Posted by Big Yogi

So you wanna know what some people really think about Barack Obama? While we witness the first real chance at having an African American President we are also witnessing an emergence of outspoken ignorance by people all around the country. Now we know that racism is alive today and most minorities deal with some type of racist act throughout their lives but there is something different in the way some people are taking the success of Barack in the Presidential campaign. Barack Obama just so happens to be the voice of change and “CHANGE” is his favorite word right now. But what does that change mean for many? If you’v paid any attetion to the news lately, race is becoming more and more of a factor in choosing the next leader of our nation and even hard core Democrats are willing to abandon political affiliation and vote Republican just to prevent a man of African American Decent from becoming President (funny thing is it doesn’t help when ur name is Barack Hussein Obama, thats a double whammy, Hussein and Osama similarity).

One the other hand no African American candidate has gained so much support by the people and the politicians of our country. So whats the issue? The issue is that the ugly face of racism is showing more and more out in public in reaction to the Presidential race. Recent occurences including reactions from the West Virginia voters, comments made on FOX news, and even more comments made by Bill O’Reilly about “lynching” Michelle Obama have set off some alarms.

Take a look at this video from the West Virginia Primaries and listen to the reaction from Democrats in that area had to say.

WATCH and DISCUSS

Now take a look at this video from FOX NEWS. The women even tries to call him Osama! Wow. Believe me she is not the only one who thinks like this.

WATCH, DISCUSS, and PREPARE

Even everyone’s favorite Shock Value news correspondent Bill O’Reilly has made comments on “Lynching” Michelle Obama. On a good note Star Jones stepped away from her daily Star attention-o-thon to respond to O’Reilly’s comments. Check out what they both had to say.

Bill O’Reilly said:

‘I don’t want to go on a lynching party against Michelle Obama unless
there’s evidence, hard facts, that say this is how the woman really
feels. If that’s how she really feels - that this is a bad country or a
flawed nation, whatever - then that’s legit. We’ll track it down.’

Star Jones said:

‘I’m sick to death of people like Fox News host, Bill O’Reilly, and his
ilk thinking that he can use a racial slur against a Black woman who
could be the next First Lady of the United States, give a half- ‘A’
apology and not be taken to task and called on his crap.

What the H ? If it’s ‘legit,’ you’re going to ‘track it down?’ And
then what do you plan to do? How dare this white man with a microphone
and the trust of the public think that in 2008, he can still put the
words ‘lynch and party’ together in the same sentence with reference to
a Black woman; in this case, Michelle Obama? I don’t care how you ’spin
it’ in the ‘no spin zone,’ that statement in and of itself is racist,
unacceptable and inappropriate on every level.

O’Reilly claims his comments were taken out of context. Please don’t
insult my intelligence while you’re insulting me. I’ve read the comments
and heard them delivered in O’Reilly’s own voice; and there is no right
context that exists. So, his insincere apology and ‘out-of-context’
excuse is not going to cut it with me.

And just so we’re clear, this has nothing to do with the 2008
presidential election, me being a Democrat, him claiming to be
Independent while talking Republican, the liberal media or a
conservative point of view. To the contrary, this is about crossing a
line in the sand that needs to be drawn based on history, dignity, taste
and truth.

Bill, I’m not sure of where you come from, but let me tell you what the
phrase ‘lynching party’ conjures up to me, a Black woman born in North
Carolina. Those words depict the image of a group of white men who are
angry with the state of their own lives getting together, drinking more
than they need to drink, lamenting how some Black person has moved
forward (usually ahead of them in stature or dignity), and had the
audacity to think that they are equal. These same men for years, instead
of looking at what changes, they should and could make in their own
lives that might remove that bitterness born of perceived privilege,
these white men take all of that resentment and anger and decide to get
together and drag the closest Black person near them to their death by
hanging them from a tree - usually after violent beating, torturing and
violating their human dignity. Check your history books, because you
don’t need a masters or a law degree from Harvard to know that is what
constitutes a ‘lynching party.’

Imagine, Michelle and Barack Obama having the audacity to think that
they have the right to the American dream, hopes, and ideals. O’Reilly
must think to himself: how dare they have the arrogance to think they
can stand in front of this nation, challenge the status quo and express
the frustration of millions? When this happens, the first thing that
comes to mind for O’Reilly and people like him is: ‘it’s time for a
party.’

Not so fast…don’t order the rope just yet. Would O’Reilly ever in a
million years use this phrase with reference to Elizabeth Edwards, Cindy
McCain or Judi Nathan? I mean, in all of the statements and criticisms
that were made about Judi Nathan, the one-time mistress turned missus,
of former presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani, I never heard any talk
of forming a lynch party because of something she said or did.

So why is it that when you’re referring to someone who’s
African-American you must dig to a historical place of pain, agony and
death to symbolize your feelings? Lynching is not a joke to off-handedly
throw around and it is not a metaphor that has a place in political
commentary; provocative or otherwise. I admit that I come from a place
of personal outrage here having buried my 90 year-old grandfather last
year. This proud, amazing African-American man raised his family through
the time when he had to use separate water fountains, ride in the back
of a bus, take his wife on a date to the ‘colored section’
of a movie theater, and avert his eyes when a white woman walked down
the street for fear of what a white man and his cronies might do if they
felt the urge to ‘party’; don’t tell me that the phrase you chose, Mr.
O’Reilly, was taken out of context.

To add insult to injury, O’Reilly tried to ‘clarify’ his statements, by
using the excuse that his comments were reminiscent of Supreme Court
Justice Clarence Thomas’ use of the term ‘high-tech lynching’ during his
confirmation hearing. I reject that analogy. You see, Justice Thomas did
mean to bring up the image of lynching in its racist context. He was
saying that politics and the media were using a new technology to do to
him what had been done to Black men for many years — hang him.
Regardless of if you agreed with Justice Thomas’
premise or not, if in fact — Bill O’Reilly was referencing it — the
context becomes even clearer.

What annoys me more than anything is that I get the feeling that one of
the reasons Bill O’Reilly made this statement, thinking he could get
away with it in the first place, and then followed it up with a lame
apology in a half-hearted attempt to smooth any ruffled feathers, is
because he doesn’t think that Black women will come out and go after him
when he goes after us. Well, he’s dead wrong. Be clear, Bill O’Reilly:
there will be no lynch party for that Black woman. And this Black woman
assures you that if you come for her, you come for all of us.’ — Star
Jones Reynolds.