Angela Rye: Persona non grata

Seemed fitting enough, the title. A little HT to one of the Big O's last actions as POTUS. Expelling 35 people to only have them reinstated a month from now by your successor? Seems like President Obama is a bit of a masochist doesnt it? Potentially some pure emasculation here. He just keeps setting these softballs on a tee for Trump. First Carrier now this? But i digress and also flitting enough because this is about electoral afterbirth.

This election cycle was pure comedy gold. One one hand you had a flip flopping blowhard who gave zero's about what anyone thought of him. That was refreshing. On the other hand you had a steaming pile of bile. A posterchild for what exactly ails the country and a PC/liberal wet-dream personified. This was an entertaining shit show through and through. One of the more humorous narratives that came out of this muck was from the left and it went something like this:


'Now we can finally see racists for who they truly are'

'America was never "Great" for anyone not white'


You've all heard this. And while it may be true and in some cases i think if anything it may have emboldened people to speak their minds good, bad or indifferent. Is America really more racist? Or are we actually having conversations that we haven't had the gumption for? The truth of the matter is this - those with the "America is more racist because of Trump" narrative might actually be an admission of guilt themselves. They might not realize it but their narrative is a manifestation of their own racist tendencies. Sort of like the macho dude in high school who calls everyone faggots and is always talking about someone sucking dick. Then you find him 20 yeas later congo dancing at a gay pride event wearing chaps and a leather vest with a ball gag in his mouth, i see you Donnie!

If there was anything gleaned from this election it wasn't race or walls or wars. It was news. How its made. Whos it made for and does it even matter if its correct? Fake news is news and news is fake news. Whos fake and whos real just depends on what flavor you like in your cup of tea. Nowhere is this more comical than CNN.

MSNBC and Fox cater to their audience. Its business. The news is isn't that important. Its not even a vehicle. Just look at the variation of ads on MSNBC and Fox. Its no different than watch a Penguins hockey game on ATT than it is watching the NBA Network. Race, class, gender, family its all been isolated bought and sold for its target market.

If i was running CNN, i would look at the business model of cable news and realize we missed the boat. We created the genre but didn't realize that people weren't tuning in for just the news. What the majority of people were tuning in for was an echo chamber. Sure, they wanted the news but they wanted it prepacked ready for consumption. CNN has no direction. Many days they appear more liberal than the Huffington Post. Most days its a free for all - like a food fight at an old folks home. Messy, slow, sad and just plain embarrassing.


Over the last few months here's some things that stood out watching the train-wreck that is CNN:


Chris Matthews roast fellow liberal Rachel Maddow on Clintons inability to appear as a viable candidate.
Van Jones refer to Trumps election as a "whitelash"
Cancel Mike Rowe's show
Still employe Erin Burnett and Fareed Zakaria
And the never ending gift that is... Angela Rye


I was sitting at a burger king a few days before Christmas (i know & not proud of it but i'm a fat boy who likes quick burgers) and I came across this nugget while consuming my 1100 calories and watching the audio-less aforementioned CNN.

"The Electoral College is problematic from its inception and something that was built upon and designed to oppress certain people,” Rye says. “It is okay for us to ask questions, particularly when we know the Electoral College was built upon a system to protect the interests of slave states.”“We would be remiss if we did not acknowledge that horrible history,”12.21.16

Just a few days before that she said something similar:

"I have every issue with the Electoral College, and I have since before this election. It does not speak for me. I am not supporting a system that was built on the backs of my ancestors who were slaves. I’m not here for it. … That guy is not my president.”

Then there was this very telling interview back from July of this year on CNN...

The fact that his campaign slogan could be, "Make America Great Again," and that pains me and people who look like me to no end. The fact that he could reference something like Operation Wetback in a debate where hundreds of our Mexican brothers and sisters were killed, slaughtered, and taken out of this country because someone didn't allow them to be here anymore is exactly the problem. The last time America was great to me, Fareed, was in 2008 when he was elected President, and ever since then, we've been paying the price for that.
I think, at some point, the issue is, we have to ID -- and by that, I just mean identify -- the fact that so much of this comes from the root of racism and what racism has done to every system in this country. That is what this country was built upon -- or I should say rebuilt upon because that's not how the indigenous people intended. But when white people got here, this was a system that was built upon the systematic oppression of people of color.

Where have we seen this before? A Liberal democrat not accepting the election results. Its 2000 all over again.

She doesn't support a system that doesn't speak for her. Instead she would rather have the popular vote decide everything. The popular vote where you can concentrate on the East and West coast and win thus making everyone else nothing more than spectators. California and New York combined hold 60 million people OR roughly 20% of the population. This is the very reason we are Republic and not a Democracy. The minority thus still has a voice. If you live in Wyoming or Iowa your vote matters.

This is a women who is for people of color. Her Mexican brothers and sisters in tow. She is against the system white people built when they came here. Sorry, she said we "rebuilt upon" because that's not what indigenous people intended their country to be rebuilt (as if said people had a country before said white arrival... yeah, they did not). Remember the root of racism has infected every system in this country according to Rye. So, of course it doesn't work for her. She, a minority that doesn't think protecting state sovereignty is relevant anymore. Her sheer ignorance here would normally be astounding if it wasn't so damn predictable and TIRED.

What happens if she got what she wanted and we went to a direct democracy and the popular vote was all that mattered? What happens if white people started to vote like black people? Where 90% voted one way and that was Democrat/black? But now 90% Republican and White? Say for example in the areas that make up the very middle of the country you want to essentially disqualify from their right to vote? Then, the coasts dont matter. Now the fly over sates accumulate the power. I bet that electoral college wouldn't seem so bad then would it now?

This isn't just some political commentator. This is a race hustling pimp who was executive director of the Congressional Black Caucus. You cannot possibly make this stuff up. This is a women who does not only have no respect for our system - she loathes it. But she dont mind the money that it brings though now does she? Shes bitter and if you're white, in her eyes you're still the oppressor. In fact she called the Republican Party as much. The Republican party is a lot of things and to me, not many are good... but oppression? Nonsense. But thats just it. This isn't about politics as much as it is about vengeance. Because, if we lose the electoral college and much of the middle lose their power to voice their opinions through national elections than there is really only one American alternative. Move to the coasts. Except you might not find such a warm greeting upon your arrival from the likes of this triggered race baiting, race hustling pimp known as Angela Rye.

"All of our lives could be better. One of the most fascinating things about this election to me, Alisyn, is that Donald Trump, a real estate mogul, a developer, has talked about inner cities and never once has talked about gentrification. That would have been a good way to segue into a conversation with African-American voters that's actually productive."
Aired October 26, 2016

Thats right, good 'ol gentrification. This is a classic. This is simply a case of damned if you do and damned if you dont. But when you're entire career is built upon emotion and victimization its only a matter of time before the logic house of cards comes falling down. But hey, this is business too. Race bating crybabys bitching and moaning about "systematic oppression" that nobody suffers from today sells. White liberals eat it up more so than anyone. But everyone likes a good boogeyman. People would much rather have a scapegoat than a kick in the ass. So i get the whole angry black woman angle. Just dont expect me to take you too serious when youre attacking the very system that has been the beacon of light to the rest of the world. The West is indeed the best but im a capitalist too so #StayWoke

Open mouth, insert 86 year - old foot

I have spent many times on this blog blasting the collective, race baiting pimps that make up the Congressional Black Caucus of the US Congress. People for the most part who are elected based solely on their race because of either white liberal guilt or because they live in predominately black areas; so it’s a vote based of their color of their skin and NOT the content on their Character. No, this is not the dream Dr Martin Luther King envisioned some 49 years ago.    

I have spent other times berating the K-Street connection including, but not limited to, the interchangeable seats between public servants and public leeches; however hard to disambiguate the two may be. People like Chris Dodd, Trent Lott or William Delahunt (just to name few of many), scum bag elites who wouldn’t know what a moral compass was if it was stuck on their dashboard GPS giving them directions from one lobby to the next back to Capitol Hill.

But above all and connected to the former two examples (and this by no way means there is not other examples of dead beats and crooks with their fangs in the public coffers) are this notion that being elected into public office is a job. The founders never envisioned people would want to spend their careers in politics.

They had work of their own to do and they made more money doing it. Insert raise after raise, health benefits and a lucrative pensions plan and don’t forget them paid junkets and viola… federally elected officials have one of the most lucrative positions someone with no real world skills can obtain. Don’t believe me, ask recently "retired" Jesse Jackson Jr for his resume.

Now with this in mind, one of the best quotes I have seen in some time came this week over the “Fiscal Cliff” debate.

"We are concluding one of the most unsuccessful Congresses in history, noteworthy not only for its failure to accomplish anything of importance, but also for the poisonous climate of the institution."

This was from Democratic Representative John Dingell of Michigan. Dingell, 86, is the longest serving member of the House, who was elected for the first time in 1955. It was in his Inaugural Address, when Lincoln said that the American people:

''have wisely given their public servants but little power for mischief, and have with equal wisdom provided for the return of that little to their own hands at very short intervals.''

Its safe to Mr Dingell never read the address. Over 50 years in congress it’s apparent he’s been inside the beltway too long that he cant see that the real reason for this poisonous climate of the institution is his (and others like him) refusal to return that power of mischief back in short intervals. Instead, he and his ilk have done nothing but rape the virtue of this country and kick & scream when a little gridlock prevents them from getting their filthy hands in the till. Where is the Queen of Hearts when we need her?

Tired? Or tired of living a lie?

"On Sunday, June 10th, Congressman Jesse L. Jackson,Jr. went on a medical leave of absence and is being treated for exhaustion

Exhaustion? For a part-time job where you collect 150K in salary and are granted all the travel and benefits of a celebrity with no work history to speak of. Tired, from holding a position in congress because of nothing more than being the son of a charlatan who is an alleged “face” of black America? Seems legit (sic).  

Then it dawned on me. Maybe he is tired of being under scrutiny via the House ethics investigation? Could Jesse Jackson’s son be troubled by pesky ethics investigation? I would say the apple doesn’t fall very far from the tree, so that cannot be it. Maybe, just maybe he is literally tired from travel? Jet lag is a real problem and Jesse Jackson Jr has done plenty of travel via paid junkets during his time in DC.

So I took a visit over to Legistorm.com and what I found was pretty telling. Now Jackson’s 58 trips don’t come close to Maxine Waters (who at last count was the leading trip taker with over 100 trips) but I suppose all paid expense trips with a part time gig that pays six-figures can be stressing.

Now what I found interesting when looking over these paid junket trips was that many names on the most traveled list were names from members on the CBC.

If you exclude those congress members that were not holding office for any reason due to things such as election loss, retirement or death; Democrats would make up 20 of 20 in the top trip takers.

Of those Top-20 trip takers, 13 of them are members of the Congressional Black Caucus. That means 2/3 of the Top-20 come from a caucus divided by race that is not only a minority in society but a minority in congress as well, with only 40 members. If the 112 Congress has 435 Representatives and the CBC has 40 members (9%) isn’t 65% of the Top-20 trip takers out of synch statistically?

This Caucus jet sets around the country to allegedly speak about issues pertaining to black people. I suppose that is noble. Is it logical? Not according to the Constitution. After all, are not the members of congress representing a district in a state first and foremost? And if so, are these districts not composed of all types of races and ethnic groups?

How can we understand this idea that elected members of congress only bound by their skin tone, elected from various districts across the country by all types of ethnicity travel all over the country to cater to the ideas and needs of one ethnic group over everyone else actually help the districts they were elected to represent?

I simply cannot understand how this is acceptable.

Unless you have a district composed of 100% Black Americans, its disingenuous to cater to said Black American’s because you represent a district, not an ethnicity. However, if it was entirely made up of black folks; then it’s a different matter. But no district is that way.

For example, if I am white and vote in the 5^th district of Missouri and I voted for Emanuel Cleaver because I am a staunch Democrat; how does he truly represent me? If he is traveling across the country focused on the needs of Black Americans in the state of California, sharing the needs of those in Missouri its obvious he represents the needs of Black Americans in his district but what about everyone else, does he value their needs as well?   

The answer is clear; he doesn’t… well at least not as much as he does those of similar skin tone. And this isn’t just some anecdotal scenario I made up to make my point lacking data; the data is there. The fact is that 13 of the 40 members of the 112th Congressional Black Caucus represented areas where black folks were the minority. So we have 13 members of Congress on the Top-20 traveled list from the 40 member CBC. And 13 of the 40 districts in the CBC are not even black as a majority. This to me is astounding. But what does it all mean?

It means that the Congressional Black Caucus is no different than any other group of collectivists. They are limited by their own narrow definitions that they oppose and because of this opposition it’s ironically what also defines them by default. Where is the outrage? Where is the indignation for a group that is fueled not only by division and bound by their hunger for power and job security? Because remember, if Black Americans no longer voted strictly by race and political affiliations, wouldn’t these “race hustling pimps” be out of a job?

Some absolutely would. So at the end of the day, what works best for “Black America”? The politicians that keep them isolated and divided from other races, as if they can’t do for themselves? Or is it the idea of freedom, the idea that nobody should be judged on their content of their skin but yet the content of their character?

The more social programs and special attention you give to Black Americans the more you ostracize them as a whole. The division that exists in this country whether it is: political, race, religious etc is real but it can all be cured if people chose freedom and held individual liberty above all. The CBC pits race vs race. It attempts to take from one person and give to another in the name of the greater good, even at the expense of the person they are sworn to be helping. There is actual black on black crime and there is this. These are not crimes in the literal sense, but make no mistake; this is a betrayal of the highest order.   

Bring on the Cleaver: the Congressional Black Caucus does what they do best.

The death of Trayvon Martin has divided people in many ways; be it politically, ethnically or racially. The amount of vitriol we have seen regarding this tragedy has only been rivaled by the amount of hyperbole that accompanies it. I have already exposed the racebaiters a few weeks ago, so no need to do that again. This time I want to call out the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC). 

Now what happened in that case with Martin and Zimmerman is still pending, so for me to comment would be unfair. I have made comments before regarding this matter and after I took a step back and looked at it from a wide vantage point; I find it’s just not logical to continue to do so until after the case has been closed. With that said, there is no denying people who are profiteers off of segregation have taken the opportunity to do so.

Released in a 4-page resolution this week, sponsored by CBC Chairman Emmanuel Cleaver, the CBC backed resolution calls to address the controversial “stand your ground” law and in that report is also states that Zimmerman used quote:

“unfounded assumptions and racial bias led to the use of deadly force.”

Just one problem Mr Cleaver. We have no basis or evidence that there was racial bias involved. CNN has corrected their version where they had Zimmerman saying “coon” on the 9-11 tapes to now “cold” and NBC blames a terrible edit which made Zimmerman look racist. Other then those now corrected errors, how can we draw an “assumption” or conclude there was “racial bias” involved in this case? How can Zimmerman be described as a racist? We can’t. Being that as it may be, that doesn’t stop members from an organization who lines their pockets via race card games, people who are elected many times due to their race, from using this to maximize political capital.

Let’s just pretend that this racial segregation in the form of representative caucuses is acceptable for a moment. Would it not be understandable to expect elected representatives to at least be representing the views of the dominant ethnicity of their district? Take for example; Maxine Waters, who represents the 35^th district of California. Only 35% of her constituency is black, 47% of it is Hispanic. Why isn’t she in the Hispanic caucus? Or what about Keith Ellison, who has 73% of his district identifying themselves as White?

Out of 40 members that make up the CBC, thirteen of them are representing districts that are not predominantly black. These districts show African Americans being a minority demographic, and in some cases behind both White and Hispanic populations. Yet you have politicians being elected to serve a minority demographic first and foremost, despite the fact that it took the votes from other larger racial demographics to get them elected in the first place.

The most audacious however and symbolic of this utter hypocrisy, is the Chairman of the CBC, Emmanuel Cleaver who sponsored this resolution. Mr Cleaver who has sixty-nine percent of his district being white is rushing to judgment to label this man a racist, even thou there is not information to conclude Zimmerman was what he was being accused of. Again, 69% of Mr Cleavers district is white. Yet he is chair of the Congressional “Black” Caucus, elected out of Missouri and condemning a some random Joe six-pack in Florida, some 1,200 miles away of being... racist?

Mr Zimmerman may or may not be a lot of things. Does he appear to be a creepy guy, a wannabe cop, and reckless… obviously. A murderer? It appears so, but again, the case is still pending. But, a racist? The evidence to this point states he is not and unless there is something totally unforeseen, it appears he is not a guy using “racial bias”. 

Even if CNN and NBC corrected themselves and that may have led some to believe he was a racist, I don’t see anyone from the CBC pulling back their slenderest remarks or resolutions. Ironically, the only thing we can absolutely derive from this event is that the Congressional Black Caucus is build upon segregation, intimidation, collectivism and racism. If anyone should be condemned for relying on "unfounded assumptions", its the CBC. If anyone is guilty of “racial bias” it’s the Congressional Black Caucus.

2012: the Year of the Bible (but only the parts we like)

As some of you may or may not know, Pennsylvania this year actually passed a bill that declared 2012: the Year of the Bible. I have no idea what that means, seems to me, 2012's year after the persecution and death of Jesus is a rather ambiguous point to set something as important as “the year” of the Bible, but this state and country “continues to face great tests and challenges” according to the author of the bill, Rep Rick Saccone (R). Thus it was said… 2012: The year of the Bible. It was also a total whitewash in support as the bill passed by a whopping 193-0 vote in the state assembly too! And who said there was no longer any bi-partisanship?

Well, if you were like me, you didn’t pay anymore attention to this piece of news then did the 193 people who glossed over the five-billion dollar state deficit did. Obviously, within the first few weeks of the new year, this crucial piece of legislation had to go through. I mean, what would we have done without our state rep's branding the Bible as the book of the year? Funny, 193 elected officials sitting around declaring 2012:  the Year of the Bible, while authorizing the purchasing of a 100 million dollar building in Harrisburg even as the state is drowning in again, 5 Billion dollars of red ink this year. I have no idea why government is so ineffective?

Now, what gets me, is that here you have 2012 being passed into law as the Year of the Bible. And this isn’t a partisan issue, again, 193 elected officials for it, none against it. So you have all this overwhelming support and an organization, who opposed the bill decided to put up a quote from the Bible entitled: “Slaves, obey your masters." Biblically speaking, its accurate… but yet you have that organization chastised by some of the 193 for it? Seems, kind of strange, I thought 2012 was: the Year of the Bible?

And that’s where the humor comes in. It is the Year of the Bible, its just not part of the Bible… the 193 like. Typical really…but hypocritical and hilarious at the same time? You betcha’.  

State Rep. Ronald G. Waters, chairman of the Pennsylvania Legislative Black Caucus wrote a letter condemning the billboard company (Lamar) for putting up the message from the Bible with an African man in bondage. Mr Waters went on to say "This image and mere reminder of slavery are offensive to minority citizens in the city of Harrisburg”. Fair enough, but is the billboard not truthful?

Were black folks not slaves at one point here in this nation? Obviously, the Bible was talking about the plight of Jews and Jewish law, but the word "slavery" here in this nation, does not make one think of slaves from 3k years ago Because we have a rather recent and dubious history with the word here. Does the Bible have a verse that commands slaves to “Obey your masters? If this is truly the: Year of the Bible, I suppose we ought to consider actually celebrating all of it, not just the parts that we don’t like or choose to ignore. After all, its not Year of the Bible chapters that aren't offensive, is it? Although, that would be the logical thing to do, in this context, logic isn’t useful when discussing the book of the year.

Maybe, just maybe, Mr Waters ought to consider the minority of people who didn’t want 2012 to be the Year of the Bible and used a billboard to demonstrate that. He had no problem passing this bill, which clearly would/could be found to be offensive by another type of minority as well. And therein lies the problem.

Mr Waters does not seem to care about the minority offended by this bill. However, he does care for the minority (his minority) that might be offended for displaying our history and quoting the book…that has been passed into law (by his own vote) as the: Book of the Year? There is a lesson to be learned from this and its one most people don't do enough of. That is, thinking for oneself. From political parties, caucuses inside those political parties, hate groups, religions etc etc… collectivism is a dangerous ideal that relies on double standards, ignorance and division. Don't be a slave to it.

Think for yourself and question authority – Timothy Leary

When is close, too close?

In my week off, a great investigation from the Washington post was published surrounding all members of both the House and Senate and its findings were quite detailed and very telling of the dysfunction that lies in the heart of Washington. If there is a reason for this blog its stated in the subtitle and out of the 47 members being investigated; its only fitting that we have 22 vs 25 representing both party's almost equally (22 R vs 25 D). The most telling of this investigation however, in my opinion, is the relationships of sons and daughters to their parents who are elected representatives. This regardless of how innocent the situation appears and it very well may be; it should always be looked down upon as unethical.


Now some of these findings appear to be a big reach as far as corruption is concerned, if nothing more then totally coincidental. For example, Rick Rahall, a Democrat Congressman from West Virginia, who ear-marked 20 million for a parking garage with a bus and taxi facility in downtown Beckley WV. The rub is the construction sits a half a mile from his sons home and about a mile from one of  the congressman's personal property's. Ive been through Beckley West Virginia many times on my way to Florida and its "downtown" is small enough that downtown basically fits inside a mile or at the most a two mile radius; so its not as if the property's could avoid nestling up to one another in that postage stamp.


While some of the others tend to look like outright nepotism. Take for instance, representative Corrine Brown (D) of Florida. This was from the Washington Post investigation:

Between 2005 and 2010, Brown helped secure $21.9 million for six clients of a lobbying firm where her daughter works. The clients paid the firm more than $1 million to represent them before Congress. Brown was the sole sponsor of $1.79 million in earmarks sent to a seventh client, the Community Rehabilitation Center, while her daughter worked as a lobbyist on behalf of the center, the Florida Times-Union reported in 2010. The congresswoman declined requests for an interview. Her daughter did not respond to requests for comment.

According to Sen. Bill Nelson, also a Democrat, was a co-sponsor for the pork containing the rehabilitation center. After learning about the connection to Corrine's Daughter he bailed and rightfully so:

“We try to do our due diligence. The center had the backing of many community leaders,” Nelson spokesman Bryan Gulley told the Post. “But when we learned her daughter was involved in lobbying for the center, that raised enough concerns that we no longer supported the project.”

This wasn't the first time Rep Brown was in hot water because of her lobbyist daughter. There was the situation in 1998 where a millionaire ex-con (Foutanga Bit Babani Sissoko) who just before he was sent to prison, turned around and handed Corrine Browns daughter the keys to a brand new 50K Lexus. Then it was said Mrs Brown "led a feverish lobbying campaign" to then Attorney General Janet Reno for his pardon. I'm sure some type of vote down the road required by the Clinton Administration would be sufficient payment enough? 


According to Sissoko's lawyer however, the car was meant for Brown herself... I wonder why she didn't take it? Sissoko, being from West Africa, might not understand the ethical concerns of that - but you can be sure Brown did; hence the re-gifting of the vehicle to her daughter. The same lobbyist daughter who would join her mother on long weekends (and there were many of them) in one of Sissoko's lavish Miami property's. 

Mrs Brown is certainty not the worst offender on this list in terms of dollar amounts but it raises some serious questions about ethics when you have a sitting member of Congress doling out billions of dollars to company's or organizations that are represented by family members of said Congressmen. The relationship between Congress and lobbying  is already too close for comfort but when you factor in family members working on K-Street it just opens up an entire new paradigm. One that only tightens the grip special interest has on our coffers.