politicalpartypoop.com

In case you did not catch O’Reilly last night (Monday 3/31) he had a discussion with Marc Lamont Hill. Mr. Hill is an Afro studies dude teaching at Temple.

HERE IS THE VIDEO FIRST…

Just an FYI, below is a portion of an article written by Mr. Hill and it shows just how liberal he is, even accusing Obama of being a centrist. He really means he is too closely aligned with whitey!

First let me say, I don’t agree with a lot of what dude says but I think dude is one of the best black guests on talking head TV in explaining his side of a given argument. He speaks fast, but dude is clear and concise and brings an intellectual analysis to any discussion. There are a lot of other liberal Negros on the tube but I rarely listen to them. Most are embarrassingly inarticulate and almost all end up resorting to the typical Negrodom talking points. Mr. Hill does that too, but he hides it well in his explanations and analysis.

Anywho, during this discussion Mr. Hill is explaining to O’Reilly why Nigga Wright received such a warm reception at this Catholic Church on Sunday. Dude has explained this to O’Reilly on numerous occasions and either O’Reilly is a complete dolt or is willfully ignorant.

Folks this is not complicated. Think back to the O.J. verdict. I still remember the day. I was in my office with a co-worker and at the exact moment when that bailiff chick (who butchered OJ’s name) said “not-guilty” I felt slightly sick. I became even more ill as I watched a room full of Negro students break out in raucous applause - as if they had won the lottery or gotten their
reparations check. This is no lie, for the first time in my life I was actually embarrassed to be a black individual. I was ashamed and appalled that Negros were celebrating the acquittal of that murderous bastard.

Now after that initial emotion, I really began to think about it. In time, I realized that black people were not cheering for O.J.’s acquittal. Rather, it was a symbolic victory for all of black America. His innocence or guilt was totally irrelevant. A black man was able to “beat the white man at their own game.”

Now I know some of you folks have heard this already, but white people today still can’t figure out why black folks react the way they do towards people like Jeremiah Wright or some other guilty or ignorant ass Negro fuck. The people in the O’Reilly/Hill discussion video of Wright were not applauding for Wright. They were applauding the fact that he got hit by white America’s best shot and he still survived.

High profile Negro politicians/criminals do crazy shit all the time and get busted for being the corrupt fucks they were born to be. But surviving the “wrath of whitey” is a very important symbolic accomplishment to the average Negro on the streets. A Negro individual’s misdeeds, corruption, guilt and being able to AGAIN “survive the wrath
of whitey.” That kind of thing s a badge of honor in the black community, particularly amongst the intellectually clueless and retarded Negros.

You see it tis a bit different now since we have You Tube and camera cell phones. Black folks use to be able to rally around each other IN PRIVATE without the prying eyes of whitey scrutinizing every thing that was said from the pulpit.

So now whitey television news executive is able to watch a You Tube clip of someone like that hopelessly retarded Pastor Manning. And the white man says “oh shit we have got to get that guy on TV to show white America just how ignorant some of these Negros are!”

You can’t analyze the typical Negro reaction to that situation in a logical manner. Why not? Because more then just the facts are at play. You also have decades, if not centuries, of being told (or knowing) that a lot of white people are “out to get us.” So any victory over white rule, no matter how small or retarded, is going to get celebrated by a lot of the “downtrodden.” So remember - there are a good number of black folks who are equally as appalled by J Wright’s crap but can’t say shit unless they want to be seen as with whitey instead of with their own people.

My point is Negros who are allowed by whitey to appear on these shows must abide by liberal Negro rule of discussion. Remember now, Mr. Hill. He is an Afro studies dude. If he were to speak candidly and truthfully about how
retarded J. Wright’s comments were he would lose his job and he damm sure would not be the chosen token Negro guest on TV. So what do you think he’s going to say? He’ll say what whitey expects an apologist to say.

Mr. Hill and all Negro talking heads play by the same rules. Say what is expected. Or be quiet. Even conservative leaning Negros who are given camera time, like Larry Elder, must be very careful about what is said – in order to be acceptable on white network television.

This is why blogging is so refreshing. I will never be invited to speak on TV or radio - although I did call into a local radio show a few days ago. I was immediately cut off when I said that “white people who plan to vote for Obama based on some sort of white guilt are being silly and intellectually dishonest and if they think that by voting for Obama will turn around race relations in the nation they are retards…………” CLICK!

The truth is a bitch. People say they want to hear the truth, but they don’t. Not really. They want to hear what they expect to hear – people agreeing with them or fitting into pre-conceived stereo-types.

But anyone who wants to hear a Black conservative’s real thoughts is hereby invited to pay me to appear on camera. I’m not shy. I can’t talk as fast as Mr. Hill. But I bet I could hold my own with him!
**********

Here is a portion of one of his articles: Not My Brand of Hope

Link to his blog

For whites, an Obama victory would serve as the final piece of evidence that America has reached full racial equality. Such a belief allows them to sidestep mounds of evidence that shows that, despite Obama’s claims that “we are 90 percent of the way to equality,” black people remain consistently assaulted by the forces by white supremacy. For many black people, Obama’s success would provide symbolic value by showing that the black man (not woman!) can make it to the top. Although black faces in high places may provide psychological comfort, they are often incorporated into a Cosbyesque gospel of personal responsibility (”Obama did it, so can you!”) that allows dangerous public policies to go unchallenged.

Despite its convoluted racial logic, the election of Obama would still be acceptable if his policies were properly aligned with a leftist agenda. Unfortunately, Obama has clung to a rigid centrism that is incompatible with full-scale social change. Despite his claims of being a peace candidate, Obama has repeatedly expressed a commitment to ramping up military and continuing the presidential legacy of using war as an instrument of foreign policy. Although he opposes the war in Iraq, Obama refuses to vote against its funding.

While Obama supports health care for all Americans, he does not embrace a universal single-payer system that would effectively undermine private corporate interests. At the same time that he bemoans the loss of jobs and expansion of global poverty, Obama fails to denounce free trade agreements and extols the virtues economic globalization. In addition, Obama has been conspicuously silent on topics such as the prison industrial complex, the Zionist occupation of Palestine, and the economic underdevelopment of Africa.

In the face of a black electorate that still craves messianic leadership, Obama has skillfully positioned himself as the Martin Luther King of his generation. Unlike King, however, Obama does not aim to disrupt the fundamental structure of society. Rather than dismantling the triple threat of global racism, poverty, and militarism that King warned against, Obama has promoted a doctrine of compromise that is self-serving rather than strategic, milquetoast rather than pragmatic.