If Bush Did It

If you’re a black Democratic President of the United States with a slobbering media class and radical blogosphere stifling the opposition, it’s totally cool to slur black Americans as “mongrels.” Of course, according to Wikipedia , ” Among humans, mongrel and mongrelize are derogatory terms for the mixing of “races”, known as miscegenation .” If any single figure on the right had even remotely implied blacks were “mongrels” in the context of Barack Obama, we’d be having another weeks-long media extravaganza on “racism” in America. Personally, as one who is mixed, like the president, I’m having a hard time finding what’s appropriate about his discussion. Yeah, I can see the context, but this isn’t a classroom lecture. It’s an appearance on a daytime talk show. Most people wouldn’t speak of blacks as ” all kinds of mixed up ” historically. There’s simply too many painful connotations for this to be a useful primer on race. And rightfully, this is the kind of thing that makes folks angry, for example, Bruce at Gay Patriot, ” Was Obama Channeling Robert Byrd on The View? “(via Memeorandum ): I initially was going to resist posting on this because I really despise racial politics. But since we are getting some new readership from the Left (and they have no clue about American history), I thought it was important. Does President Obama have any idea what he just put out there on the table? Perhaps the most incendiary language in American history . From the article ‘D. W. Griffith and “The Birth of A Monster “ ‘: [Reference: Who Is D. W. Griffith ?] D.W. Griffith’s 1915 motion picture The Birth of a Nation — originally titled The Clansman — a film which presented a re-writing of the actual history of post Civil War Reconstruction by the same Confederate traitors aginst whom the war had to be fought. It portrayed African-Americans in the post-Civil War South as depraved, lascivious beasts whose rampant lawlessness and alleged domination of the South — through military force and control of the state legislatures — threatened to destroy “Southern civilization” and “mongrelize the races” . The film asserts that this could only be stopped by the glorified lynchings and reign of terror carried out by the “honorable” new, secret order of the “chivalrous” Knights of the Ku Klux Klan. In most of the Northern cities where the The Birth of a Nation was scheduled to be shown, political fights exploded, and some small riots did occur in Philadelphia and elsewhere where the film was shown. The NAACP and others attempted to seek either a banning of the film completely, or to force the editing-out of the most egregious racist scenes. For the most part, those attempts were futile. Endless hearings were held before mayors, state legislatures, city councils, and state and city censorship boards across the country. The Illinois legislature voted 111-2 to ban the showing in that state, but eventually lost on judicial appeals filed by the film’s promoters. Those hearings became platforms for the pro-Griffith lobby to pronounce the alleged virtues of eugenics. In New York City, Griffith’s lawyer Martin W. Littleton told Mayor Mitchell that the film was a “protest against the mongrel mixture of black and white.” It is disgusting and putrid that a President of the United States bring this kind of filth language into the public discourse when our nation has moved so far past it. Laura Ingraham is correct, Obama is not “post-racial” — he is the most racial and divisive President we have ever had.

Read more here:
Obama Slurs Blacks as ‘Mongrels’ on ‘The View’‎