|
|
| |
Topic: Why The Next President Will Probably Be Black Too |
Why The Next President Will Probably Be Black Too
Buzzfeed, by Ben Smith
|
|
Original Article
|
|
Posted By:garnet, 1/4/2013 10:42:30 AM
|
| If there is anything approaching an iron law of American politics, it´s this: The next president will be a member of the same race as the current one. It´s a rule that has held through 42 of 43 transfers of power. And there´s every reason to think it will hold through the next one. The next president will, in all likelihood, be African-American, most likely one of the two African Americans who would make anybody´s list of the top 10 contenders for the Democratic nomination. This is, obviously, the sort of statistical
|
Reply 1 - Posted by:
Whamdbambam, 1/4/2013 10:47:13 AM (No. 9098259)
Lemee guess, Al Sharpton.
|
Reply 2 - Posted by:
chicodon, 1/4/2013 10:49:15 AM (No. 9098266)
Van Jones
|
| |
|
Reply 3 - Posted by:
chiller, 1/4/2013 10:50:29 AM (No. 9098270)
I would think the opposite. Obeyme´s attitude, race baiting and the like has damaged the stature of his race, imho. He should be ashamed, but whatever it takes to punish those mean whiteys.
|
Reply 4 - Posted by:
MisterDickens, 1/4/2013 10:51:07 AM (No. 9098273)
Article is likely comedy but could be bait. No time to read it. Clue me in later.
|
Reply 5 - Posted by:
happy conservative, 1/4/2013 10:54:08 AM (No. 9098278)
Proof that the democrat party is the racist party.
|
Reply 6 - Posted by:
ginadee, 1/4/2013 10:56:03 AM (No. 9098282)
My guess is Harry Belafonte.
|
Reply 7 - Posted by:
neanderthal, 1/4/2013 10:57:46 AM (No. 9098290)
The news is littered with red herrings. Only one thing counts: Is the majority of the people benefiting from government largess or is the majority paying the bills. Right now and for the next few years at least, the majority are benefiting. As long as they all go out and vote, they win every time. It´s a war between people wanting instant gratification and people who want to delay gratification.
|
| |
|
Reply 8 - Posted by:
trackman999, 1/4/2013 10:57:47 AM (No. 9098291)
It´s not about race, it´s about ideology.
|
Reply 9 - Posted by:
Grady, 1/4/2013 11:02:07 AM (No. 9098304)
Which country will he or she be from?
|
Reply 10 - Posted by:
Redneck In NY, 1/4/2013 11:05:14 AM (No. 9098315)
Django Unhinged...
|
Reply 11 - Posted by:
Udanja99, 1/4/2013 11:15:21 AM (No. 9098335)
If it´s Allen West I´m all for it.
|
Reply 12 - Posted by:
Geelabeela828, 1/4/2013 11:16:16 AM (No. 9098339)
Jay Z and Beyonce?
|
| |
|
Reply 13 - Posted by:
robertthomason, 1/4/2013 11:16:45 AM (No. 9098341)
The article is well stated and its premise very much a distinct possibility. Black voters now exercise great influence in the nominating process for the Democrats. If the Republicans continue to nominate candidates like we have in the past two elections then the Democrats have a chance to win in 2016 with a black candidate. Only if the black voters decide to give a white Democrat a shot at the nomination will someone like Hillary Clinton be nominated. The problem for the Democrats is that they have now painted themselves in a corner in regards to their most important voters. Nominate who we want or split your base and lose to a Republican.
|
Reply 14 - Posted by:
belwhatter, 1/4/2013 11:17:09 AM (No. 9098344)
Perfect#11 - the only choice.
|
Reply 15 - Posted by:
Freeloader, 1/4/2013 11:18:15 AM (No. 9098348)
The next Black POTUS? My money is on Chi-Town´s Exalted High Priest, Louis Eugene Wolcott Farrakhan Muhammad, Sr., to take it all in 2016!
|
Reply 16 - Posted by:
lanczos, 1/4/2013 11:21:35 AM (No. 9098355)
#11 & #14 - And me too!
|
Reply 17 - Posted by:
Jethro bo, 1/4/2013 11:23:34 AM (No. 9098359)
There is history to dispute this claim. The same thing happened to the Southern Democrat party. The black vote nominated black candidates and drove whites way. Oh, but that is the racist south people say. No, it was actually the far left agenda of black candidates. And that far left agenda is what eventually killed the Dems in the South. And where non whites were conservative, they were elected (black, non native Indian and others). This will happen elsewhere as more people begin to feel the destructive forces of Dem rule.
|
| |
|
Reply 18 - Posted by:
GringoinQuito, 1/4/2013 11:24:09 AM (No. 9098360)
Whoever it is will be the first black president, since what we have now is a mulatto.
|
Reply 19 - Posted by:
Pearson365, 1/4/2013 11:25:18 AM (No. 9098363)
Article has photo of next black president but does not mention her name; Moochelle Obama.
The Mooch will run if Barry´s executive order permitting him to run for a 3rd term is overturned by the Supreme Court. Barry will argue, with the help of Georgetown University´s law school and the NY Times, that the 22nd Amendment as well as Constitution isn´t applicable to him because it was written by old white men.
The Mooch will begin to discuss how it is so important to women, minorities and the less privileged to keep moving forward with Barry´s policies. "This is not the time to abandon what Barack Obama started, but to keep his wonderful vision in place for all Americans."
|
Reply 20 - Posted by:
FunOne, 1/4/2013 11:25:18 AM (No. 9098362)
Since no proof of US citizenship is not required, how about Robert Mugabee?
A president exprienced in destroying the economy of his country (even moreso than Obama), by being a leader in a movement against the white minority producers.
Obama could only hope to realize the level of redistribution that has taken place in Zimbabwe under Mugabee´s leadership.
|
Reply 21 - Posted by:
NYbob, 1/4/2013 11:39:11 AM (No. 9098385)
I guess it is something that Ben thinks there will be another President, but it is still early.
|
Reply 22 - Posted by:
Pros7767, 1/4/2013 11:48:44 AM (No. 9098400)
I have the same concerns 21.
Blacks will always vote for the black candidate. They own the seat now. Time for the libs to start trashing Allen West as an Uncle Tom or they could have problems.
|
| |
|
Reply 23 - Posted by:
disasterman, 1/4/2013 11:55:29 AM (No. 9098417)
Yup, the next president will be black and will probably be named Barack 0bama. Once he´s done getting rid of the second amendment, getting rid of the twenty second will be child´s play.
|
Reply 24 - Posted by:
Eheu Fugaces, 1/4/2013 11:56:06 AM (No. 9098419)
Chicken counting, pre-hatching.
|
Reply 25 - Posted by:
Refried, 1/4/2013 11:57:45 AM (No. 9098422)
I nominate Congressman Henry Johnson of Georgia. He of "Guam will capsize" fame. His IQ is in the same range as the voters who elected him as well as those who voted for Mohammed in Nov. Should be a shoo-in.
|
Reply 26 - Posted by:
TXknitter, 1/4/2013 12:01:48 PM (No. 9098429)
11, 14 and 16. - Amen.
|
Reply 27 - Posted by:
snakeoil, 1/4/2013 12:06:29 PM (No. 9098433)
#25. He goes by Hank Johnson and misrepresents me. But he is an improvement over Cynthia McKinney whom he defeated. I wrote him several e-mails and letters stating my total opposition to zeroØcare. For my efforts he put me on the DNC mailing list. Don´t think it will be Hillary; after another 4 years she´ll look like a Vampire at sunrise. Of course, back in 2007 I laughed at the idea of a freshman senator from Illinois running for POTUS who´s only accomplishment is he´s half black. And look what happened.
|
Reply 28 - Posted by:
Namma, 1/4/2013 12:17:18 PM (No. 9098445)
then it will be the first Black President..because this one is bi-racial...
|
Reply 29 - Posted by:
bighambone, 1/4/2013 12:24:03 PM (No. 9098455)
Chances are that from now on the Democrats will always have a liberal to socialist black politician on their ticket. You must always remember that the Democrats cannot win without a very substantial black vote in the general election.
If the Democrats were to put down a black candidate in favor of a white liberal in their primaries, there is a good chance that enough black voters would feel slighted enough to stay home on general election day causing the Democrats to loose the election. Goes to show how a small minority of voters, most of them takers and certainly not makers, can end up running the country in the future, as long as they stick together in a one party voting bloc.
|
Reply 30 - Posted by:
whyyeseyec, 1/4/2013 12:37:39 PM (No. 9098473)
I`m guessing the Dems will soon begin grooming a Hispanic for president in 2016. It`s time for our 1st `Historic Hispanic` to occupy the WH. Gotta keep that War on White Folk alive and kicking. No more old evil white republican men need apply.
/s
|
Reply 31 - Posted by:
PChristopher, 1/4/2013 12:48:58 PM (No. 9098496)
Buzzfeed is pure garbage unless you want cute animal pictures or lists of kitchen hints.
|
Reply 32 - Posted by:
Pete Stone, 1/4/2013 1:03:54 PM (No. 9098526)
Ben missed the biggest counterexample. John F. Kennedy was the first Catholic President. He was also the last, and it´s been 52 years since he was elected.
|
Reply 33 - Posted by:
Blue-Z-Anna, 1/4/2013 1:33:57 PM (No. 9098557)
Deval Patrick and Corey Freaking Booker are who he has in mind while noting that no Republican black potential candidates exist.
Just keep on thinking that.
Allen West, Sen. Scott, Herman Cain and a dozen others don´t exist ?
My red-neck research survey indicates that Barky has, more likely, kweered the deal for his melanin advantaged brethren for the next forty years.
|
Reply 34 - Posted by:
mickturn, 1/4/2013 1:46:50 PM (No. 9098578)
Lemme guess, a good tan?
|
Reply 35 - Posted by:
robertthomason, 1/4/2013 1:51:09 PM (No. 9098587)
#17 is right on the money. I live in the deep South and the Democrats have disappeared as a statewide party. This is the corner the national Democrats are putting themselves into. Their black candidates will be so far left that they can be defeated if the Republicans cure their dysfunction in national elections.
|
Reply 36 - Posted by:
kono, 1/4/2013 2:05:58 PM (No. 9098619)
Thanks, Buzzfeed. I´d quote the salient line, but it won´t pass the profanity filters here...
Never forget that Bill Clinton adamantly laid claim to being America´s first black President in 1994. Or that Barack Obama is at least as white as he is black. It´s all bullsh--, promulgated by the kneepad media who serve The Won.
|
Reply 37 - Posted by:
Wetlandz, 1/4/2013 2:40:30 PM (No. 9098674)
Seriously? I´m a little sick of the MSM obsession with race. There are plenty qualified black conservatives that would work harder than the current occupier.
|
Reply 38 - Posted by:
ScrIbelus, 1/4/2013 8:17:34 PM (No. 9099211)
I will vote according to the content of his or her character, not the color of skin. Of course, if the character is cynically disguised, as was, and is, Obama´s, I will vote for the opponent.
|
Reply 39 - Posted by:
TakeBackAmerica, 1/4/2013 8:37:48 PM (No. 9099237)
Ok! Lemme see the African American.
|
Below, you will find ...
Most Recent Articles posted by "garnet"
and
Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)
|
Most Recent Articles posted by "garnet"
|
Has the IRS Already Seized Your Medical Records?
|
|
American Spectator, by David Catron
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: garnet- 5/20/2013 6:46:32 AM
Post Reply
|
|
As gratifying as it was to see the “news” media actually do its job last week when the IRS scandal broke, it was also odd that the coverage focused exclusively on abuses of power relating to various Tea Party and anti-abortion groups. A much scarier IRS story has been virtually ignored by the establishment press. On Wednesday, it was reported that a class-action lawsuit had been filed against a group of IRS agents who, according to the complaint filed by “John Doe Company” in the Southern District of California, “stole more than 60,000,000 medical records of more than 10,000,000 Americans
|
Kathleen Sebelius dances on an ethical line
|
|
Washington Post, by Editorial
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: garnet- 5/19/2013 10:45:45 AM
Post Reply
|
|
ONE OF THE BIGGEST questions hanging over the health-care system is how many young Americans will sign up for coverage once the Affordable Care Act begins to phase in this October. If too few buy insurance on the markets that the government is creating, insurance companies would be stuck covering primarily the the old and the sick. They would have to pay out more per customer. Their customers, in turn, would have to pay more to those companies for coverage. The stakes for the Health and Human Services Department, which is overseeing the transition, are tremendous.
|
This is not the President Obama we voted for
|
|
Guardian [UK], by Heather Long
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: garnet- 5/19/2013 10:35:41 AM
Post Reply
|
|
You can argue that Republicans have blocked President Obama from doing just about anything. You can argue that he´s had bad luck. You can argue that he isn´t always the greatest orator. But you can´t argue away that the Department of Justice took the unprecedented step of seizing phone records from the Associated Press. Or the flimsy rationale justifying drone attacks abroad and at home. Or the bizarre step the Pentagon has taken to expand the ability of the military (Snip) These are actions that President Obama and his top team have taken on their own.
|
|
The Benghazi Emails´ Backside-Covering
|
|
Washington Post Writers Group, by David Ignatius
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: garnet- 5/19/2013 10:27:43 AM
Post Reply
|
|
WASHINGTON -- The hundred pages of Benghazi emails released last week tell us almost nothing about how four Americans came to die so tragically in that Libyan city. But they are a case study in why nothing works in Washington. Rather than reading these messages for their substance on Benghazi (on which officials were still basically clueless three days after the attack), try perusing them as an illustration of how the bureaucracy responds to crisis -- especially when officials know they will be under the media spotlight.
|
|
Justifiable Cause
|
|
Slate, by John Dickerson
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: garnet- 5/16/2013 7:25:16 AM
Post Reply
|
|
It must get confusing in the IT department at the Associated Press: Are you talking about the hackers who hacked our Twitter account or the Justice Department hackers who hacked our phones? Monday, the Associated Press reported that the Justice Department had secretly obtained two months of records of phone conversations by its reporters. Meanwhile, the Washington Post revealed that the Internal Revenue Service’s targeting of conservative groups was more widespread than first reported. (Snip)The Obama administration is doing a far better job making the case for conservatism than Mitt Romney, Mitch McConnell, or John Boehner ever did.
|
IRS official Lerner speedily approved exemption for Obama brother’s‘charity’
|
|
Daily Caller, by Charles C. Johnson
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: garnet- 5/14/2013 7:50:27 PM
Post Reply
|
|
Lois Lerner, the senior IRS official at the center of the decision to target tea party groups for burdensome tax scrutiny, signed paperwork granting tax-exempt status to the Barack H. Obama Foundation, a shady charity headed by the president’s half-brother that operated illegally for years. According to the organization’s filings, Lerner approved the foundation’s tax status within a month of filing, an unprecedented timeline that stands in stark contrast to conservative organizations that have been waiting for more than three years, in some cases, for approval.
|
|
The Grand Old Poseurs
|
|
American Spectator, by David Catron
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: garnet- 5/13/2013 6:47:01 AM
Post Reply
|
|
Last week, Speaker of the House John Boehner and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell ostentatiously announced their intention to fight implementation of the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB). They sent a letter to the President decrying the way IPAB will “impact America’s seniors … in the absence of the democratic process.” Sadly, the exercise was a charade. McConnell and Boehner know perfectly well that Obama has no intention of setting up this controversial board until after 2015.
|
Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)
|
White House Chief of Staff knew about damaging IRS audit, kept Obama in the dark
|
|
New York Post, by S.A. MILLER
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: FlyRight- 5/20/2013 4:15:03 PM
Post Reply
|
|
WASHINGTON – The Internal Revenue Serviced scandal today spread further within the White House and closer to President Obama. White House spokesman Jay Carney today disclosed that Obama’s chief of staff, Dennis McDonough, and other top White House officials had advance warning that the IRS was targeting conservative groups. But he insisted McDonough and the other White House officials purposely kept Obama out of the loop.McDonough “rightly chose not to take action” to inform Obama, Carney told reporters at the daily White House briefing.
|
BREAKING: WashPost Reports Obama DOJ Also Spied on James Rosen of Fox News
|
|
Newsbusters, by Tim Graham
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: drive- 5/20/2013 7:29:20 AM
Post Reply
|
|
The Washington Post on Monday reported that Obama’s Department of Justice was investigating journalists before they started wiretapping the Associated Press – for one, Fox News correspondent James Rosen in 2010. Their headline wasn´t "Obama Team Also Spied on Fox News." Fox wasn´t in the headline, on A-1 or on A-12, where the story continued. Newly obtained court documents “reveal how deeply investigators explored the private communications of a working journalist — and raise the question of how often journalists have been investigated as closely as Rosen was in 2010.” Reporter Ann Marimow began:
|
Leaks turn to deluge for reeling White House
|
|
New York Post, by John Podhoretz
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: StormCnter- 5/21/2013 4:49:13 AM
Post Reply
|
|
The wheels came off the Obama administration yesterday. We learned of a startling assault on freedom of the press by the Department of Justice, following the revelation last week of the unprecedented information-gathering foray by that department against The Associated Press. Then, a few minutes later, the Justice Department’s inspector general released a report declaring that the US attorney in Arizona used the leak of a confidential memo to try to discredit a whistleblower in the notorious “gun-walking” scandal known as Fast and Furious (which got two federal agents killed). The leak was called “egregious.”
|
Top IRS official will invoke Fifth Amendment
|
|
Los Angeles Times, by Richard Simon and Joseph Tanfani
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: Scottyboy- 5/21/2013 3:53:35 PM
Post Reply
|
|
WASHINGTON – A top IRS official in the division that reviews nonprofit groups will invoke the Fifth Amendment and refuse to answer questions before a House committee investigating the agency’s improper screening of conservative nonprofit groups. Lois Lerner, the head of the exempt organizations division of the IRS, won’t answer questions about what she knew about the improper screening – or why she didn’t reveal it to Congress, according to a letter from her defense lawyer, William W. Taylor 3rd. Lerner was scheduled to appear before the House Oversight committee Wednesday.
|
White House Aide calls Criticism of Obama ´Offensive´
|
|
New York Times, by Brian Knowlton
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: FlyRight- 5/20/2013 7:01:33 AM
Post Reply
|
|
A senior adviser to President Obama mounted a combative defense of the administration on Sunday, saying the controversies enveloping the White House were the result of Republican lawmakers’ trying to “drag Washington into a swamp of partisan fishing expeditions, trumped-up hearings and false allegations.”The remarks came from Dan Pfeiffer, a member of the president’s inner circle, as he appeared on all five major Sunday morning talk shows in an effort to move the administration past what commentators have described as a “hell week” of controversy and missteps.
|
If Your Doctor Asks You About Guns, Do You Have to Answer?
|
|
Fox News, by Staff
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: KarenJ1- 5/20/2013 1:12:07 PM
Post Reply
|
|
Stuart Varney said this morning on "Varney & Co." that one of his producers was given a questionnaire with some surprisingly intrusive questions on it when he switched doctors. One of the questions was whether he/she was concerned about unsecured weapons in the home. Another asked whether he/she was "in a relationship in which you have been physically hurt or are you afraid of your partner?" Judge Andrew Napolitano explained that the question about guns comes out of a post-Sandy Hook executive order by President Obama, but it will be required under Obamacare. Varney expressed amazement
|
Democratic Senator uses Okla. tornado for anti-GOP rant over global warming
|
|
Daily Caller, by Jeff Poor
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: bamapreacher- 5/20/2013 8:20:54 PM
Post Reply
|
|
While many Americans were tuned into news coverage of the massive damage from tornadoes ravaging the state of Oklahoma, Rhode Island Democratic Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse took to the Senate floor to rail against his Republican colleagues for denying the theory of anthropogenic global warming. Whitehouse spent 15 minutes chastising GOP senators and justified his remarks by alluding to states that seek federal assistance in the wake of natural disasters. “So, you may have a question for me,” Whitehouse said. “Why do you care? Why do you, Sheldon Whitehouse, Democrat of Rhode Island, care
|
|
|

Home Page | Latest Posts | Links | Must Reads | Update Profile | Register | Rules & FAQs | Search | Post | Contact | RSS | Contribute | Logout | Forgot Password
© 2013 Lucianne.com Media Inc.
~~~c~~~
|