Is anyone tired of hearing 'first African American president'??

#51
#51
I'm sure the same people hated the fact that a few years ago marked the first time 2 african american head coaches were in the super bowl and one of them was the first to win one.

See, I don't believe that. It would be easy to just throw out the racism card and call it a day, but I don't think that is really what's going on here. It has to do with being bitter about minority status and race being used as a weapon against conservatives to so long. Minority status has been used as a mechanism to initiate government intervention and grow government power. This has grown some misplaced resentment, perhaps, for those who do not want to see an all-powerful central government.
 
#53
#53
Can African-Americans not be white too?

I've got to be honest I hate the hyphen thing too.

How does it make sense to call someone continent where my (distant) ancestors were from-country where I live now?

And if life originated from Africa aren't we all African-Americans?
 
#54
#54
90% of what you post on this board is negative. It's certainly not limited to this situation. I have had high hopes of both Bush and Obama, and I will be just as quick to be critical of Obama if he fails as I have Bush. I'm not a Democrat. I consider myself a Libertarian. I get pleasure from seeing our Nation prosper not in reveling in every misstep the guy I didn't vote for has. That is the difference between you and me. My views aligned more with Ron Paul's than they did anyone's but out of the two choices I felt I had, I thought Obama was the better one. I'm not blind like some here though. I don't expect everything to go right. But I still have my hopes that it will and I will remain positive until I am proven wrong.
If you voted for Obama over McCain, you're not remotely a Libertarian. Obama is the exact opposite of almost every ideal Libertarians have. I am a Libertarian.
 
#55
#55
He's as much "Caucasian-American" as he is "African-American"

I think the whole "blot in your race" system should be thrown out. I don't think you should get any more, or less, prefence based on your race.

But he is three times as much arab as african.

I suppose that; 'judge us not by the color of our skin but by the content of our character,' was just window dressing?

Isn't Obama 1/2 white?

If by 'white' you mean caucasian, then you should be aware that some caucasians have darker skins than Obama.

Obama is 1/2 caucasian (as far as we know) 3/8 arab and 1/8 'african.'

No, I'm not tired of hearing it. It's considered a milestone by many.

Sort of a false milestone since he isn't African American by law, wouldn't you say??

Again, Obama is Arab-American.
 
#56
#56
If Obama wasn't famous and was walking down the street, and someone asked you what his race is, you know full well what you'd say.

Or you could think of it as him having more African ancestry than any previous president. I don't really understand why the resistance to him being labeled black or African American. What does it matter?

Why should that be totally ignored, in a time when so many Jesse Jacksons and Al Sharptons make the case that minorities are so much more disadvantaged than others? Shouldn't conservatives be using his minority status as proof that they can succeed without government intervention, rather than isolating minorities by mocking his mixed ancestry?

I just don't get it. Just like I don't understand why the world will end now that he'll be president, when McCain wasn't so different.

what you don't understand is that he's black because he's a liberal/sociailist. if he was a black conservative, his fellow lib black leaders would not call him black,if they did, he would be considered an uncle tom. Clarence thomas isn't considered black by the libs, JC watts isn't considered black. any black conservative is not considered black in the eyes of the "black leaders"

the reason sharpton and jackson do well is because they have a liberal media that want to push the liberal agenda.
 
#58
#58
IMO, those complaining that he is called ''the first African-American President'' are much more bothered by the fact that he is that than that he is called that.

In fact, its pretty obvious.

The only thing that is obvious is either your ignorance or your attempt to twist the facts.

Fact, Obama is NOT African-American, Obama IS Arab-American.

End of story.

If Obama wasn't famous and was walking down the street, and someone asked you what his race is, you know full well what you'd say.

Or you could think of it as him having more African ancestry than any previous president. I don't really understand why the resistance to him being labeled black or African American. What does it matter?

Why should that be totally ignored, in a time when so many Jesse Jacksons and Al Sharptons make the case that minorities are so much more disadvantaged than others? Shouldn't conservatives be using his minority status as proof that they can succeed without government intervention, rather than isolating minorities by mocking his mixed ancestry?

I just don't get it. Just like I don't understand why the world will end now that he'll be president, when McCain wasn't so different.

Why don't we call him the first Muslim-America president??

Here is ample evidence of that supposition:

Kenya, once a shining beacon of peaceful democracy in Africa, was hurled into of Odinga fueled violence and ethnic cleansing.

Among the 72 individuals and organizations that contributed money to Odinga's 2007 presidential run in Kenya, Shabbir lists "Friends of Senator B.O." as having donated 66,000,000 Kenyan schillings, about $950,000.

Saif el-Islam Gadhafi, the Libyan strongman's second oldest son, reportedly donated 53,450,000 Kenyan schillings, about $765,000.

(the two top contributors were friends of Obama and the family of Libyan strongman Gadhafi.)

Raila made a deal with the world-champion enemies of the West and democratic freedoms: Moslem fundamentalists.

The deal pledged the support of Kenyan Moslems for Raila's election. In return, as President of Kenya, Raila agrees to 14 actions, listed a) through n) on page two. Read them all, and be sure you're sitting down. Here's a sample:

b) Within 6 months re-write the Constitution of Kenya to recognize Shariah as the only true law sanctioned by the Holy Quran for Muslim declared regions. (they can behead you for drinking a beer, want some Taliban pictures for proof?)

c) With immediate effect dismiss the Commissioner of Police who has allowed himself to be used by heathens and Zionists to oppress the Kenyan Muslim community.

g) Within one year facilitate the establishment of a Shariah court in every Kenyan divisional headquarters. [Note: everywhere in Kenya, not just in "Muslim declared regions."



Barack Hussein Obama speaking on behalf of his 'cuz' Raila Odinga in Kenya.

The 2008 New Year Day atrocity in the Kenyan village Eldoret, about 185 miles northwest of Nairobi, had all the markings of the Rwanda genocide of a decade earlier.

(Remember William J Clinton puling our UN peacekeeping force out of Rwanda so that nearly a million mostly Christian tribesmen could be hacked to death??)

excerpts:

About 50 parishioners were locked into the Assemblies of God church before it was set ablaze. They were mostly women and children. Those who tried to flee were hacked to death by machete-wielding members of a mob numbering 2,000.

By mid-February 2008, more than 1,500 Kenyans were killed. Many were slain by machete-armed attackers. More than 500,000 were displaced by the religious strife. Villages lay in ruin. Many of the atrocities were perpetrated by Muslims against Christians.

The violence was led by supporters of Raila Odinga, the opposition leader who lost the Dec. 27, 2007, presidential election by more than 230,000 votes. Odinga supporters began the genocide hours after the final election results were announced Dec. 30.

Mr. Odinga had the backing of Kenya's Muslim community heading into the election. For months he denied any ties to Muslim leaders, but fell silent when Sheik Abdullahi Abdi, chairman of the National Muslim Leaders Forum, appeared on Kenya television displaying a memorandum of understanding signed on Aug. 29, 2007, by Mr. Odinga and the Muslim leader. Mr. Odinga then denied his denials.

In return for Muslim backing, Mr. Odinga promised to impose a number of measures favored by Muslims if he were elected president. Among these were recognition of "Islam as the only true religion," Islamic leaders would have an "oversight role to monitor activities of ALL other religions," installation of Shariah courts in every jurisdiction, a ban on Christian preaching, replacement of the police commissioner who "allowed himself to be used by heathens and Zionists," adoption of a women's dress code, and bans on alcohol and pork.

Like his father, Jaramogi Oginga Odinga, the main opposition leader in the 1960s and 1970s, Raila Odinga is a Marxist He graduated from East Germany's Magdeburg University in 1970 on a scholarship provided by the East German government. He named his oldest son after Fidel Castro.

Raila Odinga was implicated in the bloody coup attempt in 1982 against then-President Daniel Arap Moi, a close ally of the United States. Kenya has been one of the most stable democracies in Africa since the 1960s. The ethnic cleansing earlier this year was the worst violence in Kenya since that 1982 coup attempt.

Initially, Mr. Odinga was not the favored opposition candidate to stand in the 2007 election against President Mwai Kibaki, who was seeking his second term. However, he received a tremendous boost when Sen. Barack Obama arrived in Kenya in August 2006 to campaign on his behalf. Mr. Obama denies that supporting Mr. Odinga was the intention of his trip, but his actions and local media reports tell otherwise.

Mr. Odinga and Mr. Obama were nearly inseparable throughout Mr. Obama's six-day stay. The two traveled together throughout Kenya and Mr. Obama spoke on behalf of Mr. Odinga at numerous rallies. In contrast, Mr. Obama had only criticism for Kibaki. He lashed out against the Kenyan government shortly after meeting with the president on Aug. 25. "The [Kenyan] people have to suffer over corruption perpetrated by government officials," Mr. Obama announced.

"Kenyans are now yearning for change," he declared. The intent of Mr. Obama's remarks and actions was transparent to Kenyans - he was firmly behind Mr. Odinga.

Mr. Odinga and Mr. Obama had met several times before the 2006 trip. Reports indicate Mr. Odinga visited Mr. Obama during trips to the U.S. in 2004, 2005 and 2006. Mr. Obama sent his foreign policy adviser Mark Lippert to Kenya in early 2006 to coordinate his summer visit. Mr. Obama's August trip coincided with strategizing by Orange Democratic Movement leaders to defeat Mr. Kibaki in the upcoming elections. Mr. Odinga represented the ODM ticket in the presidential race.

Mr. Obama's judgment is seriously called into question when he backs an official with troubling ties to Muslim extremists and whose supporters practice ethnic cleansing and genocide. It was Islamic extremists in Kenya who bombed the U.S. Embassy in 1998, killing more than 200 and injuring thousands. None of this has dissuaded Mr. Obama from maintaining disturbing loyalties.

Then of course NOI leader Louis Farrakhan promised America a bloodbath if Obama wasn't elected.

But who noticed????

BTW, Obama is considered to be a Muslim throughout the Arab world.

I'm sure the same people hated the fact that a few years ago marked the first time 2 african american head coaches were in the super bowl and one of them was the first to win one.

You miss the point.

No one is complaining about having an African-American president, the point of the thread is that we will soon have the first Arab-American president.

Perhaps you can explain why the media keeps hawking the "African-American" angle when that isn't ture???



hating the person and hating the term are 2 different things. Amazing how quick some are to apply the racist label

Talk about denseness and can't see the forest for the trees.

The discussion isn't about use of the term, the thread is about MISUSE of the term.

And while we are at it, let's discuss the NAACP.

The NAACP was formed by the same people who helped bring about the Lenin overthrow of the Russian government, from it's founding it was about 30 years before they had any African-American members, it was about 50 years before they had an African-American president.

So you could say the NAACP isn't about advancement of 'colored people', it is about advancement of marxism.
 
#59
#59
Why don't we call him the first Muslim-America president??

ummm, because he's not Muslim? I'd copy/paste proof but no one would read it

Talk about denseness and can't see the forest for the trees.

The discussion isn't about use of the term, the thread is about MISUSE of the term.

the posts I quoted were not about that.
 
#60
#60
In the eyes of millions of voters, Obama is a black guy. His religion does not change his color.
 
#63
#63
yes, im sitting in my trailer right now with my rebel flag belt buckle, and matching, with a cross burning in the yard screaming white power as i draw swasticas over and over
 
#66
#66
hating the person and hating the term are 2 different things. Amazing how quick some are to apply the racist label


I don't know you well enough to label you anything. What I am saying is that I cannot for the life of me understand why anybody cares what Obama is called, unless it bothers them that he is in fact that. Whether it be African-American or as gsvol would argue Arab-American, it seems patently obvious that the real source of angst is that he falls into one of those categories, not the label itself.



Can African-Americans not be white too?

I've got to be honest I hate the hyphen thing too.

How does it make sense to call someone continent where my (distant) ancestors were from-country where I live now?


And if life originated from Africa aren't we all African-Americans?


I concede that we are all American, first and foremost. Ideally, the hyphen would not be used. But we are probably a century or so away from being past that. More importantly, some people wanting to add an adjective to it, such as "African-" make me no never mind and in fact those who protest it in this context, to me, are really much more in turmoil about the fact that he is African-American than that he is called that.

The only thing that is obvious is either your ignorance or your attempt to twist the facts.

Fact, Obama is NOT African-American, Obama IS Arab-American.

End of story.



Why don't we call him the first Muslim-America president??


Thank you for proving my point. That you chime in as supporti8ng this nonsense and endorse it -- and if anything take a harsher psoition -- tells me I am 1000 % correct in my assessment of what is really going on here.

Again, who cares that some people want to call him African-American? Does that lower your taxes or make the country safer? The title or the feigned outrage at it? Nope.

But this is why the Republican lost in 2008 and are in big trouble overall -- people are tired of these sinister insinuations and dirty name-calling and pandering to our worst instincts. But clearly you are never going to understand that. So keep it up. You only make the left stronger by continuing spewing your hate-filled garbage.
 
#67
#67
I don't know you well enough to label you anything. What I am saying is that I cannot for the life of me understand why anybody cares what Obama is called, unless it bothers them that he is in fact that. Whether it be African-American or as gsvol would argue Arab-American, it seems patently obvious that the real source of angst is that he falls into one of those categories, not the label itself.






I concede that we are all American, first and foremost. Ideally, the hyphen would not be used. But we are probably a century or so away from being past that. More importantly, some people wanting to add an adjective to it, such as "African-" make me no never mind and in fact those who protest it in this context, to me, are really much more in turmoil about the fact that he is African-American than that he is called that.




Thank you for proving my point. That you chime in as supporti8ng this nonsense and endorse it -- and if anything take a harsher psoition -- tells me I am 1000 % correct in my assessment of what is really going on here.

Again, who cares that some people want to call him African-American? Does that lower your taxes or make the country safer? The title or the feigned outrage at it? Nope.

But this is why the Republican lost in 2008 and are in big trouble overall -- people are tired of these sinister insinuations and dirty name-calling and pandering to our worst instincts. But clearly you are never going to understand that. So keep it up. You only make the left stronger by continuing spewing your hate-filled garbage.

1.) Nice to know it only evil right wing people who watch faux news.

2.) You proudly state what side you are on.

Nice!
 
#68
#68
1.) Nice to know it only evil right wing people who watch faux news.

2.) You proudly state what side you are on.

Nice!


Its all relative. I'm left of center, I imagine. But not a fan of Pelosi or Reid. Some things about Obama surely concern me. But I'm probably left of Hillary C on the war.

At any rate, my point is not who is right and who is wrong about what he is and is not. My point is that the real issue is that anyone cares in the first place.
 
#69
#69
Its all relative. I'm left of center, I imagine. But not a fan of Pelosi or Reid. Some things about Obama surely concern me. But I'm probably left of Hillary C on the war.

At any rate, my point is not who is right and who is wrong about what he is and is not. My point is that the real issue is that anyone cares in the first place.

The only point you have is to whine about Faux News and the supposed people who watch it.
 
#70
#70
But this is why the Republican lost in 2008 and are in big trouble overall -- people are tired of these sinister insinuations and dirty name-calling and pandering to our worst instincts. But clearly you are never going to understand that. So keep it up. You only make the left stronger by continuing spewing your hate-filled garbage.

No one has spewed more hate filled garbage than Pelosi, Reid and their cohorts over the last several years. It always amazes me that the left consistantly bashes the right for being intolerant, yet the left will not tolerate anyone who does not benefit their cause.
 
#71
#71
No one has spewed more hate filled garbage than Pelosi, Reid and their cohorts over the last several years. It always amazes me that the left consistantly bashes the right for being intolerant, yet the left will not tolerate anyone who does not benefit their cause.

1.) Only republicans are hateful

2.) Christians should be burned at the stake

3.) Politicians are the answer to the problems we deal with.
 
#74
#74
what you don't understand is that he's black because he's a liberal/sociailist. if he was a black conservative, his fellow lib black leaders would not call him black,if they did, he would be considered an uncle tom. Clarence thomas isn't considered black by the libs, JC watts isn't considered black. any black conservative is not considered black in the eyes of the "black leaders"

the reason sharpton and jackson do well is because they have a liberal media that want to push the liberal agenda.

Speaking of Clarence Thomas, (African-American) Supreme Court Justice;

(Obama picked Thomas as his least favorite justice)

Barrack Hussein Obama:

Barack Obama likes to portray himself as a centrist politician who wants to unite the country, but occasionally his postpartisan mask slips.

"I would not have nominated Clarence Thomas. I don't think that he, I don't think that he was a strong enough jurist or legal thinker at the time for that elevation. Setting aside the fact that I profoundly disagree with his interpretation of a lot of the Constitution."

The Democrat added that he also wouldn't have appointed Antonin Scalia, and perhaps not John Roberts, though he assured the audience that at least they were smart enough for the job.

So let's see. By the time he was nominated, Clarence Thomas had worked in the Missouri Attorney General's office, served as an Assistant Secretary of Education, run the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and sat for a year on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, the nation's second most prominent court. Since his "elevation" to the High Court in 1991, he has also shown himself to be a principled and scholarly jurist.

Meanwhile, as he bids to be America's Commander in Chief, Mr. Obama isn't yet four years out of the Illinois state Senate, has never held a hearing of note of his U.S. Senate subcommittee, and had an unremarkable record as both a "community organizer" and law school lecturer.

Justice Thomas's judicial credentials compare favorably to Mr. Obama's Presidential résumé by any measure. And when it comes to rising from difficult circumstances, Justice Thomas's rural Georgian upbringing makes Mr. Obama's story look like easy street.

Even more troubling is what the Illinois Democrat's answer betrays about his political habits of mind. Asked a question he didn't expect at a rare unscripted event, the rookie candidate didn't merely say he disagreed with Justice Thomas. Instead, he instinctively reverted to the leftwing cliché that the Court's black conservative isn't up to the job while his white conservative colleagues are.

Clarence Thomas has written an autobiography, "My Grandfather's son," it is well worth reading, particularly the part about the false accusations made by leftist African-Americans on his character in an attempt to torpedo his confirmation to the Supreme Court.

13664628.JPG


"I've never doubted the greatness of a country in which a person like me could travel all the way from Pinpoint to Capitol Hill."
~Justice Clarence Thomas

John Doggett interview:

excerpts;

On to the Clarence Thomas and your Senate testimony. How did you meet then-Judge Thomas and what was your impression him? Did you read My Grandfather's Son? What did you think of your mention in it?

I first met Clarence Thomas when he entered Yale Law School in 1971. Clarence was a soft-spoken, solid, conservative student at a school filled with bright, effervescent liberals. Clarence's most outrageous act at Yale was to occasionally come to school in jeans overalls. Clarence wanted to become a corporate lawyer and it was very important to him that he proved that he belonged at that school. Clarence and I were acquaintances, not friends.

We respected each other because we both cared about black people but didn't use that as a crutch. We had many things in common, however, and one of them was a strong commitment to being positive examples of what decent, God-fearing black men can achieve. Like Clarence, I was attracted to the strength of Malcolm X. Like Clarence, I was convinced that all black men in prison were political prisoners. Like Clarence, I eventually came to the conclusion that most men are in prison because they had hurt someone or broken the law.

I have read parts of My Grandfather's Son. I will finish it this summer. I appreciate his mentioning me in his book, but was surprised at how little he said. Both Clarence and his mother told me that if I hadn't testified, he would not be on the court today. I would have appreciated his acknowledging that in his book.

What did you think of Anita Hill?

Anita Hill and I both came to Washington, D.C. in 1981. She had just graduated from Yale Law School and I had just earned my MBA from Harvard Business School. Washington, D.C. attracts men and women who are long on ambition and short on ability. Some climb the political ladder by brown nosing or sleeping their way up. Others try to attach themselves to the star of a rising politico hoping to be swept up in their success. Anita was an obvious star chaser.

Anita's first job was as an associate at the Washington, D.C. law firm of Wald, Harkracker & Ross. Gill Hardy had recruited her for this position. Gill was a black Yale law school grad and senior associate of the firm. Gill was the godfather of black Yale Law School grads in the Washington, D.C. and Baltimore area. He worked hard to make sure that we got to know each other. I met Anita at one of the networking parties that Gill had organized.


Anita Hill makes a good first impression. She appears to be a solid, dark-skinned sister who is concerned about substance. After you talk to her for a little while, however, you start to wonder if the elevator goes all the way up to the top floor. It's not that Anita is not smart; she is just incredibly dull and boring. During the years that we were both in Washington, I occasionally noticed her talking with men at our Yale parties. At first you could see the interest in the guys eyes, and then it started to dim. Eventually the guy would get up and excuse himself, never to come back.

It was clear to most that Anita had a strong desire to attach herself to Clarence. Once, when I walked into Clarence's EEOC office to go to lunch with him, Anita tried to get herself invited to join us. Anita had just walked into the foyer of Clarence's office. She asked why I was there. When I told her that Clarence and I were going to lunch, she asked if she could join us. When I told her that I hadn't seen Clarence for a while and discouraged her from joining us, that didn't stop her. She waited to see if Clarence would invite her to join us. He told her that just the two of us would go to lunch and closed the door in her face. In fact, Clarence never mentioned Anita Hill in the many conversations that we had in the eight years that we both were in Washington, D.C.

I never spent time with Anita alone and only learned by accident that we lived four blocks apart on Capitol Hill. One Saturday, as I was jogging, I ran by her house. Anita was on the porch and called out to me. I was not interested in talking with her, but I didn't want to be rude, so we talked while I jogged in place for two or three minutes. When I said that I had to go, she said, "Since we live so close together, why don't we have dinner sometime?" I told her to give me a call and continued up the street.

Anita called me a week later and we set up a tentative date to go together. On the day we were supposed to go out, I called her and told her that because of business, I would have to cancel. I never called her back. A few months later, a mutual friend called to tell me that black Yale Law grads were having a going away party for Anita. She said that Anita was going to teach at Oral Roberts Law School and wanted to know if I would attend. I almost declined, but decided that since I had not seen many of my friends for a while, I would attend.

I arrived early and as I entered the room, Anita stopped me and asked if she could talk with me in private. We walked over to a corner and she unloaded on me. Anita said:

"John, there is something that I want to tell you. You know, I am really disappointed in you. John, it is not nice to lead women on. You gave me reason to believe that you were interested in me and you never followed up. When you canceled our dinner engagement, you promised to call back and you never did. That's not right. I'm telling you this so that you don't break the heart of another woman after I leave town."

I was dumbfounded, and said, "Anita, I have never been interested in you romantically. I have never wanted to date you. That is why I canceled your proposed dinner date and never called you back. I just didn't want to send the wrong signals. Anita, I have done everything in my power to treat you with respect and to establish a professional relationship with you as a fellow Yale Law School alum. You are dead wrong and I won't let you try to lay a guilt trip on me."

I then walked away from her and have never spoken with her to this day. Nevertheless, Anita's bizarre charge stuck in the back of my mind, to be dredged up eight years later when she resurfaced.
-----------------------------------------
I ran back into the house and told my former wife that Anita Hill was a nut case who had accused me of being interested in her in spite of my having never shown any interest.
continued;
 
#75
#75
I'll never forget the look on Anita's face when Senator Specter asked Anita if she remembered a John Doggett. She panicked because this wasn't part of her script. Her first instinct was to say that she did not remember me, but she realized that they wouldn't bring up my name if they didn't know the connection. When they read my affidavit, she almost became unglued. She knew that my statement seriously undermined her case against Clarence.
--------------------------------------
As I continued to read the transcript, I saw that it was riddled with holes, inconsistencies and pure lies. I also then remembered that Joe Biden, the Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, had announced earlier that day that the Committee would no longer use any evidence that was not introduced by a witness who was testifying under oath before the committee.
-----------------------------------------
As these proud black and brown women talked about their experiences with Clarence and Anita, I realized that they had come to the same conclusions as I had, and I had never met any of them before. Their testimony brought tears to my eyes and I told my former wife that we truly were on the side of Justice.

-------------------------
Now the cynical racists were the staffers to the Democratic Senators, not the Republicans. Now, the people who didn't give a damn about the facts or morality were liberal white Democrats, not Republicans.
------------------
Teddy Kennedy and the Democrats knew how to play to the stationary television cameras. Since Teddy's cousin was getting ready to go to trial on rape charges, Anita Hill's appearance meant that he had to keep his mouth shut. Nevertheless, that didn't mean that he wasn't stage managing things. Often, when the camera focused on the other end of the committee, Senator Ted gave hand signals to his staff or to Biden. In fact, Teddy signaled the start of the infamous Metzenbaum attack on me.

My testimony was a two-act play. The first act covered my background, the details of my affidavit and my responses to questions from the senators. It is my sense that at the end of this act, we were at a draw. I had not delivered a knockout blow to Anita, but they had not been able to sufficiently damage my credibility to neutralize the impact of my affidavit and testimony.

Just when Dean Kothe was starting to tighten the link between his observations with mine, Senator Kennedy gave a hand signal to Biden and Biden left the room. Senator Specter was asking Dean Kothe a question, when suddenly a Democratic staffer appeared next to the Dean. Senator Metzenbaum interrupted Specter, said that he was concerned about the Dean's diabetes and asked if he would like a short break.

This planned attack was the beginning of the second act. The Democrats knew that the Dean, with his white hair and fatherly demeanor, was hurting Anita. They were afraid that if he endorsed my claim that Anita was emotionally unstable, the game would be up. So they decided that it was time to use the "all black men are sex fiends" card against me.


This was a bold and reckless move. If it worked, they would destroy my credibility, and as a result, they would have restored Anita's. If, on the other hand, this attack failed, it was likely to generate sympathy for me. The thing about white liberal Democrats, however, is that their racism prevents them for thinking straight when it comes to black people. I am convinced that the Democrats on the Committee believed that they had let me into Harvard, Yale and Claremont because of my race and that I was as incompetent as the black affirmative action tokens on their staff.

When Senator Metzenbaum started his attack on me, he made three fatal errors. First, he hadn't read the complete transcript that was the source of his information, so he didn't know the facts cold. When you are a litigator, you never cross examine a hostile witness without knowing the facts inside and out. Second, he assumed that I wouldn't attack him. If he had done any background research about me, he would know that this was one black man who did not ever take crap from anyone. His biggest mistake, however, was to give me too much time to think about how to respond.

When Metzenbaum started reading from the transcript, I was incensed. My first reaction was to want to leap across the table and wring his scrawny neck. My former wife sensed this and whispered, "Don't let them get you mad, keep cool, think about your response." As he continued to drone on, the "I'm going to cut your throat" litigator in me came to life. I started thinking about how I could destroy Metzenbaum with my first strike.

I knew that the first six words of my response to his attack would set the tone for the rest of the night. If I seemed at all apologetic or caught off guard, the Committee and the television audience would say, "Hmm, maybe there is something to this." I decided that the fatal flaw in their strategy was that they assumed that I respected and was afraid, or at least in awe, of them.

What they didn't realize was that parents who taught me to judge everyone by the content of their character, not their position or title had raised me. These Democrats also didn't realize that I was one of those Americans who believed that since all government workers, including senators, were being paid by me, they were my employees. And I wasn't about to let one of my employees insult me in public.

I quickly settled on an attack strategy that would give the United States Judiciary Committee a simple choice. I would demand that they immediately apologize to me for impugning my character. Or, they could ask the Capitol Police to arrest me and take me out in handcuffs. That was it. I was not going to stop my counterattack until one or the other of those two choices was selected.

I was going to define the terms of this engagement and was going to take the attack to them. I was not going to back down. I knew that the Democrats would not want to create a furor by having me handcuffed and dragged out of the hearing in front of a national television audience. I knew that I could not lose because I knew that the one thing these racists liberal Democrats would never expect was a frontal assault. I mean, after all, there were eight of them plus their staffers. What they didn't understand was that I was telling the truth, and with God on my side, I had them outnumbered.

What I didn't know at that time was how unprepared Metzenbaum and the other Democrat Senators and staff members were. They had obviously decided to violate their own rules and to use this information if necessary. But they hadn't assumed that the Republicans had been smart enough to give me the transcript or that I had read it.

Just think how it would have seemed if I had asked for a recess so I could read the transcript and "formulate" an answer. I am convinced that much of my success as a Witness for Clarence was my immediate and unrelenting counterattack.

It was not until the next day, when my former wife and I saw a replay of my testimony on C-SPAN did I realize how dramatic this confrontation was on television. For as I held a copy of the transcript in my hand and jumped from page to page showing how inconsistent my assailant's testimony was, the cameras flashed on Senator Metzenbaum. It was a pathetic sight. Here was the imperious Senator looking shell shocked. His hair was awry as his staffers desperately tried, without success, to keep up with my machine gun attack.

Since the Democrat staffers were not litigators, they didn't understand that I was using a standard litigation tactic to keep them off balance. I was jumping at least three to eight pages at a time, as quickly as possible, so that it would be impossible for them to keep track of what I was talking about. I would like to claim that I had figured this out in advance, but frankly, by then God had taken control and I was on autopilot.


Metzenbaum had lost control of the hearing, because by then I was pounding my fist on the table and demanding to have my name cleared then and there. Kennedy motioned to a staffer to get Biden back in. But by that time it was too late.

By using the "all black men are sex fiends who want to screw white woman" card against me, Clarence's attackers were finally exposed for what they were. And, they had insulted America.

What price did you pay for testifying for Clarence Thomas?

When the Clintons came to power, their supporters attacked my business. Within six months, I had lost all of my contacts with the federal government. My 30 employees and I were out of work.

One of my colleagues told me that in 1992 I had won the largest "open competition" contract ever won by a black-owned consulting firm that had never participated in the 8 (a) minority set-aside program. However, due to "normal" government delays, the actual contract was not signed until November 16, twelve days after President Bush lost to Bill Clinton. That signing date was eventually to attract tremendous attention from Anita Hill supporters in the Clinton Administration and in the press.

Most people never know when they first contract cancer. My company was infected by cancer before the project started. In retrospect, it was insane for me to attempt to do anything with the federal government after I testified for Clarence Thomas. When Bill Clinton won, I mistakenly believed that an Administration run by Yale Law School classmates would not target me for elimination. I was wrong.

Anita's supporters in the Clinton Administration destroyed a business that I had spent ten years growing from a one man shop to a 30-person firm with offices in two countries.
 

VN Store



Back
Top