Y'all Gotta Excuse Old Jimmy - His Mouth Has Survived The Death of His BRAIN!

Former President James Earl "Jimmy" Carter, Jr. allowed his hummingbird brain to gain control of his hippopotamus mouth, and suddenly blurted out, "I think an overwhelming portion of the intensely demonstrated animosity toward President Barack Obama is based on the fact that he is a black man, that he's African American." Let's dissect that sentence, shall we?

First of all "I think" is an overstatement. Jimmy rarely thought when he was occupying the White House, and now that he's 85 years old he probably he likes to think he's thinking. As for his statement that there is "intensely demonstrated animosity toward Barack Obama"... the old man has apparently forgotten what the word "intensely" means. Jimmy needs to look back at the Democrats constant attacks on President George W. Bush during Gee Dubbya's last term to get the true meaning of "intensely demonstrated animosity". The only part Carter got right was that Barack Obama is President (Rosalynn Carter probably had to remind him of that). Obama is not "a black man", he is a gray man. Obama is an equal mix of the black and white races - who has elected to identify with - and emphasize - only with that portion of his genetic makeup which is black. (Being black, combined with his ability to say nothing meaningful better than most people, is, after all, the thing which got him elected. It was his "hook", his gimmick, which he played very well against the guilt many white people have been carrying around for decades. His campaign was essentially saying to the country, "Prove to the world that you aren't racists - elect Barack Hussein Obama - a totally unqualified black man - as the next President of the United States of America!") And, finally, there's the "African American" claim. His father was an African national, and his mother was an American national. I will concede the "African" part, but it takes more than simply being born in the USA to be an American. Part of being an American is having pride in America, its history, its culture, its constitution, and its singularly unique accomplishment of having gone - in a scant 200 years - from l'enfant terrible (a rebellious infant) to world leadership. This is an achievement that heretofore had taken other nations a thousand years - or more - to accomplish... an achievement that most nations failed to accomplish even with a thousand year head start. One does not show pride in their country by traveling the globe apologizing for that country. One does not demonstrate pride in their country by rejecting its culture. And, one does not show pride in one's country by diverting it from the path of success, or by belittling, ignoring, or attempting to change it's Constitution! There are not enough voters of color in the USA to have elected Barack Obama as president if every one of them voted several times. It was those "racist" white Americans who carried Obama into the White House.

Can we not dislike Obama simply because his only qualification for office of President is that he carried the majority of the popular vote (many of whom are now regretting that decision)? Obama is a professional politician with less than 180 days in the U.S. Senate, who voted "present" over 90 percent of the time (thereby avoiding any real commitment to anything), and spent twice as many taxpayer paid days campaigning for president as he did fulfilling his duties in the Senate! Can we not demonstrate animosity toward any man (or any Congress) whose policies would destroy our financial system? Is it wrong that we feel uncomfortable with a President who has a documented history of association with terrorists, and intentionally surrounds himself with tax cheats, avowed Communists, Marxists, Maoists and other assorted socialists and revolutionaries in an effort to change our system of governance from a Democratic Republic to a dictatorship? Is it wrong that patriotic Americans are both embarrassed and angered by a President who displays a general disdain for the people and the nation over which he presides? If the best plan he can come up with is, "We will spend our way out of bankruptcy!", do we not have the right to voice our displeasure at such arrogant ignorance? America may need a few little "tweaks" to correct some minor flaws... but it does not need to be re-engineered from the ground up!

If you think there's any chance I could be wrong about this... think again! Your brain is probably as atrophied as Jimmy Carters...

Blacks, whites show prejudices along racial divide - - and this is news because?

I was just reading an Associated Press article on the Internet, bearing the above amazingly un-insightful headline. And, the story beneath the headline was equally un-insightful. But, it was the use of a statistic that caught my eye -

"Four of every 10 white Americans hold at least a partly negative view toward blacks, calling them "lazy," or "violent" or blaming them for the ills of black America, according to the AP-Yahoo poll."

Exactly where is the surprise in that? Chances are that four of every ten Americans hold a least a partly negative view toward their neighbors, regardless of their race. Here's the deal ...

• There is no genetic, inborn dislike of the unlike. Racism, on all sides, is taught by those considered to be authority figures within the family, neighborhood and community. This indoctrination generally begins informally, at an age pre-dating that of understanding, through casual conversations among adults overheard by small children. Wishing to please the adults, the children memorize and practice the litany of hatred which they have heard, hoping for positive recognition.
• It seems to be a part of human nature, at least in many people, to want to look down the social ladder and see somebody beneath them. If there's nobody there, they will - in their own mind - place somebody there. Nobody wants to be on the bottom rung.
• There is resentment for some historical events within all ethnic and racial groups. Some of these events are well-known outside the group primarily affected by it, others are relatively obscure and well-hidden from 'outsiders '. The holocaust, and enslavement of black Africans in post-colonial America, are probably the two best-known. The Turkish war of genocide against the Armenians in 1915-1916, at the cost of 1.5 million Armenian lives, is probably one of the least remembered. The Irish and Italians weren't exactly received with open arms when they immigrated to the USA. But, we tend to forget about those things which happened before most of us were born ... if we ever learned about them in the first place. The whiners get the attention.
• Revisionist history has become a fun subject for our liberal left educational/indoctrination centers to foist upon the innocent young. The basic philosophy there is one of - if you don't like the way things happened in the past, rewrite history the way you would have liked it to have been! The hope there is probably that 'if a thing is ignored long enough, perhaps it will become less noticeable in the future.' If you ignore a scab it will heal more quickly ... but if you ignore a cancer, it may just kill you!
• Most people have had at least one negative social interaction with someone of a different race or ethnicity ... and probably 20 times that many with people of their own race/similar ethnicity, but which do they remember? (That was, of course, a hypothetical question which I shall now answer ...) They remember the one with the member of a different race, because there is something about them that makes it more memorable. It may be the color of their skin ... or the way they talk ... or their manner of dress. Regardless of what it may be, there is something about them that causes us to make a mental generalization about all the others who may resemble that person. That's just another negative aspect of human nature. Here's a surprise for some of you readers -human beings are not perfect, and the vast majority don't even strive for - or desire - perfection. It's easier to go with the flow of one's peers. 'Going with the flow' requires less objective thought, provides less emotional turmoil and less social conflict than taking an oppositional stand. On a slightly more positive note, you remain on good social terms with your peers and reap the rewards of being accepted as one of the like-minded masses.

Almost every race and ethnic group has been on the receiving end of prejudice somewhere and at some point in time. And many - besides people of African descent - have ancestors who were slaves. What would be newsworthy, would be if the media stopped fanning the flames of racial discord with insipid,sophomoric articles such as this one!

There must be some point in time at which we are all ready to put the injustices of the past to rest. Resentment of things that happened to ancestors 150 to 2,500 years ago is ridiculous! Yes, it was a bad deal. But, as the Irish and Italians have done, get on with your life - the one YOU have in the here and now. Living in the past is counterproductive, in that it will not resurrect your ancestors ... it will just keep feeding resentment. And that resentment seems to cross-feed to those you resent - who go merrily about resenting the resenters for their resentment, which only feeds that resentment, etc., etc., ad nauseam.

But, this is just the way I see things. I may be as socially myopic as most people seems to be. I'm not certain that I'm finished with this subject yet, but I'm going to post it anyway. I can always come back and continue it at a later time in a separate post.