Poor Republican

“Black leaders see Senate seat being hijacked”………that’s the headline in Chicago.

It seems that black leaders (including clergy, who really shouldn’t be advocating racial divisions) are demanding that another black politician be appointed to Obama’s seat in order to “keep the seat Black.”  I don’t use “African-American” because it’s a nonsense, politically-correct, Rightspeak term.  My family has only been in this country since 1961 and we don’t call ourselves “Dutch-Indonesian-Americans” because that would be stupid.  To continue….

Apparently once a black person takes any position it must always be filled by another black person or somehow it’s racism.  There’s talk that the idea of having a special election to fill Obama’s seat instead of letting Bribeojevich fill it is an attempt by Whitey to kick the Negroes out of town, or whatever ’60s throwback cliches are appropriate.  The concept that a political seat might be chosen by an actual election seems to be less important than making  sure the “black community” keeps what they now consider to be “theirs.”

Does this mean that every politician in line to succeed the President has to be black too?  After all, should something happen to Obama, we can’t let the “white power establishment” get away with “stealing” the presidency, can we?

Of course, if they wanted to be accurate, Obama’s replacement should have to be half black.  Obama, after all, is HALF BLACK.  Which is yet another example of liberal racism.

First of all, if a very light-skinned mixed race politician called himself white, blacks all over the known universe would be calling for his head.  Names like “Oreo” and “sellout” would be flying.  Guilty white liberals would be decrying the failure to acknowledge his “African roots” and tell him about his failure to understand his “historical place” and similar garbage.  Yet Obama is called our first “African-American President” and treated like Jesus Jr. despite the fact that he has a white mother and NEVER refers to himself as white, or even mixed race.  If he was exactly the same person but called himself white, they’d stone him, especially if he had an (R) in front of his name.

And if a white group demanded that a white politician be replaced only by another white man the word “Nazis” would be out before you could blink.

But let a black Democrat do the exact same thing, and nobody in that party protests.  More than that, anyone who does protest gets called racist for protesting it!

Only one party constantly ties everything to race, and it is NOT the GOP.

Who are the racists again?

It’s that time of year again.  We all jump in our cars, fight traffic, and head to the mall to buy gifts for our friends and loved ones.  We’re full of Christmas cheer and the spirit of giving.  And then we get to the mall and it starts.

We throw our favorite finger at people in the parking lot.  We jostle and elbow each other in the stores.  We complain about the lines.  We treat the employees like garbage, and our fellow shoppers worse.  Maybe we even figure it’s not worth it and give up buying that special gift, instead substituting something cheaper or easier to get.  Merry Christmas to all, and all can just get the hell out of our way because we’re sick of this (bleep) and we’re going home to watch Lethal Weapon!

We all know that Christmas has become far more commercialized over the years, but is that the problem?  Or could it be that we’ve forgotten why we go out there in the first place?

It certainly doesn’t help that anti-Christian liberals have made sure that Christmas is banned in schools.  We grew up singing carols in our school Christmas plays; our kids are being taught about Kwanzaa.  Malls don’t put up decorations the way they used to, and store employees are trained to say “Happy Holidays” instead of “Merry Christmas” because it might offend someone to say Christmas….at Christmas!  Universities, cities, counties, states and even private companies ban everything from Christmas displays to Christmas parties to gift exchanges in the name of “inclusion,” which apparently means that if one person doesn’t like something, everyone else has to go without.  And people don’t go to church the way they used to, even for Christmas mass.

The atheist, live-for-today, it’s-all-about-me ’60s hippie liberals are winning the ironically named but descriptive “fight for Christmas.”  And our country and culture are losing.

Try to remember “reason for the season.”  First and foremost, it is to celebrate the arrival of Christ.  His name is right there in Christmas, so that shouldn’t be too hard.  He came to save us from God’s wrath, and to teach us not only to be better in the eyes of God but to be better to each other.  The liberal anti-Christian activists have drummed that out of many of you, and you need to get it back for more than one reason.  Love, generosity, compassion, sacrifice…these are the primary messages of Christ and Christmas, beyond the obvious religious one.  Are these not the same reasons we give at Christmas, even if we’re not Christians?

Bill Murray’s character in Scrooged said it best:

“It’s Christmas Eve. It’s-it’s the one night of the year when we all act a little nicer, we-we-we smile a little easier, we-w-w-we-we-we cheer a little more. For a couple of hours out of the whole year we are the people that we always hoped we would be.”

The next time you head to the mall and feel the urge to act the way so many people do while Christmas shopping, ask yourself:  are you being the person you always hoped you would be?

Remember that the next time you go out to do your Christmas shopping.  Approach every aspect of the experience from one direction: the reason you are doing it.  Imagine the happiness on the faces of those you are buying for when they open your gifts. Think of how good it feels to make someone else happy.  And every time you start to get impatient, remind yourself.  If necessary, remind other people.  Sometimes it works.

I was in a line once at our local mall, and it was moving very slowly.  People were clearly agitated, looking at their watches and pacing in place.  Some were beginning to complain.  So I spoke up.  I said “I love this.”  People turned and looked at me like I was insane.  I continued:

“I really love this.  I love looking at the decorations.  I love watching people picking out gifts for friends and loved ones.  I love doing the same for mine.  I even love standing in line.  This is all part of the experience, and I enjoy it because it all leads up to the moment they open that present and I get to make them smile.  And that’s why we’re all here, right?  We’re going to make other people happy by sacrificing our time, effort and money.  We’re not just giving the gift; we’re giving all of it, including standing in this line.  So I just take it all in and enjoy it.  It’s Christmas.  It’s awesome, and I love it.”

By this time I was really speaking loudly, and at least twenty people had turned and listened.  I don’t know why I did it.  But only a couple rolled their eyes and muttered something less than complimentary.  Almost everyone paused, then smiled.  A few actually said things like “yeah” and “that’s right.”  It made a difference.

I hope that if you are reading this, it will make that difference again.

God Bless you, and Merry Christmas.

We are expected to believe that Barrack Obama never talked to Illinois-crooked-politician-of-the-week club president and soon to be former governor Rod Blagojevich about his Senate replacement?  The media apparently does, as do all of the Obamanauts who are making sure no mention of the scandal appears on Obama’s “Open for Questions” site.

I guess that means “open for questions unless they are questions we really, really don’t want to answer.”

Imagine if this was a Republican.  Imagine if this was Bush, or Cheney, or any high profile Republican coming into office.

Would the media believe that the recently elected President would have NO contact whatsoever with the governor who gets to pick his replacement in the Senate, where he will need all the cooperation he can get to make sure his legislation gets passed?  After all, this governor is a close political ally who helped him get elected, and whom he endorsed for governor.  Do we still believe he had NO contact at all regarding the appoinment?

Would we believe it when a member of his own staff said that he talked to the governor about the appointment….then suddenly releases a statement saying he “misspoke?”  Or when a local TV station reported twice on a meeting between the President-elect and the governor, then suddenly retracts the story and scrubs its website?

How about if the new Chief of Staff reportedly had multiple conversations with the governor about the appointment, then suddenly stopped taking questions from the press and disappeared from press conferences, even though he nearly always attended them before?

What if the President-elect’s team started stonewalling, as the liberals in the press and Congress have repeatedly accused Bush of doing?

The answer is very obvious.  There would be a feeding frenzy in the press.  The liberals in Congress would be talking impeachment before inauguration.

What do we get instead?  Well, gee, Obama says he didn’t talk to him, didn’t know anything about it, and he’s really, really, upset by the whole thing.  And the press says “oh, well, okay then!”  Must be nice to be The One.

Good thing there is no press bias, right?