|
|
| |
PAUL BAGALA EXPLAINS WHY MIDDLE AMERICANS ARE NAZISWHOWANTTOKILLSIXMILLIONJEWS
|
|
A color-coded map of the United States, showing how each county voted in the presidential election, told a story everybody seemed to recognize. On that map, America's clear division was shown with ruthless clarity: middle Americans voted solidly Republican. The East and West Coast and the self-styled "elites" and professional minority groups voted even more unanimously for liberalism.
This was not really news to anybody. Everybody knows that all the resident aliens who hate Middle America and white people use liberalism as their vehicle. Liberalism today is simply a hatred of Middle America, and a way to destroy it.
But the fact that liberalism is simply a hatred of white people and middle Americans is what I call a Public Secret. A Public Secret is something everybody knows, but which the media and respectable conservatives prevent from ever being mentioned.
Anybody who mentioned what those color-coded maps made painfully obvious would have been a racist, anaziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews. It is fully expected for all blacks to "vote black," which means to vote liberal so that liberals will force white people to do what black people want them to do.
But for whites to vote the other way is racist.
That map was an excruciating embarrassment to liberals. They claim to represent "populism" and real America.
But the map showed that Middle America is precisely the enemy that liberals hate. Any conservative who dares mention this fact will lose his respectability. And being respectable in the eyes of liberals is more important to conservatives than any principle, any people, or any country.
So the map said something no one was allowed to say, and it really upset liberals. It showed that liberals and their clients are on one side and real America is on the other.
That map stunned the regular liberals into silence.
What they plan to do about it is to use respectable conservatives to keep this embarrassing fact from being mentioned. The public memory is short, and they can count on the respectables to help them put this down the Memory Hole.
Most liberals were stunned into silence by that map.
But one thing you can say for Clinton's crowd: nothing shuts them up. One of Clinton's closest buddies and spokesmen, Paul Bagala, spoke up about the fact that Middle America had turned on the liberals. He said that those so-called Middle American counties included the place where a homosexual was killed in a hate crime. Those counties included the site of the Oklahoma Bombing. Middle America, he added, included the county in Texas where a black man was dragged to death on a chain behind a truck.
In other words, the only reason Middle America votes conservative is because it represents Hate. Middle America is a bunch of naziswhowanttokillsixmillionjews.
Bagala is from the South. There is no loudmouth traitor like a SOUTHERN loudmouth traitor.
|
THE FIFTEENTH AMENDMENT SAYS NOTHING TODAY. THAT SAYS A LOT.
|
|
There are three Reconstruction Amendments, which were passed in the aftermath of the Civil War.
The first Reconstruction Amendment was the Thirteenth Amendment, which freed the slaves. The second was the Fourteenth Amendment, which gave black people citizenship. That one got through only by open cheating.
The last Reconstruction Amendment, and by far the hardest to shove and cheat its way through, was the Fifteenth, which gave blacks the vote.
As the presidential election went to the courts, there arose a chorus of people who say that voting "is the most basic right of every American citizen." One of the LAWYERS who is arguing the Bush case before the United States Supreme Court said that "VOTING IS A FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT." He said that you have as much right to vote as you do to practice your religion, or to free speech.
To repeat, the Fourteenth Amendment gave black people CITIZENSHIP. But it took a real fight to get through the Fifteenth, which gave blacks the VOTE. A lot of people who supported black citizenship did not want all non-whites to be given the vote. This was especially the case in California, with its huge Oriental minority.
In fact, a groundbreaking Federal Court decision was necessary to save the Fourteenth Amendment. It barely squeaked by, cheating and all. Before it was passed, California actually rescinded its ratification. If that had been allowed, the amendment would have failed.
What happened was that Californians suddenly noticed that there was no reference to "black people" in the new amendment. It not only gave Southern blacks citizenship, but it also gave the same rights to Orientals! California tried to pull back its ratification when it realized that the Fourteenth Amendment gave Orientals NON-VOTING citizenship.
California would never have touched the Fourteenth Amendment if they had thought from the beginning that it gave Chinese immigrants the VOTE. In other words, if the people who ratified the Fourteenth Amendment had thought that voting was the right of every citizen, it would never have gotten into the Constitution.
As it was, in order to save the Fourteenth Amendment, the Supreme Court had to rule that no state could back out once it had ratified an amendment.
But when the fight over giving blacks the vote came up, they were already citizens. It never occurred to anybody that they therefore had the right to vote.
Nowadays, it never occurs to anybody that, if you are a citizen, you might not have full voting rights.
Actually, what the Fourteenth Amendment gave blacks was what everybody insists cannot exist. It gave blacks citizenship, but no vote. The Fourteenth Amendment, in other words, made blacks official second class citizens. If it hadn't, there would have been no Fifteenth Amendment.
In 1954, in Brown vs. Board of Education, the Court changed the Fourteenth Amendment. They said that it forbade any distinction at all, of any kind, being made between white and black citizenship.
Today, it is impossible to explain to anybody why the Fifteenth Amendment was necessary. In 1868, it would have been just as impossible to explain to anybody why it wasn't.
There is no overlap whatsoever between the thinking of those who wrote the Constitution (even the most radical) and the judges who claim to interpret it today.
|
|
|
|
| |
Home
| Current Articles | Article Archive | About
Bob Whitaker | Contact Bob | Links
| Privacy
Policy
|
|
|