasion.
McCain’s kind of people, in other words.
This is by no means the senator’s first visit to “The Race.” In 1999 McCain was honored by La Raza and in 2004 he delivered the keynote address at their annual conference.
[…]
Here at VDARE.COM we don’t tell you how to vote. We can, however, tell you how bad the candidates are on the National Question.
Vote for whomever you want. But conservatives, and anyone who wants to stop the alien invasion and America’s balkanization should be under no illusions about John McCain: the man is an open borders fanatic, an associate of radical anti-Americans, and a contemptuous enemy of white middle-class Americans and traditional American culture.
[…]
McCain has a horrible record on immigration. Americans for Better Immigration give him a grade of D (for both his Career grade and Recent grade). [...] On some [immigration-related] issues McCain is no different from Hillary or Obama — sometimes he’s a little better, sometimes worse. Not a great recommendation.
McCain’s negative leadership in promoting McCain-Kennedy and other horrible (though thankfully defeated) [illegal-alien] amnesty bills in recent years shows us exactly where he stands. He has supported marches by illegal aliens and is a strong proponent of Bilingual Education. His “Hispanic Outreach Director” is Juan Hernandez, a former Mexican cabinet official and rabid amnesty supporter who has openly stated his goal was for Mexican-Americans to always “think Mexico first.”
But it’s not just McCain’s positions. It’s his attitude. McCain is extremely contemptuous of Americans — even including fellow senators — who disagree with him. In an interview with Hugh Hewitt former Senator Rick Santorum described how things were during the amnesty debates:
“John McCain was the guy who was working with Ted Kennedy to drive it down our throats, and lectured us repeatedly about how xenophobic we were, lectured us, us being the Republican conference, about how wrong we were on this, how we were on the wrong side of history, and that, you know, this was important for his … because having come from Arizona, knowing the strength of the Hispanic community, that we were going to be seen as racists, and he wasn’t going be part of that, that he was not a racist, and that if we were for tougher borders, it was a racist thing.”
[…]
What’s really sad, discouraging and frustrating is how many GOP voters claim to care about protecting our borders but voted for John McCain anyway. The Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) recently released a study titled Poll: Voters Unaware of Candidates’ Immigration Positions and subtitled “McCain Supporters Farthest off the Mark.” Ain’t that the truth! It explains that
“A new poll using neutral language finds that primary and caucus voters have little knowledge of candidates’ immigration positions. The results also show that voters often do not share their candidate’s position.”
What were these people thinking? According to the CIS poll, only 34% of McCain voters (in the primaries and caucuses) know that McCain favors “eventual citizenship for illegal immigrants who meet certain requirements.” Incredibly, of those polled who voted for McCain “35 percent mistakenly thought he favored enforcement that would cause illegals to return home, another 10 percent thought he wanted mass deportations, and 21 percent didn’t know his position.” According to CIS, only 31% of McCain voters agree with the man on immigration.
Thanks a lot, folks, for selecting John McCain as the GOP candidate for president. Now we’re stuck with this guy — at least until November.
In his own way John McCain is as alienated from the United States as Barack Obama. Sure, each man has his own style, which appeals to a different set of voters. But both candidates display contempt for traditional American society and both are contemptuous of white working- and middle-class Americans.
McCain, like other elitist Republicans, thinks grassroots Republicans have nowhere else to go and will have to vote for the GOP. That’s why the candidate thinks he can stick it to them again and again [Scroob note: and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again] and they’ll still vote for him come November.
But a lot could happen in the next six months. [Scroob note: “A lot”? Whatever it is, I’ll take it! ANYTHING … PLEASE GOD, ANYTHING BUT JOHN McCAIN! DEAR GOD HAVE MERCY! GIVE US ANYTHING ELSE!] And John McCain, if he continues to stick it to the Republican base, just might be surprised. [Scroob note: Pray God it come to pass! Let it come to pass, God! We’re counting on you, God! Can you hear me on this?]
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Monday, May 12, 2008 at 03:50 AM | #
Lawrence Auster notices a few things worthy of comment about the New York Times’ choice of photo of their favorite candidate. In addition to the log entry itself (at the link), see this, for example, in the comments thread:
Paul K. writes:
“I agree with you about what the photo is meant to suggest, and I am a professional artist.
There’s an odd thing about that photo, though. Of the people on the right, only the first few rows appear to be looking at Obama. The people behind them, whom Obama has passed, are not looking at him, but upward and to frame left in a state of rapture, as if glimpsing the shining city on a hill that Obama promises.”LA replies:
That’s absolutely true. The ones whom he has passed are all looking up in the same direction with the same blissful expression. Having been touched by Obama’s charism as he walked by them, they are now receiving the Spirit which is descending upon them.
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Monday, May 12, 2008 at 04:22 AM | #
Page 1 of 1 pages
Next entry: People Before Profits - the May Day March in Melbourne
Previous entry: On an interesting election night
Posted by Robert Reis on Wednesday, May 7, 2008 at 12:52 AM | #