Here's an oldie I'd like some lefty to spin for me.

[Uncle Bill]

Maybe menmon or Buzz or my favorite Jdogger, can tell me how I should find it in my heart to not consider the current President is one of the most corrupt individuals in US history. Is this the person we should condone, along with his administration???....And the party in which they reside? Maybe our newest lefty from Wisconsin can explain how he views this information, which he may be reading for the first time. Since Ken's poll indicates we have around 11 Obama believers among us, regardless of how that survey wasn't understood correctly, it's my guess it was perceived to be just a popularity poll, and morphed into how members of this message board would vote. If ANY of you have an explanation of how we should view this story, please let me know.

UB


Pigford vs. Glickman


"In 1997, 400 African-American farmers sued the United States Department of Agriculture, alleging that they had been unfairly denied USDA loans due to racial discrimination during the period 1983 to 1997."

The case was entitled "Pigford vs. Glickman" and in 1999, the black farmers won their case.

The government agreed to pay each of them as much as $50,000 to settle their claims.

But then on February 23, 2010 , something shocking happened in relation to that original judgment: In total silence, the USDA agreed to release more funds to "Pigford".

The amount was a staggering...... $1.25 billion. This was because the original number of plaintiffs - 400 black farmers had now swollen, in a class action suit, to include a total of 86,000 black farmers throughout America .

There was only one teensy problem:

The United States of America doesn't have 86,000 black farmers!!!!

According to accurate and totally verifiable Official USDA 2010 Census census data, the total number of black farmers throughout America is only 39,697.

Hmmm... By the Official USDA 1990 Census data the US had only 18,816 black farmers!!

Oops!!

Well, gosh - how on earth did 39,697 explode into the fraudulent 86,000 claims??

And how did $50,000 explode into $1.25 billion??

Well, folks, you'll just have to ask the woman who not only spearheaded this case because of her position in 1997 at the "Rural Development Leadership Network", but whose family received the highest single payout (approximately $13 million) from that action - Shirley Sherrod.

Oops again!!

Yes, folks it appears that Ms. Sherrod had just unwittingly exposed herself as the perpetrator of one of the biggest fraud claims in the history of the United States - - a fraud enabled solely because she screamed racism at the government and cowed them into submission.

And it gets even more interesting...
Ms. Sherrod has also exposed the person who aided and abetted her in this race fraud.

As it turns out, the original judgment of "Pigford vs. Glickman" in 1999 only applied to a total of about 16,000 black farmers.
But....in 2008, a junior US Senator got a law passed to reopen the case and allow more black farmers to sue for funds.

The Senator was Barack Hussein Obama..

Because this law was passed in dead silence, and because the woman responsible for spearheading it was an obscure USDA official, American taxpayers did not realize that they had just been forced in the midst of a worldwide recession to pay out more than $1.25 billion to settle a race claim.

But Andy Breitbart knew. And on Monday, July 22, 2010 , he cleverly laid a trap which Sherrod - - and Obama + his cronies - - stumbled headfirst into which has now resulted in the entire world discovering the existence of this corrupt financial judgment.

As for Ms. Sherrod?? Well, she's discovering too late that her cry of 'racism' to the media which was intended to throw the spotlight on Breitbart has instead thrown that spotlight on herself and the huge corruption.
Sherrod has vanished from public view.

But the perpetrator of that law passed in dead silence leading to unlawful claims & corruption..... Is still trying to fool all of US.

Go to Google and read for yourself "Pigford vs. Glickman", or "Pigford Obama".

As some have said, "The Republic can survive a Barack Obama. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools such as those who continue to keep him as their President."


http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/pigford.asp

[JDogger]

I'm heartened that I am among your favorites, Bill. You are certainly one of mine.

I"ll not spin a word for you, Bill.

The Pigford vs Glickman case was indeed a cluster of unprecedented proportions. It stretched across several adminstrations as I'm sure you're aware, (well maybe not.)

To deviate a little... Not every day, but surely every week, I log on to a variety of online news sources. Fox, CNN, MSNBC, BBC, etc. I also follow the MSP, NBC, CBS, ABC...as time allows. As I eat my dinner I flip between channels regularly. I also follow online blogs, both conservative and liberal. I try to keep myself as widely informed as I have time to do. I try as best I can to follow current events and comments about them. My goal is to take from many sources, as much as I can to make my own best self-informed decisions.
You could do as well also.
Only following Rush and the right wing blogs that dominate your world is your choice. One hears what one wants to hear.

I find that frequently your narrowly confined copy and paste comments do not agree with my observations of current events, but I do not refer to you as a toady.

I hope that answered your question as it may be. I'm sure you'll come back with some personnal insult. JDogger AKA Yer fren' Hugh

[Uncle Bill]

"Only following Rush and the right wing blogs that dominate your world is your choice. One hears what one wants to hear."

Watching ALL the sources you do, while only having one view about what's being stated, is enhancing your knowledge?

Ever try to read some of the founders materials...or some of the men that made a difference?

Ever hear of this guy?

"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.Winston Churchill

Or this one?

"You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich. You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong. You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift. You cannot lift the wage earner up by pulling the wage payer down. You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred. You cannot build character and courage by taking away men's initiative and independence. You cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they could and should do for themselves." - Abraham Lincoln

The danger to America is not Barack Obama, but the citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the presidency.
It will be easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency, than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to an electorate willing to have such a man for their president.
The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails us.
Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince.
The republic can survive a Barack Obama. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools such as those that made him their President.
　
　
The final quote from an anonymous source points our the real problem in this nation, but from the standpoint of a lefty, it has little meaning. Those of the sheeple class will continue to do as the Democrats, socialists, marxists and that belief crowd do, America be damned.

So believe what you want, Hugh. But please don't continue to tell me your MSP is NOT in the bag for your messiah. Furthermore, should you and the rest of the 49% SFN group put this total incompetant back in office, it won't matter what you OR I believe...America will no longer exist as it was handed to us by our fathers. Do you suppose your offspring will recognize you sold them out? I know mine will, because I remind them almost daily what's in store for them if the Obama oligarchy prevails.

UB