God, I love the Internet and how it, finally, enables the truth to come out:
New Panther National Chief Malik Zulu Shabazz is seen speaking at the rally on the left. Then Obama speaks to the Selma crowd at the same rally.
Big Government reported:
New photographs obtained exclusively by BigGovernment.com reveal that Barack Obama appeared and marched with members of the New Black Panther Party as he campaigned for president in Selma, Alabama in March 2007.
The photographs, captured from a Flickr photo-sharing account before it was scrubbed, are the latest evidence of the mainstream media’s failure to examine Obama’s extremist ties and radical roots.
In addition, the new images raise questions about the possible motives of the Obama administration in its infamous decision to drop the prosecution of the Panthers for voter intimidation.
The images, presented below, also renew doubts about the transparency of the White House’s guest logs–in particular, whether Panther National Chief Malik Zulu Shabazz is the same “Malik Shabazz” listed among the Obama administration’s early visitors.
Man, it sure would’ve been nice if the MSM had done its job in properly vetting Candidate Obama way back in 2007 and 2008, huh? “Paling around with thugs, terrorists and radical hatemonger preachers” indeed. (BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!)
Yeah, considering ol’ Hussein’s pretty much turned out to be the apotheosis of crony capitalism at its very worst. Man, they sure put their money on the wrong horse with this guy. What’s the black unemployment rate? North of 17 or more percent I think, and that’s just the official sanitized-by-the-government rate. It’s probably double that, in reality. Thanks Obama!
The images, presented below, also renew doubts about the transparency of the White House’s guest logs–in particular, whether Panther National Chief Malik Zulu Shabazz is the same “Malik Shabazz” listed among the Obama administration’s early visitors.
What? How many dudes do you think there are in the country named Malik Shabazz? How is that a knock against the transparency of the guest logs? If anything it’s removing doubt about the transparency of the logs if they would have that guy on there.
Otherwise, we should use this thread to clear up two seemingly conflicting criticisms of Obama:
Obama is a radical because he spoke to X.
Obama is a sleazy politician who just told everyone during the campaign what they wanted to hear so they’d vote for him.
Which is it? I personally lean towards #2 if I have to choose.
The images, presented below, also renew doubts about the transparency of the White House’s guest logs–in particular, whether Panther National Chief Malik Zulu Shabazz is the same “Malik Shabazz” listed among the Obama administration’s early visitors.
What? How many dudes do you think there are in the country named Malik Shabazz? How is that a knock against the transparency of the guest logs? If anything it’s removing doubt about the transparency of the logs if they would have that guy on there.
Otherwise, we should use this thread to clear up two seemingly conflicting criticisms of Obama:
Obama is a radical because he spoke to X.
Obama is a sleazy politician who just told everyone during the campaign what they wanted to hear so they’d vote for him.
Which is it? I personally lean towards #2 if I have to choose.
Perhaps a transcript of Shabaz stance on cracker babies and Rev. Wrights words and then we can decide which things Obama never heard them say. Oh add in Farrakhan too.
Once again he reveals exactly what he bellievs in his words and who he surrounds himself with.
Perhaps a transcript of Shabaz stance on cracker babies and Rev. Wrights words and then we can decide which things Obama never heard them say. Oh add in Farrakhan too.
Once again he reveals exactly what he bellievs in his words and who he surrounds himself with.
I think, like Quel, that he’s more of a cynical opportunist – making him doubly eager to use his official RaceCard than any other president before him – than anything else. His haranguing of the Congressional Black Caucus to get in line and start marching and supporting him was a cynical ploy and his supporters’ lightning fast resort to calls of racism to smear the Tea Party (Morgan Freeman was a particularly egregious example of this, just recently) or any critics of Obama shows they’re getting desperate and that they and their enablers in the MSM (including the Washington Post, with its drive-by slander of Rick Perry this past weekend) will say anything and do anything to ensure Obama’s reelection in November 2012. It’s not going to work, mainly because people are fed up with the constant fallback position of liberals that even mild criticism of The One is racist, but they don’t have any other play in their well-worn playbook.
I personally do not find (2) terribly troubling if that were to be the end of it. It’s more the apparent quid pro quo, be it Justice (Black Panther dismissal) or policy (no, you can’t build a plant in NC, etc, etc) that these opportunistic dalliances typically become that are so offensive.
The images, presented below, also renew doubts about the transparency of the White House’s guest logs–in particular, whether Panther National Chief Malik Zulu Shabazz is the same “Malik Shabazz” listed among the Obama administration’s early visitors.
What? How many dudes do you think there are in the country named Malik Shabazz? How is that a knock against the transparency of the guest logs? If anything it’s removing doubt about the transparency of the logs if they would have that guy on there.
Otherwise, we should use this thread to clear up two seemingly conflicting criticisms of Obama:
Obama is a radical because he spoke to X.
Obama is a sleazy politician who just told everyone during the campaign what they wanted to hear so they’d vote for him.
Which is it? I personally lean towards #2 if I have to choose.
All of the above.
To be fair, if it were 1) or 3) we’d probably have some evidence (like actual radical policy) by this point, instead of just more of what we had during 8 years of GWB.
Good point. I’d rather they all be flushed, on both sides and especially the ones who were elected to do one thing but then are co-opted and wind up doing another once they spend some time in Sodom-on-the-Potomac. I know that groups like the ones I’m currently working worth have told the folks that we helped to get elected that they’ll need to die on that hill, if required, in order to rein in spending, taxes and to impose some sense of fiscal responsibility. None of the groups that I personally have experience with, as well, give a tinker’s damn about the so-called “social issues.” It’s all about the Benjamins, bay-bee. (LOL!)
I think, like Quel, that he’s more of a cynical opportunist – making him doubly eager to use his official RaceCard than any other president before him
Cain just played the race card more than Obama ever has.
His haranguing of the Congressional Black Caucus to get in line and start marching and supporting him was a cynical ploy and his supporters’
Yeah, and the CBC is angry with him because he doesn’t play the race card, or actively support their causes. And, bitch please, like Boehner’s constant haranguing of the Tea Party caucus to get in line isn’t the exact same “cynical ploy.”
I think you need to adjust your tactics a little bit. It makes you sound a little desperate to be dredging up this stuff again.
Cain just played the race card more than Obama ever has.
His haranguing of the Congressional Black Caucus to get in line and start marching and supporting him was a cynical ploy and his supporters’
Cain was answering the questions given the info that was out there (he hasn't learned to be evasive and duplicitous in every answer!). I'd imagine that he will revisit his criticism of Perry in light of the rest of the story now known.
Obama criticized the CBC for disagreeing with, and challenging him. It's what he does to anyone that dares do so, whether pubs, Americans, the supreme court justices, or the CBC. He does not respond to them logically, he attacks, and sets his minions on them as well...he is the ultimate divider.
I think, like Quel, that he’s more of a cynical opportunist – making him doubly eager to use his official RaceCard than any other president before him
Cain just played the race card more than Obama ever has.
Puh-leeze. Obama’s lifeblood is all about race, dude. You know that. And Cain asserting that the Dems have some form of mind control over the black community is just stating the obvious to anybody who’s not a liberal and obsessed with making sure us pore brown and black folks get an even break.
His haranguing of the Congressional Black Caucus to get in line and start marching and supporting him was a cynical ploy and his supporters’
**Yeah, and the CBC is angry with him because he doesn’t play the race card, or actively support their causes. And, bitch please, like Boehner’s constant haranguing of the Tea Party caucus to get in line isn’t the exact same “cynical ploy.” **
Look! A Tea Party distraction!! Yow!!!
Uh, I think the CBC is pissed to the wide at Obama (by their own admission, if Obama weren’t black they’d have already been marching on the White House) for a variety of reasons, a major one being that his (and their) playing of the race card at every turn doesn’t seem to be gaining much traction. Only scared white libs seem to really care about that race stuff anymore. And tired old actors who diddle their step-granddaughters. I forgot about that.
I think you need to adjust your tactics a little bit. It makes you sound a little desperate to be dredging up this stuff again.
I don’t know how it’s dredging something up that just broke yesterday (Obama’s close association with the New Black Panther Party and Malik Zulu Shabazz, as thuggish a so-called “community leader” as there ever was), but you gotta play the balls that come your way. Trouble for Obama is, there are tons of balls being sent our way that’ll be used to no end over the next 13 months. And I’m lovin’ it, bro-ham. (HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!)
