My Substitute Reality -You're just jealous cause the little voices only talk to me-

Here’s another post from my buddy Grouchy Old Cripple.  He calls em like he sees em and I agree with everything he says here.

http://grouchyoldcripple.com/2013/11/new-eupemism/

“Remember how the LSM had to make up a new demographic, “white Hispanic” to brand George Zimmerman a white racist in the St. Trayvon of Skittles circus? Yeah. Me too. Now, the New York Slimes (motto: All the news that fits our views) has made up a new euphemism for lie. It’s called an “incorrect promise”. (Thanks to Roger in the comments for alerting me to this.) That’s how they are defending Jug Hussein Ears Downgrade’s promise that Americans could keep their doctors and their health plans if they liked them, period. No asterisk. No caveats. Period! He was not lying to us. He was just making an incorrect promise to us. Get it? Nudge. Nudge. Wink. Wink. They must think we’ll believe anything and why not. We elected and reelected someone to the highest office in the land who is woefully incompetent and was totally unprepared to govern even though Valerie Jarrett said they were ready “to rule from day one”. All he’s good at is campaigning and reading words someone else has written for him off a TelePrompTer.

So now that the Dimocrats have seen what a disaster Obummercare is they’re running away from it. There’s panic in the ranks. It’s like someone has turned on the lights and the cockroaches are scurrying for cover.

Ted Cruz was right. Mike Lee was right. Mitt Romney was right. Paul Ryan was right. The Republican Party was right. No Republicans voted for this job killing and healthcare destroying bill. It was rammed down the throats of the American people in the dead of night and was passed using legislative tricks. I was right. The Tea Party was right. The right side of the Blogosphere was right. The only people wrong were Obungler, Dimocrats, the LSM, and liberals progressives and rat bastard commies. How do like Obummercare now America? How do you like the Obamessiah? How’s that hopey changey stuff working out for you? Sarah Palin was right. Now that really has to hurt you Obumbler minions! Sarah Palin was right and Oblunder, Plugs, exSpeaker Blinky, and Horrible Harry were wrong.

Just wait. Even though Ditzy Debbie Whatshername Sluts think Dimocrats will win running on Obummercare next year, most of her party doesn’t and I hear that Obeavis has delayed still more of Obummercare until after the 2014 election.

So now we’re gonna have Dimocrats running to “fix” Obummercare. Got that? Fix it. Not repeal it but fix it. The only fix that will work is to scrap the whole thing and start all over from scratch and actually draft a bipartisan bill and a bill that we won’t have to “pass it so we can find out what’s in it”. We need to see what’s in it before we pass it. (Stuff like this is why we shouldn’t elect booger eatin’ moh-rons to Congress) We need to do this in the open (like Obutthead said when he made the “incorrect promise” that that was what he would do with all legislation. He obviously specializes in incorrect promises) and not behind closed doors. We need a bill that the American people will support, not one that they are against.

Unfortunately, the American electorate is made up of idiots. I have made this prediction before. Mary Landreiu, Mark Pryor, and the rest of the red state Dimocrats are running away from Obummercare. They voted for it. They own it. Now, they’re gonna tell their constituents that they’re gonna fix it. It’s sad to say that the American electoate is dumb enough to believe this bullshit. I’m predicting here that five of the ten red state Dimocrat senators running for reelection will be reelected. No. I have no faith in the American electorate. Exhibit A? Obeauzeau.

We’re doomed!”

Here’s a great article from Forbes that really answer the question “Is Obama’s recovery really a good one?”

Well, the article really asks if Obama could be our worst president but I think that’s a given by now.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterferrara/2013/06/02/economically-could-obama-be-americas-worst-president/

“The recession ended four years ago, according to the National Bureau of Economic Research. So Obamanomics has had plenty of time to produce a solid recovery. In fact, since the American historical record is the worse the recession, the stronger the recovery, Obama should have had an easy time producing a booming recovery by now.

Obama likes to tout that we are doing better now than at the worst of the recession. But every recovery is better than the recession, by definition. So that doesn’t mean much.

The right measure and comparison for Obama’s record is not to compare the recovery to the recession, but to compare Obama’s recovery with other recoveries from other recessions since the Great Depression. By that measure, what is clear is that Obamanomics has produced the worst recovery from a recession since the Great Depression, worse than what every other President who has faced a recession has achieved since the Great Depression.

In the 10 previous recessions since the Great Depression, prior to this last recession, the economy recovered all jobs lost during the recession after an average of 25 months after the prior jobs peak (when the recession began), according to the records kept by the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis. So the job effects of prior post Depression recessions have lasted an average of about 2 years. But under President Obama, by April, 2013, 64 months after the prior jobs peak, almost 5½ years, we still have not recovered all of the recession’s job losses. In April, 2013, there were an estimated 135.474 million American workers employed, still down about 2.6 million jobs from the prior peak of 138.056 million in January, 2008.

Ronald Reagan suffered a severe recession starting in 1981, which resulted from the monetary policy that broke the back of the roaring 1970s inflation. But all the job losses of that recession were recovered after 28 months, with the recovery fueled by traditional pro-growth policies. By this point in the Reagan recovery, 64 months after the recession started, jobs had grown 9.5% higher than where they were when the recession started, representing an increase of about 10 million more jobs. By contrast, in April, 2013, jobs in the Obama recovery were still about 2% below where they were when the recession started, about 2 ½ million less, or a shortfall of about 10 million jobs if you count population growth since the recession started, as discussed below.

Obama’s so-called recovery included the longest period since the Great Depression with unemployment above 8%, 43 months, from February, 2009, when Obama’s so-called stimulus costing nearly $1 trillion was passed, until August, 2012. It also included the longest period since the Great Depression with unemployment at 9.0% or above, 30 months, from April, 2009, until September, 2011. In fact, during the entire 65 years from January, 1948 to January, 2013, there were no months with unemployment over 8%, except for 26 months during the bitter 1981 – 1982 recession, which slayed the historic inflation of the 1970s. That is how inconsistent with the prior history of the American economy President Obama’s extended unemployment has been. That is some fundamental transformation of America.

Moreover, that U3 unemployment rate does not count the millions who have dropped out of the labor force during the recession and President Obama’s worst recovery since the Great Depression, who are not counted as unemployed because they are not considered in the work force. Even though the employment age population has increased by 12 million since the recession began, only 1 million more Americans are counted as in the labor force. With normal labor force participation rates, that implies another 7.3 million missing U.S. jobs, on top of the 2 ½ million missing jobs we are still short from when the recession began, for a total of about 10 million missing jobs.

If America enjoyed the same labor force participation rate as in 2008, the unemployment rate in December, 2012 would have been about 11%, compared to the monthly low of 4.4% in December, 2007, under President George Bush and his “failed” economic policies of the past. We will not see 4.4% unemployment again, without another fundamental transformation of America’s economic policies.

The number of unemployed in January, 2013, at the end of President Obama’s first term, was 7.7 million. Another 7.9 million were “employed part time for economic reasons.” The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) reports, “These individuals were working part time because their hours had been cut back or because they were unable to find a full-time job.”

Another 2.3 million were “marginally attached to the work force.” The BLS reports, “These individuals…wanted and were available for work, and had looked for a job sometime in the prior 12 months. [But] [t]hey were not counted as unemployed because they had not searched for work in the 4 weeks preceding the survey.”

That puts the total army of the unemployed or underemployed at nearly 18 million Americans in January, 2013. They are all counted in the BLS calculation of the U6 unemployment rate, which still totaled 13.9% that month.

But the Shadow Government Statistics website for nfl picks also includes in its “SGS Alternative Unemployment Rate” long term discouraged workers, those who wanted and were available for work for more than a year, and had looked for a job, but not in the prior 4 weeks. That is how the BLS U6 unemployment rate was calculated prior to the changes made in the early 1990s under the Clinton Administration. Including these workers as well raises the SGS unemployment rate for April, 2013 to 23%. That seems more consistent with how the economy still feels for the majority of Americans, despite Democrat Party controlled media cheerleading.

This utterly failed jobs record of Obamanomics reflects the more basic reality that the economy has not been growing under President Obama. In the 10 post depression recessions before President Obama, the economy recovered the lost GDP during the recession within an average of 4.5 quarters after the recession started. But it took Obama’s recovery 16 quarters, or 4 years, to reach that point. Today, 21 quarters, or 5 plus years, after the recession started, the economy (real GDP) has grown just 3.2% above where it was when the recession started. By sharp contrast, at this point in the Reagan recovery, the economy had boomed by 18.6%, almost one fifth.

Obama’s economic performance has even been much worse than Bush’s. Jeffrey H. Anderson, a senior fellow at the Pacific Research Institute, writes in Investors Business Daily on January 13, “Prior to Obama, the second term of President Bush featured the weakest gains in the gross domestic product in some time, with average annual (inflation-adjusted) GDP growth of just 1.9%, [according to the official stats at the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA)]” But average annual real GDP growth during Obama’s entire first term was less than half as much at a pitiful 0.8%, according to the same official source.

Even Jimmy Carter produced 4 times as much economic growth during his one term as Obama did during his entire first term. In fact, as Anderson notes, real GDP growth under Obama has been the worst of any President in the last 60 years!

But it’s even worse than that. Obama’s real GDP growth has actually been less than half as much as the worst of any President in the last 60 years. In other words, even if you doubled actual GDP growth under President Obama, it would still be the worst record of any President in the last 60 years!

Anderson adds, “In fact, the real GDP in 2009 was lower than it had been three years earlier (in 2006).” That has happened only twice before in the last 100 years at least, maybe in American history. One was in 1933 and 1934, at the height of the Great Depression. The other was in 1946 – 1948, when the World War II economy was powering down.

And what happened in the years after those two experiences? From 1935 – 1937, real GDP growth reached a peak of 13.1% in one year (1936). From 1949 – 1951, real GDP growth reached a peak of 8.7% (in 1950). That reflects once again the basic principle for the American economy that the worse the recession, the stronger the recovery. That is what Obama should have produced for America. But under Obama, real GDP growth in the following years, 2010 – 2012, peaked at only 2.4% (in 2010). “[A]nd never again hit even that meager mark in the two years following ObamaCare’s passage,” Anderson adds. Yes, Obama and his sycophants really are transforming America, into a banana republic.

Even if the economy finally breaks out into some real growth during this year, that is only because of the long overdue real recovery that is still straining to break out inside this economy, as indicated by the data above for 1936, in the depths of the depression, and the postwar boom that started in 1950. That and the startling Reagan recovery from the 1970s are the standard for Obamanomics. Don’t be fooled by some way overdue short term growth spurt this year that just reflects the basic cycles of the economy. Unless the fundamentals of Obamanomics are changed, the result will be long term stagnation compared to the historic, world leading, booming economic growth of the American Dream.

In his 2013 State of the Union Address, President Obama said, “A growing economy that creates good, middle class jobs, that must be the North Star that guides our efforts.” But the slow growth, and negligible job creation under Obama, in turn have caused steeply declining middle class incomes. The latest numbers compiled from the Census Bureau’s Current Population Survey show that real median household income declined by more than $4,500 during Obama’s first term, about 8%, meaning effectively that the middle class has lost annually the equivalent of one month’s pay under Obama. Even President Bush again did better during his disastrous second term, when real median household income at least rose by 1.7%, not enough, but still positive rather than negative.

Even if you start from when the recession ended in June, 2009, the decline in median real household income since then has been greater than it was during the recession. Four years into the supposed Obama recovery, real median household income has declined nearly 6% as compared to June, 2009. That is more than twice the decline of 2.6% that occurred during the recession from December, 2007 until June, 2009. As the Wall Street Journal summarized in its August 25-26, 2012 weekend edition, “For household income, in other words, the Obama recovery has been worse than the Bush recession.”

Despite his rhetoric, Obama has failed to deliver for the poor as well. But we know Obama loves the poor, because he has created so many of them. Indeed, the only thing booming under Obamanomics has been poverty. Poverty has soared under Obama, with the number of Americans in poverty increasing to the highest level in the more than 50 years that the Census Bureau has been tracking poverty. Over the last 5 years, the number in poverty has increased by nearly 31%, to 49.7 million, with the poverty rate climbing by over 30% to 16.1%. This is another natural result of negligible economic growth, paltry job creation, declining real wages, and the worst economic recovery since the Great Depression.

These dismal results of Obamanomics have been produced because all of Obama’s economic policies are thoroughly anti-growth, indeed, the opposite of what is needed for long term booming growth. Instead of cutting tax rates, which provides incentives for increased production, Obama has been focused on raising rates. Instead of deregulation, which increases the cost of doing business, and results in barriers to productive activity (see, e.g., Keystone Pipeline), Obama has been all about increasing regulation. Instead of cutting spending, Obama entered office exploding spending during his first two years, and was only restrained when the people elected Republicans to control the House.

And instead of adopting monetary policies that would produce a stable dollar, Obama’s monetary polices have mimicked the devaluationist ones previously embraced by George W. Bush on the way to sagging investment, and with the latter, slow growth. President Obama derided Mitt Romney during the 2012 campaign as proposing to bring back the same economic policies that led to the financial crisis in the first place. But it is Obama who is bringing back precisely those policies, overregulating banks to make loans on the basis of supposed fairness. Moreover, Obama’s Fed has thrown oil on the bonfire with its zero interest rate, and runaway quantitative easing policies. With those policies having been in place for years now, they are the foundation of the current economy, which is just another bubble that will pop when the Fed tries to implement any exit strategy.

Next week I will discuss why and how these misguided, Keynesian monetary policies will only lead to another, even worse financial crisis, probably during Obama’s second term, and why only fundamental monetary reform can restore America to its traditional booming, economic growth.”

His lips are moving.  Yes, I’ll be here all night.

But seriously, does the man ever tell the truth?  Remember back in 2008 when he was telling us how terrible Bush was for raising the debt to *GASP* $9 TRILLION dollars?

Well here it is just 5 short years of King Barack’s rule later and do you know what our national debt is now?  That’s right, it’s fast closing in on $17 TRILLION.  In other words he’s coming close to doubling the debt since he raged about how terrible Bush was for having it so high.

Do you remember him telling us one of his first priorities would be to balance the budget (right after he closed Gitmo on his first day in office).  What’s that you say?  Gitmo is still open?  Yes, and the budget is still not balanced.

The saddest part of this is seemingly intelligent people think Obama has it under control and actually knows what he’s doing.  That must have been what the Romans were saying too….

Here’s a good article I found on this subject.

Link
President Obama likes to say that raising the nation’s borrowing limit “won’t add a dime” to the federal debt, but he neglects to mention that the government already has borrowed the equivalent of more than 60 trillion dimes since he took office.

When Mr. Obama became president in January 2009, the total federal debt stood at $10.6 trillion. This week, it hit $16.7 trillion — an increase of 57 percent. In the same time frame under President George W. Bush, total federal debt rose 38 percent. Under President Clinton, it rose 32 percent.

The administration says the government will run out of authority to pay its bills by Oct. 17 unless Congress raises the debt limit again to allow more borrowing. The president portrays the move as one of simple responsibility.

“It does not increase our debt,” Mr. Obama said. “It does not grow our deficits. All it does is allow the Treasury Department to pay for what Congress has already spent.”

The president rarely mentions that he, by law, approves congressional spending, and his argument glosses over the nation’s burgeoning total debt.

“It’s certainly not the whole story,” said Alex Brill, a budget specialist at the American Enterprise Institute. “We’ve seen a dramatic increase in the debt held by the public in the last four or five years, and it’s projected to only get worse.”

On Oct. 4, the debt held by the public — not including Social Security and Medicare — had risen 89.3 percent since Mr. Obama took office, according to FactCheck.org, a nonprofit project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania. The administration recently projected an annual deficit of $750 billion in the fiscal year that began Oct. 1 and $626 billion the year after that.

“At that rate, the debt owed to the public will more than double during the Obama presidency,” FactCheck said in its quarterly statistical report on Mr. Obama’s tenure in office.

Many Republican lawmakers say that is the reason spending cuts and entitlement reform should be part of the discussion to raise the debt limit.

“We are in trouble financially,” Sen. Tom Coburn, Oklahoma Republican, said Tuesday. “We are $30 trillion in the hole, plus another $17 trillion in debt. Wouldn’t it be smart if we started addressing that problem before we blankly allow an increase in the level of the credit card?”

Mr. Obama said he won’t talk about long-term budget issues until Republicans agree to reopen the government and raise the debt limit without conditions.

The office of House Speaker John A. Boehner, Ohio Republican, said Wednesday that linking spending reforms to increases in the debt limit is “common, bipartisan practice.” The Republican leadership pointed to a Congressional Research Service report last month that said Congress has used debt-limit laws to change fiscal policy 20 times since 1917. In that same 96-year span, the nation’s debt limit has been raised 103 times.

In the increasingly contentious showdown with Congress, Mr. Obama also is fond of pointing out that budget deficits — the annual red ink that contributes to the total debt — have been falling at the fastest pace in 60 years. That’s true largely because spending rose dramatically in his first term as the administration tried to blunt the impact of the Great Recession.

Although a “grand bargain” on spending and entitlements eluded the president and congressional Republicans in 2011, Mr. Brill said, it is the kind of approach still needed to get the debt under control.

“It’s logical and appropriate what we’re hearing from many Republicans that we need to not only deal with the debt limit itself but we need to deal with the underlying cause of this pressure to increase the debt,” he said. “That means we need to deal with entitlements.”

You hear them say it all over the place.  “People will love Obamacare once it rolls out”.  But is that really true?

I know the polls have been saying for a long time that more Americans oppose it than support it.  So now that it’s “rolled out” are people jumping for joy or are they still skeptical?

Unfortunately for those on the left the answer is, the American people still don’t like it.  Here’s an interesting image from one of the left’s favorite hangouts, the Huffington Post.  I don’t want them to be able to say “oh you are just using Fox News polls”.

Looks like it’s still not American’s favorite thing since sliced bread.  Maybe as time goes on people will forget how it was before this monstrosity was passed.  You know, kind of like putting a frog in cold water on a stove then turning on the heat. (by the way, that doesn’t really work but it’s still a great metaphor)

After all people seem to like Medicare now even though at the time it was a huge entitlement.

As for me I wish we could go back to what our founders had in mind before people like Woodrow Wilson and FDR turned it into a land of entitlements.  But I realize that will never happen and just like Rome we will eventually spend ourselves out of a country.

This is from a blogger I read.  I liked what he said in one of his posts so much I decided I would borrow it.  Note that he uses quite colorful language so if that offends you please don’t read it.

His blog is at http://grouchyoldcripple.com

So here we are witnessing two show trials. One is against George Zimmerman. The way the case is going, no rational jury could find him guilty, but Florida bowed to the Black Grievance Industry to bring to trial what was obviously self defense. Treyvon Martin was not a choirboy. He was a thug. But he was black and was shot by a white Hispanic who is actually 1/4 black. In fact Zimmerman is more black than Elizabeth Warren is Indian and he has the black grandmother to prove it. All Elizabeth Warren has are high cheekbones. Michael said to me on Saturday, that the way the prosecution’s case is going after they’re done, the defense should just say, “The defense rests.” Maybe they wanted this brought to trial to prove just how flimsy the evidence was against Zimmerman. Doesn’t matter. They could have a video showing exactly what Zimmerman said happened and blacks will still be pissed and claim the video was doctored. If he is acquitted, there will be riots in every city that has a large black population and they will be egged on by leading members of the Black Grievance Industry like Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and the CEO, Jug Hussein Ears Downgrade. It ain’t gonna be pretty.

The second show trial is that of Paula Deen, who admitted saying nigger 35 years ago. The left overlooked Robert Byrd being a kleagle of the KKK and saying nigger on a Sunday talk show. He was a liberal Dimocrat so he was given a pass. Paula Dean should have as well since she supported Obungler in 2008 and 2012, donated money to his campaigns, and had Moochelle on her cooking show. She had to feel blindsided. Maybe Moochelle was pissed because Paula said she liked to cook for her because she wouldn’t stop eating.

Once again we see a big double standard going on. Paula Deen said nigger 35 years ago and she is suddenly a pariah, losing her Food Channel show, her book contract, and companies running for the exits to drop her. Meanwhile, over the weekend, Alec Baldwin called some Brit a queen and said he would like “to put his foot up his fucking ass” but he “would probably enjoy it”. Has Capital One dropped him from its advertizing? Nope. Didn’t think so.

Remember, if it weren’t for double standards, the left wouldn’t have any standards at all.

In the spirit of healing and reconciliation, Oblunder could say that this happened a long time ago and Paula Deen is surely no racist. BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Like that’s gonna happen. She’s a white southern woman and liberals hate southern whites and this is just another excuse to stir up blacks, which the Black Grievance Industry loves to do and Obunghole is the CEO of the Black Grievance Inbdustry. Stirring up black unrest is its main function.

Michael sez he thinks she’s getting what she deserves because she supported the Obamessiah.

Now we have her apologizing and groveling and calling up Jesse Jackson and asking him for help. I’m sure he could help her if she is willing to give him enough money. He’s good at extorting money from people. Being a RWPP is a very lucrative profession. Jackson extorted a beer distributorship for his family from Anheuser Busch in return for fixing their racial policies by hiring more blacks.

We saw Imus begging and groveling just like we are now seeing Paula Deen doing the same. Both of them are millionaires. Both of them could walk away rather than bowing and scraping to the Black Grievance Industry.

Enough!

I would like to one day see one of the people attacked by the Black Grievance Industry tell them to fuck off and say,

“I’ll apologize when Al Sharpton apologizes for the Tawana Brawley hoax.” Lives were ruined and careers were destroyed. Ask Steve Pagones. He did get some satisfaction in winning a settlement against Sharpton for defamation of character.

“I’ll apologize when Al Sharpton apologizes for the Crown Heights riots.” Sharpton fired up a mob and eventually a mob attacked and killed a young rabbinical student.

“I’ll apologize when Al Sharpton apologizes for the Freddie’s Fashion Mart arson.” People died as a result of his racial demagoguery. Unlike Paula Deen and Don Imus, Sharpton has blood on his hands. No matter. MSNBC has given him legitimacy by giving him his very own TV show. I had to laugh when before one of the debates Rachel Madcow asked him, since he had been in one of these debates, what were the candidates thinking. I know what was going through Sharpton’s mind during his debates. Keep those campaign contributions coming in so I can continue to fly first class and stay in the most expensive suites of the most expensive hotels, while doing what I do best, demagoguing.

“I’ll apologize when MSNBC apologizes for giving a racist anti-Semite like Al Sharpton respectabilty by giving him his own TV show.”

“I’ll apologize when the Black Grievance Industry apologizes for going after the Duke Lacrosse Team, who were innocent of all charges.” It was such a miscarriage of justice to charge them that the prosecutor wound up being disbarred for his actions. When a black, like Tawana Brawley and the stripper who accused the Duke Lacrosse Team, makes an accusation, the Black Grievance industry goes into overdrive and the liberals, like the Duke faculty and the Duke administration, always take the word of the poor black despite any evidence to the contrary. Did the Duke faculty and administration apologize to the members of the team. Howza ’bout to the coach, who was fired?

“I’ll apologize when Jesse Jacklson apologizes for calling New York Hymietown.” You can imagine what he would say if I were to call Atlanta Niggertown.

“I’ll apologize when John Lewis, noted “civil rights icon”, apologizes for his race-baiting ad here in Atlanta when John Eaves was running for head of the Fulton County commission.” He, then mayor Shirley Franklin, and former mayor Andrew Young recorded an ad that ran on black radio stations that said that if they didn’t vote for Eaves we would be going back to the days of “fire hoses and dogs”. It was shameless race-bating and it was despicable. Hardly what one would expect from a respected “civil rights icon”.

“I’ll apologize when John Lewis apologizes for falsely claiming that he was called nigger 13 times while he and his fellow CBC members walked through a Tea Party protest trolling for remarks to prove that the Tea Party was made up of racists.”
When it didn’t happen, Lewis falsely claimed that it did and Al Sharpton jumped in and said that he had seen the tape that proved it. Funny, Andrew Breitbart offered $50K to anyone who could produce a video to prove Lewis’ assertions. None was produced, not even by Sharpton who said he had seen it. John Lewis may have once been a “civil rights icon” but now he has degenerated into a racist, race-baiting demagogue. Nice legacy John.

“I’ll apologize when blacks apologize for and quit playing the knockout game.” The knockout game is when a bunch of young blacks look for someone who is not black and see how many blows it will take to knock him out.

“I’ll apologize when the New Black Panthers apologize for their intimidation of voters at a Philadelphia polling station in 2008.”

“I’ll apologize when Eric Holder apologizes for dropping the case and prosecutes them.”

“I’ll apologize when blacks apologize and quit destroying the housing that we have built and given them over the years.”

“I’ll apologize when blacks apologize for committing the majority of homicides and other violent crimes in this country.” There is a reason we once used racial profiling. It’s because by race, blacks commit most of the crimes in this country.

“I’ll apologize when the Dimocrats apologize for keeping blacks poor, uneducated, and keeping them on the Dimocrat plantation while telling them that the reason they are poor and uneducated is because of white racism.” Exactly who are the racists here?

I’m stopping here because just as I’m about to post, I think of sumpin’ else that the Black Grievance Industry and their enablers should apologize for and I don’t want to write for the rest of the day.

I’m sure y’all wouldn’t have any trouble adding to this list. What do you think they should apologize for?