Why did people automatically assume the McDonald's beating was "racially motivated"?

You've all probably have seen the video about the "supposed" young white girl who was beaten up by two black females here in Baltimore last Monday. Thanks to Matt Drudge, the Live Leak video went viral. When people watched the video, people immediately assumed that the two black girls beat up the white girl Chrissy Polis, because Polis is white. People have been asking me to comment on this, since it happened in my area. I held off commenting on the story for one reason. There was information coming out locally that the national press at the time wasn't reporting. The beating of Chrissy Polis was brutal and completely uncalled for, but it wasn't an assault based on Polis's race. Just like Matt Drudge, many bloggers and commentators jumped the gun Friday in making a story based solely on the video. This is what really happened.



Sometimes it actually pays to wait to get all the facts.

Liberals racially attack black guy at a Portland Tax Day Tea Party.

Liberals do not embrace diversity unless the people of diversity support them. These people are such frauds. I can't believe they continue to spew on as if they are truly the champions of racial harmony. For them to single out a black guy for the sole purpose of racially attacking him speaks volumes about their low tolerance of opposing views from people of different races. I provided commentary in the video. Funny how the left tries to brand the Tea Party has the racist element, yet the racism that is on the display didn't come from the Tea Party. It came from them!

This is a few reasons why liberals hate James O'Keefe.

James O'Keefe has balls. He's driven by his passion to expose progressives for the frauds and dangerous vermin that they are. I wish more conservatives could be like him. The left hates him, and that is why he is an icon in my book. Keep up the great work Keefe!!

Looks like somebody else believes Obama is nothing more then a "Magic Negro".

No, I'm not talking about the Paul Shanklin Parody that he created for Rush Limbaugh. I'm talking about where the title "Obama the Magic Negro" originated from back in 2007 with the Los Angeles Times Editor David Ehrenstein. Obama's race and legitimacy as a person of color has been made an issue over and over by the people who claim to support him the most. When Harry Reid said back in 2008 that Obama is a "light skinned black guy who doesn't have a negro dialect unless he wants to have one ", Obama's supporters worked overtime to try and downplay Reid's comments.



Reid's remarks did give validation to Ehrenstein's title "Obama the Magic Negro", little did they realize. When Obama decided to launch his war against Libya via Nato a few weeks ago, I didn't expect any black supporters of Obama to criticize his decision. To most of them, wars are only bad if the president who initiates them has a "R" by his name. I was shocked to hear the New Black Panther Leader Malik Zulu Shabazz verbally attacking Obama calling him basically the tool who works of the "white man".



Let this serve as a lesson to those who are silly enough to believe that some how racism is exclusively a "white" thing. I find myself in a small way defending Obama in this. It was Obama's Attorney General Eric Holder who in essence protected the two New Black Panthers members by not pressing federal voter intimidation charges against them for their actions at a Philadelphia voting prescient on election day.



If it weren't for Obama and Holder, the New Black Panthers could have found themselves facing long jail time and huge fines that I doubt they would have had the financial resources to ever pay. The smart thing for Shabazz to have done was for him to say thank you to Obama and Holder instead of what he said about him. I guess the old saying is true that "no good deed goes unpunished". Even though I disagree with a large percentage of what Malik Shabazz said and how he said it, a nugget of truth can be found in his words. It's no secret that Barack Obama's puppet master is George Sorros. The investment bankers on Wall Street like Goldman Sachs have a string connected to Obama as well as General Electric, BP, the private and public sector union bosses etc. Shabazz is so full of hate, he's too blinded to understand the big picture. Did he really think Obama was going to work for the "black man", when the $500 million dollars Obama raised for his campaign didn't come from them? If any black person though for a minute that Obama was going to have a separate agenda that was going to personally benefit blacks in America, I have a quit claim deed to the Brooklyn Bridge I am willing to sell for five hundred dollars, any takers? Because Obama is by far more popular in the black community then the New Black Panthers are, Malik Shabazz may have turned his group into an outcast organization even among the most die hard militant black racist activists, oh well.

Do you remember when Barry laughed at the words "Drill Baby Drill"?

It's amazing how quickly Barry changed his mind once his puppet master stuck his hand up Obama's you know what. Now he supports drilling for oil and spending tax payer money to extract it. He just doesn't support doing it in his own country. I put this video together with me in it, so you all can see just how much of a fraud this person truly is. Many people have told me that George Sorros is pulling the strings of Obama. I'm beginning to believe they might be right after all.

Is the media trying to pick Donald Trump to be their anti Palin and Mc Cain candidate for 2012?

I've been around the block a few times in my life, so it's hard to pull the wool over my eyes. I know how the media operates. I know they are mostly liberals to their core with a few microscopic exceptions. Back in 2008, I watched back in early 2008 as the media started writing positive story after positive story about John McCain as a Presidential candidate during the Republican primaries. McCain has never been a conservative. If anything, he has always been the liberal's best friend in congress. He was the one who always shanked his party in the back in order to always try and get along with Democrats across the aisle. The New York Times even endorsed McCain in the Republican primaries. The reason why the media backed McCain in the Republican Primaries wasn't because, they wanted McCain to become president. They did so for the expressed purpose of helping to pick a Republican candidate they knew would demoralize the conservative base thus making it that much easier for the Democratic candidate to win in the General Election. I said last year to wait and see what Republican prospect candidate the media would again start to write positive stories on. It looks like the media has found it's "stooge" I meant candidate. Mr. Trump, please step forward. A year ago, Donald Trump wasn't even on the long list of potential candidates for 2012, now his name is all anyone hears. The positive press on Trump has been almost on the same level as with Obama . The NBC News, Wall Street Journal Poll "which is a joke" claims that Trump is now in second place among likely Republican voters just behind Romney. So I guess we are to believe that Trump has support among Tea Party activists and conservative Republican voters? Oh really, I talk to many Tea Party folks, and Trump's name isn't the one that rolls of their tongues. I hear the names of Palin, Gingrich and Bauchman but not Trump. So I'm very skeptical of this poll and polls that echos the same thing. I have a good memory. I can bring up facts about an issue, when most people have long forgotten about it. I remember the media claiming that Sarah Palin's presidential chances would be greatly diminished, because she did her reality television show "Sarah Palin's Alaska". Now isn't "The Donald" known for starring in his own reality show that has been on the air for over six seasons known as The Apprentice?


Donald Trump is ten times the celebrity figure Palin could ever be, but there isn't any stories out there claiming that Trump's television celebrity status would be a problem for him. I know what's really at play with the media's sudden love affair with Trump. The media is trying to pick their "anti Palin" candidate. Trump isn't the only one they are filtering with. I've also noticed the press claiming that Michelle Bachmann is somehow the "real Sarah Palin". Before Bachman entertained the thought of running for president, the media branned her as a far right wing nut, but now she is seen as "more presidential" then Palin? As anyone can clearly see, Trump & Bachmann are being used as pawns in an attempt to try and overshadow and kill a potential run by Sarah Palin. Sad to say it, but some on the conservative side will buy into the media's plan. Don't misunderstand me, I like both Trump and Bachman, but I'm no fool either. As of right now, nobody has officially announced their candidacy for the Republican nomination. So any polls right now are purely speculative. Just keep reading their so called polls and reading the media's stories on Bachmann and Trump. If they keep bringing up Sarah Palin's name in their stories, you'll know I'm right. Oh yeah, I forgot to mention this. Trump also was a fan of Nancy Pelosi becoming Speaker of the House back in 2006. He wanted her to do well and said "she was the best". Know who the media is pushing.

Something is missing from Barack Obama's 2012 Campaign Launch video that is kind of important.

One of my favorite television commercials during the 80's is the "Where's the beef" commercial for Wendys.



This commercial showed that looks can be deceiving and that bigger isn't always better. This applies perfectly with Barack Obama's 2012 Campaign Launch Video entitled "It Begin's with us".



So "Where's the Beef" in this video? The video is all about Obama and the 2008 election season, but it didn't mention anything about Obama's accomplishments in his first term to justify him being re elected. It's nothing more then a professionally produced fluff piece. With so many problems impacting our country right now, how exactly does the title "It Begin's with us" fit into all of this? It's the same style open ended, empty platitude, bumper sticker slogans of "Yes We Cam" & "Hope & Change". I have no doubt that tens of millions of clueless Obama supporters will once again consume this Madison Avenue catch phrase dribble like a person wondering in the desert who finally comes across water. It's to be expected. I can only pray that a certain percentage who those people this time around have wised up to not fall for the same ploy the second time around. I'm going to contrast Obama's "It Begins with us" video to that of Reagan's 1984 commercial "It's Morning Again in America".



The two videos are a difference between night and day. The Reagan ad gave examples of how Americans were better off in 1984 as compared to 1980. It listed the accomplishments under Reagan in which people could point to and say yes, that is true. Obama is going to need more then a title "It begins with us" this time around, because the citizens have experienced his so called hope, and now they want change from him.