Why is it when I think about Al Sharpton, I immediately think back to this scene from the movie "Coming To America".



Got to love the 80's. Time to get serious. Obama's self professed mentor and "link to the streets" is planning on heading out west to further stir up trouble in Arizona. I never liked Al Sharpton nor Jesse Jackson. They are walking, talking billboards for what is wrong in the black community. Sharpton like Jackson are mere race hustling, poverty pimps. They've never come across a television camera they didin't like nor a corporation they wouldn't try and fleece for some fast cash. So Sharpton believes that some how the illegal immigration law that was just signed into law will violate the civil right's of legal citizens. I've said it before, Sharpton never struck me as being an intellectually sharp guy. I resent him trying to compare the civil rights movement of the 1960's with the "so called plight" of illegal aliens. There is no comparison. Even most blacks don't support illegal aliens coming into this country. It still amazes me how the media still takes this buffoon seriously. When Al does step foot on Arizonian soil, he will not be speaking for blacks but for himself.



I can only imagine the ratings of Sharpton's radio show. Dare I even go there? This is what Al Sharpton is most known for. He stirs up racial animosity and can't even be a man when he is proven wrong. Let me put it another way. Al Sharpton is a racial parasite and a bottom feeder of American society, and he shouldn't be taken seriously or given an ounce of credibility.

Only in Obama land could this be a bad thing. The Community Organizer In Chief is mad, because the Governor of Arizona Jan Brewer with the blessings of most of the residents signed into law a bill that is going to finally get control of an out of control problem on the Arizona border with Mexico. The only people who would oppose a law that enforces immigration laws are people who really don't like this country to begin with. I guess I have to throw in Barack. People are being kidnapped and killed by Mexican drug gangs in Arizona, yet Barack seems to care more about how the illegals will be treated rather then being concerned for the safety of Americans citizens who live in Arizona. This man's perception of reality is beyond screwed up. Leave it to Obama to criticize a law that most people favor in this country. I applaud Governor Brewer for her action in signing into law "common sense legislation". After the bill was signed into law by Governor Brewer, Obama called the new legislation "misguided" and wants to pass a nation amnesty bill that is the opposite of that of Arizona. I love it when I hear illegal alien advocates claim that legislation designed to crack down on illegals makes it hard for illegals to "come out of the shadows". Here's the Homer Simpson doh question. What did these people do to put themselves in the situation that placed them in the shadows to begin with?



I'll take a crack at answering my question. Could it be that these people came into the country "ILLEGALLY" thus making them "ILLEGAL aliens"? So once again Barack Obama is taking a position that puts him at odds with the American public. This really isn't a partisan issue. It was because of George Bush, John McCain, Lindsey Graham and other RINOs trying to pass amnesty in 2005 that made it possible for Democrats to take control of congress in 2006. I have to go back to when Obama said that he wants to "fundamentally transform this country". When you think about his staple legislation that he wants signed into law, all of it is designed to change this country into something none of us will recognize. This is what Mr. Obama doesn't understand and never will. The American dream is so important to immigrants who come here legally for a reason. They have to work and be patient for the hope of one day being able to be called a United States citizen. These people respect this country enough to play by the rules and "do it the right way". Illegals who enter this country regardless of nationality do so in order to work not because they love this country, rules, and traditions. This is what happened when illegals and their supporters didn't get their way when the legislation was signed into law in Arizona.



They attacked the police and supporters who supported the bill. I don't believe liberals are going to comment on this "unruly mob", because this is their supporters doing the violence. I still can't figure out how the illegals think they have the "right" to protest about anything. It's beyond mental madness to believe that people who are trespassing on the soil of another country believe they have the right to speak out against it's laws. This video was taken last year at a Palmdale Anti Illegal Immigration rally. I love how this guy in the video completely exposed this illegal immigration supporter for the absolute dunce that she is and where her "loyalty" is with.



What this woman showed like many who share her views is that they do not support nor embrace the values of this country. FYI, this isn't Mexico. All they are about is taking and taking and taking. So if Barack Obama's views on illegal immigration are in line with this woman in the video and the rioters in Arizona, is it really far fetched to claim that Obama's loyalty isn't to the United States of America?

The late George Carlin was a controversial comedian. Some say he was a liberal while others say he was a libertarian.Whatever he was, George understood perfectly how absolutely ridiculous the claims of others who think that mankind somehow has the power to impact the weather due to their actions. What is so funny about George's skit is that he made a humorous comedy routine using just the insanity of the left and their belief in "saving the planet". I've always said that liberals are a joke. After watching this clip, you'll know exactly what I mean. 

George Carlin was never know for being a "clean comic" so listener discretion is advised on this one"

What you are about to hear are the words from Tea Party activists and participants. Since we know these folks are racists and bigots, because Keith Olberman, Chris Matthews, Bil Clinton and the folks in the Baghdad Bob media tell us so, listener discretion is advised. If you can't trust the media, who can you trust right? There is only a slight problem with this video you are about to see. These bigoted racist right winger tea party white folks speaking aren't exactly "white". Nothing like truth in advertising.

I read an interesting story from the Associated Press the other day, and I couldn't stop laughing after reading it. It appears that Grand Shyster Al Sharpton is hooking up with Barack Obama to become Obama's " "lightning rod" for President Barack Obama on inner city streets. I'm not exactly sure what that means. If I had to guess, I would say that it simply means that Al found a new source to get some "walking around money" for doing nothing. Just when I thought I knew everything there is to know about Barack Hussein Obama, something else comes out. Apparently, Al Sharpton not only went to Harvard, but he was also a mentor to Obama while at Harvard. Well wonders never cease do they? I'm sure Al was just mentoring Obama on how much he appreciates America or something along those lines. I have to wonder did Sharpton sake down he Dean of Admissions in order to get in. Al never struck me as a very bright person. If anything, he's the poster child for what ignorance sounds like whenever he opens his mouth. With Obama credibility among white Independent voters tanking and him supposedly representing a post racial era as the first black man to occupy the white house, his now open working affiliation with one of the most racially divisive people in this country will only help to further erode Obama's credibility. I was thinking why exactly would Obama need Sharpton to be his "link to the streets". Then it dawned on me. It was Obama's own "mentor" Al Sharpton who said back in February of 2007 that his pupil wasn't "authentically black". Obama's "blackness" has always been questioned by his own supporters. Sorry Obama supporters, but this is something that can't be falsely pushed off on the tea party folks. In the Time Magazine article, writers from Time and New Republic spells it out very well.

"Obama is seen as a "good black," and thus has less of following among black people. Meanwhile, agitators like Al Sharpton are seen as the authentic "bad blacks." Obama's trouble, asserted Beinart, is that he will have to prove his loyalty to The People in a way that "bad blacks" never have to."

Obama has always been seen as a "good black". While Sharpton and Jackson were fleecing down corporations in the "name of the people", Obama was on a surf board in the paradise of Hawaii. Beinart's comments were dead on accurate. The same thing can be said for RNC Chairman Michael Steele. Michael is desperately trying to prove to black folks that he is authentic, even if that means having to associate with Al Sharpton as well. I have more to say about that later. Black liberal editor of the Los Angeles Times David Ehrenstein picked up on this three years ago in 2007 with his column "Obama the Magic Negro". It wasn't of course until 2009 that Rush Limbuagh caught fake outrage by the left for parodying Ehrenstein's column to Al Sharpton's impersonated voice. The left wanted to destroy Limbaugh over the parody, but they overlooked the whole basis of the parody. It was David Ehrenstein and Al Sharpton that were the foundation behind the Limbaugh parody to begin with by questioning Obama's "blackness".



Does Barack now has "black credentials" now that Sharpton is his official link to the streets? If that is the case, then could that mean that a little of Obama's "magic" has worn off as well?

This video should serve as an illustration to tea party activists of different races on how to neutralize a race baiting question posed by a liberal in the media. Darryl Postell is the black tea party gentleman shown in the video being "interviewed by NBC Nightly News report Kelly O'Donnell who happens to be white. Kelly stated that "There aren't a lot of African-Americans men at these event." Then she asked Darryl “Have you ever felt uncomfortable"



Darryl's answer was the best answer anyone regardless of race could ever give. His answer solidified perfectly the contrast between what it is to be conservative versus what it is to be liberal. Darryl answered Kelly's race baiting question by saying "No, no, these are my people, Americans". Liberals are always trying to divide our nation among "racial and economic" lines. I've been to several tea parties and I have never once felt "uncomfortable". Then again, I don't have race on the brain 24/7 like some of the left like Kelly O'Donnell has. Most conservatives believe in a nationalist point of view. That simply means "love of country". Reagan coined the phrase "American Exceptialism". The left uses race as a control mechanism. They use it against non whites as a way to shame them into being subservient to their ideology. That is why the left uses terms like"Uncle Tom", "Sellout" etc. The left uses race against whites who don't subscribe to their ideology by labeling them "racists", "bigots" etc. Darryl is a man liberals loath. He is a man who isn't guided by race but by his beliefs and conventions. To say that liberals for the most part aren't big fans of this country isn't exactly breaking any new ground. It does serve to reinforce why they attack non whites as traitors for embracing this country. I think I'm on to something.



In the eyes of white and black liberals, a person like Darryl would easily be labeled an "Uncle Tom", because he doesn't think along the lines of race. Liberals don't live up to their own hype when it comes to wanting a color blind society. I wish I could have asked Kelly in response to her question, how many "African Americans" work in the news department at NBC News and MSNBC. That question would have had the blood draining from her face.

When liberal women make money, you never hear other liberals attack them for doing so. Oprah Winfrey is the richest woman on the planet, and liberals don't begrudge her for her success. Many liberal women have made millions in Hollywood starring on television or in movies. I don't have a problem with women making money, but it appears that some liberals have a problem with conservative women making money. It's time for another appearance of the liberal hypocrisy monster. Sarah Palin was the only person on the national ticket in 2008 who wasn't a millionaire. Because liberals knew that fact, they filed 19 frivolous ethic violations complaints against her when she returned to Alaska in a vicious attempt to bankrupt Sarah Palin under the weight of accumulating legal fees totalling over $600,000. At the time, Palin only made $150,000 a year as the Governor of Alaska. The left labeled Sarah as a "quiter" for not staying on as Governor and going bankrupt in office. Once again, liberal logic never makes sense. Anyways, Sarah Palin has defied the left at every turn. Not only was she able to pay off her crushing legal debt, but she has reportedly made over twelve million dollars since resigning. In true to form fashion, the left is now harping on the success of Sarah Palin in her post governor era since they never got the opportunity to harp on a bankrupt governor Sarah Palin like they wanted too. NBC's Andrea Mitchell on Thursday's Today show, attacked Sarah Palin for "making millions on her book" and "getting paid for her speeches". So I guess it is ok for liberal women to fly in leer jets but not conservative women? Here's the biggest outrage by Andrea. Sarah wants "bendable straws" for her water bottles. You all heard right. How dare Sarah Palin ask for 2 cent bendable straws for her water bottle. This is actually outragous to Andrea for some reason. Andrea actually believes that everyday Americans could care less about Sarah Palin enjoying the fruits of her success as being a bad thing. I'm sure the kooks over at the Daily Kos and the Huffington Post took interest in Andrea's story, but most of if not all of "normal" America could frankly could care less. Of course in the name of the liberal hypocrisy monster, Andrea would never disclose to her limited viewers how much her contract with NBC is worth. I'm sure that Andrea won't be doing any hit pieces on the millions that liberal women like Katie Couric, Barbra Walters, Oprah Winfrey and many many others make. Oh no, let's just focus on the outrage that a conservative woman dares to make money and enjoy it. This is what Andrea had to say about Bill Clinton back on August 7, 2001 on the NBC Nightly News

Andrea Mitchell ""The self-declared 'Comeback Kid,' a hero to his new office neighbors in Harlem, now breaking a world record, signing the biggest non-fiction book deal in history, bigger than the Pope's. Bigger than Hillary Clinton's. Sources say as much as $12 million."

This is what Andrea had to say about Sarah Palin and her book deal

ANDREA MITCHELL: And since the campaign, she has made some changes herself. Remember this?

SARAH PALIN: We got rid of a few things in the governor's office that I just didn't think our citizens should be paying for. Like that luxury jet. It was a little bit over the top.

MITCHELL: A year-and-a-half later, the hockey mom from Wasilla is Palin Inc. making millions on books, a new TV series for Discovery - "Sarah Palin's Alaska." A lucrative contract with Fox News and highly paid speeches. But a speech she's been hired to give at Cal State - Stanislaus, one of 23 California campuses drowning in red ink, is causing a furor. That's because students found a copy of Palin's contract for the black tie event in a trash bin.

Andrea was so desperate to attack Palin, she left out some very key details as usual. Sarah Palin got rid of the state's luxury jet as the "governor", because she felt the state didn't need it. It wasn't her private jet. For her to bring up a decision Palin made as governor and then try to link it somehow to Palin flying on luxury jets herself is beyond desperate on Andrea's part. I guess in Andrea' perfect world, hockey moms are suppose to stay broke or not have access to the same amenities that Andrea herself and other successful liberal women can afford. Also, Andrea pointed out that Cal State- Stanislaus like other schools are fiscally in the red but she waited to nearly the end of her hit piece to point out that private donations are paying for Palin's speech not the school. I'm more then sure if Hillary Clinton was scheduled to speak at Cal State-Stanislaus, Andrea wouldn't' have said two words about it. The hypocrisy monster is full for now, thanks Andrea.

Who knew that Hillary Clinton could be such a lush. For those of you who ever wondered what it takes to actually loosen up Hillary Clinton, the answer is a few glasses of Jack Daniels. It must be nice to be able to get wasted on the tax payer's dime and not have to worry about being fired for it, thus the life of a liberal elitist. Did you all know that the State Department spent $300,000 dollars last year on alcohol purchases? I wish I could give a rational explanation on why the State Department needs to spend tax dollars on alcohol, but I can't think of one I'm sober. This type of waste is why the Tea Party exists and are ticked off. How many books and computers can $300,000 buy for inner city schools and recreation centers? Forgot about the citizens money going up in smoke. It's more like it's going "down the hatch" cheers.

Since liberals want to brand, tar and feather patriotic Americans within the Tea Party movement as being nothing more then a bunch of redneck, racist hate mongers, I believe that turnabout is fair play in this case. The Southern Republican Leadership Conference was held in New Orleans last week. The conference was carried on C-PAN. The speakers were great, their straw poll was a joke however. Anyways during the conference, a group of protesters were outside bashing Bobby Jindal for no apparent reason. No these weren't the Tea Party activist folk. The folks that were vocally attacking Bobby Jindal and Republicans were liberal Democrats. Now since Governor Jindal is an American of Indian descent, could it be said that the crowd attacked Bobby because of his race which would make the liberal protesters a bunch of liberal racists? I can imagine the heads of liberals exploding while reading this. Put this on a two tier scale and weigh it out. Both Bobby Jindal and Barack Obama are non white political figures. So why would it be acceptable to label the Tea Party folks a bunch of racist and not label the protesters that were at the Southern Republican Leadership Conference as a bunch of racists too? The protesters in New Orleans were mostly "white" by the way. Isn't that the "taboo race" in which to be a Tea Party activist according to liberal media pundits? Since Bobby is the Governor of the state of Louisiana, what did these white liberals mean when they chanted "Bobby Jindal go home"? The last time I checked, New Orleans is in Louisiana.

Here is something that separates the Tea Party activists from the liberal group that protested against Bobby Jindal and the attendees at the SRLC. The Tea Party folks can give verbatim the policies for which they have a strong disagreement with Obama and congress. The group that protested against Bobby didn't give or display any policy reasons for which they slammed Jindal's name. It looks like the protesters that were in New Orleans were out to just show hatred rather then trying to communicate a message of constructive criticism. This is the face of "the real mob" the media won't show, because it isn't aimed at a person of an ethnic group that is liberal. It cracks me up every time a liberal tells me that they can't be racist.

What is up with this empty suit known as Barack Obama? The media does everything in it's power to hide the flaws of Obama at every turn,but they can't hide all of them. It usually cracks me up when the Obama cultists try to trash the intelligence of Sarah Palin, yet ignore the obviously true life flaws of their beloved hero. FYI, Sarah Palin has yet been photographed bowing uncontrollably to world leaders unlike Barack Obama. One of Mr. Obama's notorious flaws is his uncontrollable bowing to people. I know that Obama is subservient to the will of the world, but his constant bowing takes it to a whole new level. I thought I've seen everything a few months ago, when Obama bowed to the mayor of Tampa Florida.




Still waiting for his loyalist to explain that. I'm not an expert on Asian culture, but I'm pretty sure that the Chinese don't bow to each other. I know the Japanese do. Here a picture of our idiotic president once again making a fool out of himself yesterday by bowing to Chinese President Hu Jintao. It's bad enough that our country is beholden to the Chi-coms, because they hold a good chunk of nation's debt. Obama's subservient bow to Mr. Jintao presented the picture that the Chinese do indeed own our country. They say that a picture is worth a thousand words.

Newt Gingrich made a good point today while appearing on the Today Show. Newt factually stated what Republicans should be focusing on right now. Newt said

"I think what we ought to do is focus on Democrats. We have a real chance to elect [House Minority Leader] John Boehner as speaker and to elect [Senate Minority Leader] Mitch McConnell as majority leader."

Though I am annoyed to a certain extent with Michael as is with many conservatives and Republican insiders, we all share a common goal that we can't stray away from. In less then six months Republicans have a chance to politically cripple Barack Obama and limit any further damage he can cause going forward in the 2012 election. The media and liberals would love for the Republican Party to start openly putting Republican vs Republican in regards to Michael Steele pro or con. I'm not saying that Republicans need to not question Steele's motives and actions. I am saying that Republicans need to not air their distrust or disdain for Steele out in the open like Steele did himself on Good Morning America. The left is trying desperately to tar and feather the Tea Party movement in an attempt to shield Democrats from the backlash that is brewing over Obamacare. The left will take any unknowing help it can get in creating the template of a "GOP Meltdown". As I stated before, now is not the time to deal with Steele. Republicans need to keep their eyes on the prize and not be duped into Republican infighting. I agree also with Gingrich when he said "Steele should remain in his post heading into the crucial round of elections this November". The November election is bigger then Steele, it's about the fate of our country. We can't lose focus of that.

As a black man who is a conservative, I stand up for my principals in what I believe is right. I don't compromise my integrity in order to be "liked" by people who don't share my ideology. I've been called every racially charged word in the book by liberals, you know the people who claim to embrace "diversity". Michael wants to be liked by his enemies, yet I on the other hand can care less about my enemies liking me. Actually the more I annoy liberals the happier I become for some reason. Recently, Michael has been gingerly using the race card as a defense mechanism in order to take attention away from his gaffs and screw ups lately. That is something I know a person like Ken Blackwell would have never done as the RNC Chairman. Sometimes I wonder is Michael trying to prove to black Democrats that he is "still black" or is he trying to convince himself? I find myself actually starting to question Michael's mental state. I raised an eyebrow a few years ago when Steele claimed that George Bush was his "homeboy". I don't know many middle aged, college educated, black men who call the president their "homeboy", but I digress. When I was watching Michael Steele on Good Morning America the other day, I swore for a moment I was watching a black liberal suffering from a case of "SIRVS". That's short for Self Inflicted Racial Victimization Syndrome. Maybe Michael was lent some literature by the race hustling poverty pimps Al and Jesse on "why you are victim and how you can work it to your advantage". Michael claimed to George Stephanopoulos that "being black gives him “slimmer margin for error".



I believe without a shadow of a doubt that had to have been one of the dumbest comments to ever roll off the tongue of Michael Steele to date. When Republicans lost control of congress and most of the governorships in 2006, that was an humiliating defeat for the party. When they lost the White House and even more congressional seats in 2008, that was when the Republican Party was at it's absolute low. In order for the Republican National Committee to start to regain trust among the voters, they couldn't afford anymore controversies or unprincipled candidates running within the ranks. So if the margin of error for a black man is so slim according to Steele, why did the RNC select him them knowing that the party couldn't afford any errors going forward? I'm using Michael Steele logic just to let everybody know. As you all can see, it really doesn't add up to much. Every political party is out to win elections, and they tend to put what they see as their best and brightest people in the positions to get the job done. Michael doesn't understand that he was selected due to his experience working within the RNC. For him to play the race card on Good Morning America not only betrays the trust given to him by the Republican National Committee, he's also using an external factor as a reason for the internal problems he is having. I can't believe I have to agree with Robert Gibbs on something. Robert Gibbs commented on Michael the other day about him using the race card. Robert said "Steele's Problem Isn't The Race Card, It's The Credit Card". It just goes to show that even a waste of space such as Robert Gibbs can even grasp common sense once in awhile. Michael's actions is what has landed him in hot water with the Republican donors. It is his actions that have cause many to question his judgement and leadership with in the Republican Party. Race has absolutely nothing to do with this. I'm not sure that with everything that is going on with Steele it is the right time for him to step down as RNC Chairman. The last thing the party needs is for the liberal activists posing as journalist to create a shallow drum beat controversy up until election day. The media is licking their chops for another "culture of corruption" scandal by the GOP in order to take the attention away from the heavy projected Democrat loses. Should Michael step down? If he can't get his personal act together, then yes he should. The best advice I can give Michael is for him not to speak when he feels the urge to say something. Here's Ken Blackwell on Mr. Tingle's show discussing Michael Steele.

As many of you might have noticed lately, the Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele has been in the news lately for all the wrong reasons. A RNC staffer was inappropriately using party donations at an adult themed night club. That incident wasn't Michael's fault, but that incident did bring to light the spending habits of Michael when it comes to living high on the hog on the donations of Republican donors. Michael is from my state of Maryland, and I voted for Michael when he ran for the U.S Senate against Ben Cardin. I voted for him mainly, because I was voting against his opponent Ben Cardin. Another reason I supported Michael was because of how black and white liberals treated him when he was the Lieutenant Governor and also during his run for the U.S Senate. I can't say that I ever supported Michael based on conservative principals, because he isn't a solid conservative. This is the problem I see with Michael Steele as a person. Michael seems to be suffering from a "racial identity crisis". On one hand, he claims that he supports the platform of the Republian Party and is a conservative, yet he plays the racial victim game and wants to be accepted by black liberals as being "authentic". The reality that Michael doesn't want to accept is that he can't have his cake and eat it too. When Michael was a guest last year on the now cancelled D.L Hughley show on CNN, Steele was so desperate to prove to D.L that he was his own man, he got played like a useful idiot by D.L into attacking Rush Limbaugh. When I saw the interview, I knew my gutt instincts were right and that the Republican National Committee made a mistake in selecting Michael to be the Chairman. That interview came just two days after Limbaugh's speech at CPAC, and it didn't take a rocket scientist to understand that the only reason Michael was invited on Hughley's show was for him to be played like a fool into attacking Rush.



Anybody who follows politics knows that the only time a person can be the leader of his or her political party is when he or she is elected President of The United States. I guess Steele and Hughley didn't realize that fact or maybe Steele didn't. This misfire by Steele was only the first of many more to come. I openly backed Ken Blackwell for Republican National Committee Chairman as did the vast majority of conservatives. Most of the conservative think tank organizations, foundations, and bloggers knew that Ken was a much better fit for that position then Michael was. I believe the reason Michael was ultimately chosen to be the RNC Chairman was for two reasons. The first reason is that Michael has the experience of being a Chairman within the Republican Party. He was the Chairman of the Prince George's County Republican Party, the Chairman of the Maryland Republican Party and also the Chairman of GOPAC. The second reason is due to him not being a solid conservative but more so a partisan insider who wouldn't do anything to disrupt the moderate influences within the party.

Ever heard the expression "going down swinging"? That describes the left at this point. They've committed political suicide by bum rushing one of the most unpopular pieces of legislation in our country's history down our throats. So what is the strategy of the Democrat's allies in the media to negate the damage? The strategy is to go into overdrive calling anyone who opposes Obamacare as a "racist" or has a "racist motive". I've gotten to the point where I don't comment on MSNBC or CNN, because I actually care about their in your face activist journalism. At this point, it really doesn't even matter. They as with the rest of the media have become irrelevant, obsolete and exposed for who they really are. I bring up the antics of people like Chris Matthews, Keith Olberman and others in the Baghdad Bob media to constantly prove a point. The point is that most Americans have tunned these clowns out a long time ago for a reason. We all know that the left uses race when it comes to politics like a pimp uses prostitutes to make money. Chris had on his show yesterday the Attorney General of Georgia Thurbert Baker who is a black Democrat. He has refused to follow the order of the Governor of Georgia Sonny Perdue who is a Republican and is white to file a lawsuit against the federal government in trying to stop Obamacare. Well leave it to good ol Chris to bring the taped together and extremely worn out race card from the bottom of the deck yet again in a pathetic and far reaching attempt to try and label Sonny Perdue as a racist.



I have no idea what the Civil Rights Bill of 1964 has to do with Obamacare of 2010. Maybe if I applied the two while playing the Kevin Bacon game, I might come up with something of a connection. I'm going to go out on a limb with this one. I have a hunch that if Sonny Predue wasn't a "white Republican", Chris would have never brought up the 1964 Civil Rights bill.

Chris Matthews "would he have been doing the same thing back then if he were governor: calling it unconstitutional to demand that stores are open to everybody? I'm asking a tough question: is he playing the same game those people played back then"

That is a great question that is in sore need of an answer. When Democrats were surrounding Obama as he signed into law one of the most destructive bills ever conceived in congress a week ago, one would think that Democrats couldn't wait to go back to their districts and states for Easter recess so they could bask in the appreciation of their ever so grateful constituents. Welcome to reality, that isn't happening for them. Not only aren't Democrats getting any love from the voters they flipped off by voting for Obamacare, they are actually hiding out from them. Here's a thought. If Democrats would have done the will of the people instead of going against them, maybe just maybe they wouldn't have to be hiding out from them now until the Easter recess is over. Isn't that a crazy thought? If Obamacare is so great as Obama and the Democrats promoted it before it was shoved down our throats, why aren't they out communicating to voters how great it's going to be? They have the perfect opportunity now to "dispel the lies" that they claimed conservatives made up about the Obamacre. All I can say is that they can hide now from the voters, but that won't work come November. It's been over a week, and Obama is still trying to con the American people into embracing this. It's amazing how this guy thinks so little of the intelligence of the American people. Since Democrats want to hide out, can we just stop calling them congressmen? How about we just call them cowards or rats instead. Well they've been rats and cowards anyways, but lets just make it official. Cowards run from a confrontation, and rats run from the light.