Rod Blagojevich–Maybe not so stupid

The Tygrrrr Express is about to become a ping pong ball. At lunch I will get to listen and meet Colonel Ralph Peters, a hero of mine. The David Horowitz Freedom Center is hosting him. Then I hightail it to Phoenix.

Yet while the world burns, for the second day in a row the media is focused on racial nonsense.

The latest Rod Blagojevich episode is a non-story on the surface that contains a story deep below.

For those with better things to do, let me regress your intelligence with uselessness. Rod Blagojevich, a pasty white Midwesterner (redundant, I know), stated that he was blacker than Barack Obama.

He spoke of his hardscrabble life in explaining why he was the blacker of the two men.

Republicans ignored him while Democrats tried to claim he was a Republican in a past life. Blagojevich quickly called President obama and apologized. Blagojevich then held a five minute press conference where he used the word “stupid” 17 times to describe his comments.

His comments were stupid, and he quickly apologized.

So as I have asked before, why does this even matter?

Because based on liberal standards, his comments might have been less than stupid. In fact, they may have been accurate.

I have been screaming at the top of my lungs that race is about one thing only, that being pigmentation. Pigmentation is not caused by climate change or white colonizing or even Israeli settlements. It is caused by melanin content.

If one accepts this explanation, then a pair of black people having intercourse will produce black children. A pair of caucasians engaging in sex will produce white children. Magically, if a person of one race sleeps with somebody of a different race, the child will be mixed race. In fact, they will be biracial. This is revolutionary to those who do not know that the prefix “bi” means two.

According to my math, Barack Obama being biracial and Rod Blagojevich being completely caucasian makes Barack Obama blacker than Rod Blagojevich. According to this model, Obama is blacker.

(By the way, unless your response to this is “who the heck cares?” then you spend too much time obsessing about race. Being blacker is not a positive or negative development. It just is.)

If Obama is blacker, then Blagojevich made stupid comments.

Yet maybe the comments were not stupid. Maybe Blagojevich is blacker.

Using liberal methods of analysis, this may be the case.

Black grievance-mongers and the guilty white liberals they prey on see blackness as a feeling, attitude, and lifestyle. Bill Clinton was the first black President. Clarence Thomas is not black.

This is insulting.

Bill Clinton did have positive achievements growing up. He did well in school and received a college scholarship. Yet that is not what made him “black.” He never knew his birth father, and grew up with an alcoholic abusive stepfather.  That is his “blackness.”

What a terrible message it sends to people when one can be considered “black” because they come from a  dysfunctional family.

Yes, he was committed to civil rights, but his awful childhood was what he trumpeted.

Clarence Thomas and other blacks who rise out of poverty are told that they are “acting white.”

Bill Cosby has been calling out the black community for celebrating low achievers, criminals and thugs.

Charles Payne is a brilliant Wall Street commentator who got beat up by other black kids because he wanted to be a successful businessman. This is  insane.

The National Basketball Association found that more kids admired Alan Iverson than Kobe Bryant. Iverson had troubles with the law, while Kobe was a law abiding citizen. Then Kobe got accused of rape, and magically his “street cred” went up.

So if Blagojevich grew up poor while Obama partied in Hawaii, then according to the liberal model, Obama is whiter because he had a more comfortable life as a young adulthood.

(Obama did have a rough childhood, but Blagojevich claimed that his was even worse. This leads to the equally idiotic notion that winning a poverty contest is of any more value than  winning a pigmentation contest. At least kids who brag that they are wealthier make sense. Pride in poverty is illogical. Next we will have kids bragging on the playground that they have the smallest genitals. A boy will jump up in down in celebration at having a smaller one than a girl, which will lead to many questions about both kids.)

Liberals keep trying to have it both ways (not talking about genders and genitals).

First they claim that black is white and white is black, provided that liberals get to decide.

Then when a Democrat utters the same idiocy that the left has repeatedly claimed, he is pilloried.

Yes, Blagojevich made stupid remarks. Blagojevich is as Blagojevich does.

Yet liberals calling his remarks stupid is hypocritical.

Until the left acknowledges that black conservatives are blacker than white liberals, and that race has nothing to do with any political position on affirmative action, the Blagojevich standard will stick.

Blagojevich was stupid for saying what he did.

The Democratic Party is stupid for perpetuating the very stupidity that they disavow when convenient.

It’s the stupidity, stupid.


8 Responses to “Rod Blagojevich–Maybe not so stupid”

  1. Dav Lev says:

    When Obama was campaigning, I told anyone who would listen that
    he was in fact a mulatto, not black or white per se.

    No one listened. In their minds, he was definitely black.

    On the Charlie Rose show, a few people (black) interviewed during this period and after he was elected, said he was black, caus he CONSIDERED himself black.

    The argument then was heard that some whites voted against him because
    of his race. In fact, some did. But let’s get serious, 98% voted FOR
    him because of his race. ( I watched while celebs cried during his
    speeches (and the last one in Washington D.C.).

    They did NOT cry because they thought he was white, but one of them.

    The entire world views him (especially the Middle East and Muslim
    world, as an American black man. This, to them, brings hope that
    he will be anti-Jewish (anti-Israeli) and more sympathetic to

    But guys, we have been sympathetic to the Muslim countries for decades.

    We allowed them to nationalize our oil fields. We lost Iran’s control of
    it’s fossel fuel, which they had no influence in creating. Dead
    pre-historic animals were responsible.

    It just so happened, those dead animals died benearth the deserts
    at the time, mainly in the Arabian Peninsula.

    Or as the saying goes, “Had Moses gone left, rather than right, we would
    now have the oil”. There is some truth in this.

    Obama has done nothing to aid his (so-called) people from my
    perspective. In fact, he has worsened their situation in every way.
    With unemployment and underemployment at 20%, his people
    have been mostly affected. Ask any former auto worker or manufacturing

    Hey guys, smart blacks ( or whatever you choose to call them) belong to unions..
    whether civil service, or auto, or trucking. Smart blacks become
    career officers in the military, wherein they get medica and other benefits
    for life. And I applaud them for this. I am not being critical.

    But let’s face it, and I disagree here with Eric, blacks are catagorized.
    I mean it’s evident in every aspect of THEIR lives.

    I worked with blacks. During festivals or retirement or award dinners,
    they sat together..whites here, and blacks there. At retirement dinners,
    few whites showed. Blacks were also discriminated for. Their pigment
    did in fact mean something. People simply feel more comfortable among
    themselves. Is this bad or just nature?

    There is a down side to all this obviously. During the OJ trial, after he
    was found not guilty, well, you can imagine. Now of course everyone knew he had killed those two people.

    I say so what!. Whites are white and blacks are black. I have called
    whites called “White whites”, meaning Protestants, by minorities.

    The expression, “You people” is accepted language..but don’t say this
    to a black audience. They interpret it wrong. It’s not wrong, it just
    means you people (there).

    Let’s not fool ourselves. about the divides in this country. They exist.
    We have all heard the racial and other inflammatory remarks

    Heck, I’ve heard Orthodox Jews being equated with being gonifs, who
    hurt people. Funny, but I know some Orthodox, and I am not familiar
    with them hurting anyone. In fact, they are intimidated by “Others”.
    Ultra-Orthodox, forget it, akin to the devil.

    But Orthodox Jews are mainly white, unless you are referring to those
    whose heritage goes back to North Africa. The Shas Party in Israel
    is Orthodox, Sephardic ( Spainish origin). Some of them look more
    like black Americans than black Americans. ( See Yemen).

    Whether this former mayor did himself any good, only time will tell.
    Practically, he should have not said what he did. It’s just not
    smart politics, ever. The real question is whether he commited the crimes
    that have been alleged? I suppose that as long as he doesn’t go bald,
    he will at least never have folicle problems. Maybe that’s a compensation?

    Oh btw, last Saturday night, on SNL, the host made a derogatory remark
    about a Jewish lady sitting in the audience. He referred to her as a Jew.

    Now I ask, was she wearing a Star of David on her forehead? I mean
    I am a Jew and would never have guessed it. She had no garb
    which would reveal her religion..she did not say oy vey to him
    or even shalom.

    Unlike the Muslims, those who saw it did not make a big to do over it,
    nor burn down anything or threaten. I am not prejudiced, just
    honest about what I see and hear.

  2. I don’t know of any liberals who would think Blago’s commeents are “correct.” In fact, I don’t know any liberals who think the man is anything other than insane and everything that somes out of his mouth should just be ignored. the media is infatuated with Blago. Liberals like me couldn’t care less about him and do not at all care about him nor follow his inane antics on the news. But here were are on a conservative blog talking about Blago…

    But just for the sake of laughs, why what Blago said offended liberals is that insinuated that being black meant being poor, that these things are one in the same. And that’s just stupid, a lie, racist, and nasty.

    As for Clinton, the reason people called him “The First Black President” had nothing to do with his upbringing, but with his consistent lifelong advocacy for civil rights.

    As for Clarence Thomas, the knock on him was never about “acting white,” but about acting like a Corporatist lackey.

    As for Bill Cosby, he remains very popular among all people and races and though some criticize him for “airing the dirty laundry” of black culture, most liberals I know of think he’s a bright man making a good point and we’re glad for it.

    As for Charles Payne, he’s a big mouthed slobbola that only Fox “News” fans can so much as momentarily tolerate. No wonder he got “beat up” all the time. I’m sure it had nothing to do with him wanting to be a business man and everything to do with him being a sleazy lowlife. Either that or all the bullying made him a resentful lunatic out to wreck havoc on the Earth for his misfortune.

    You conservatives don’t understand issues of race – or for that matter understand liberals. Period. You all would be best to avoid discussing such things because it only makes you look bad. Really bad. Trust me.


  3. Micky 2 says:

    I do believe that we are a racist nation.
    But we are not the hateful, prejudice, segregating and discriminating racist that we are portrayed as because people have the audacity to actually acknowledge race.
    When you elect a man just to achieve some cultural and ethnic milestone in history you’re being racist but still with no hostilities to any particular race. Its like climbing a mountain just because its there regardless of serious matters that need tending at home.

  4. Micky 2 says:

    What I saw in the two plus years of campaigning was a bunch of idiots who were voting against man who could of never had the office no mater what along with a bunch who wanted a black/minority president regardless of qualifications.
    Its evident today when you look at the leadership and the buyers remorse were not seeing as result of those idiots who are still hoping their idealistic choice will finally get it.

  5. Micky 2 says:

    I cant get the rest of my post to stick no matter how much I break it up.
    Only happens here

  6. Micky 2 says:

    “You conservatives don’t understand issues of race – or for that matter understand liberals. Period. You all would be best to avoid discussing such things because it only makes you look bad. Really bad. Trust me.”

    Gee, it must of made you feel soooo good to say that.
    Even though its about the dumbest damn thing I’ve heard since your last post where you point out that we understand race issues just enough to be the sinister racist bastards we all are supposed to be.
    And no, its not a conversation or an inclining for anything to debate, just pointing out stupidity.
    You guys cant even figure yourselves out so why be surprised if the rest of us are so perplexed half the time only to chalk it up to a mental disease

  7. Micky, I canvassed for Obama. Not one of the voters I canvassed said they were voting for him because he was black or to achieve some “cultural milestone,” including among the black voters I spoke with. I did, however, meet a few people who were quite specifically NOT voting for Obama – lifelong Democrats too – just BECAUSE he was black. The vast majority of people I spoke to said they were voting for Obama because they believed he represented a move to the left that they thought was now due. And that’s about it. Some of them simply said they’d rather vote for a piece of driftwood than another Republican after the Bush debacle. I understood these people. Of the more lefty and pie-eyed, I warned quite a few – he’s not as “left” as many people think. Never was.

    The trouble with conservatives and race is that you have some terrible habits of argument. For example, conservatives will often say that Democrats take advantage of minorities and use them while neglecting or evening worsening their problems. This may be quite true, to some extent, but it also confers that minorites are morons and suckers, unable to see they are marks for con-artists. People don’t like to be told this. Heck, I tell this to conservatives all the time and they just hate it!

    Another mistake conservatives make is that they assume to understand things that they just can’t. Most conservatives are white, rural or suburban, or ex-urban white-flight. They are not exposed to minorities, for the most part, unless they’re on the evening news, exploiting urban violence stories, or speaking with a an accent that is difficult for more uncultured white people to grasp. What little exposure they have to minorities tends to be negative. So, when conservatives try to make sense of racial or minority issues, they often come to rather inane and ridiculous, ignorant conclusions, further alienating them from those very minorities. That’s why I think conservatives would be well-advised to avoid the issue.


  8. Micky 2 says:

    “What little exposure they have to minorities tends to be negative.”

    Good God you’re an elitest bigoted idiot

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.