Obama: “Open your hearts and open your minds to the words of Prof. Derrick Bell”
Link to Bell’s “white folks” comment.
If you enjoy the content at iBankCoin, please follow us on Twitter
© Copyright 2007-2024 iBankCoin All rights reserved under penalty of bodily harm. DISCLAIMER: This is a personal web site, reflecting the opinions of its author(s). It is not a production of my employer, and it is unaffiliated with any FINRA broker/dealer. Statements on this site do not represent the views or policies of anyone other than myself. The information on this site is provided for discussion purposes only, and are not investing recommendations. Under no circumstances does this information represent a recommendation to buy or sell securities. DATA INFORMATION IS PROVIDED TO THE USERS "AS IS." NEITHER iBankCoin, NOR ITS AFFILIATES, NOR ANY THIRD PARTY DATA PROVIDER MAKE ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND REGARDING THE DATA INFORMATION, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE OR USE. Privacy Policy
he he he he he he he i’m dyin ovah heah
More whining from your part. Listen to the context of what he was saying. “She lived with whites who supported her”, so it wasn’t all whites. It’s the morons who harass blacks. The morons who say nothing about corporate welfare, and whine about public welfare. The morons who don’t understand that our govt did all it could to hinder blacks for centuries, and then applies band aid tactics such as affirmative action to make up for that. A snap of the finger and all of a sudden the cohesive family structure will return?
Harass these idiots all day long I say. Just Obama’s black muslim socialist face harasses your kind and I love it. And I say this as a rich and successful white man.
wtf decade do you live in? go find a newspaper. check the date. this is not the fucking sixties! old man.
Regardless it appears a fruitless way to phrase it.
there’s no “there” there.
if this is the best the conservatives can do – a second hand quote about an old lady agitating for rights dutifully owed her by the constitution of these united states then they’re more fucked than i originally thought –
where the fuck did you come from? it is the “invasion of the 0 dicksuckers”. like zombies they spew old tired lazy sixties bullshit. they do not know that an african american is president in fact they still fear nixon even tho their kids and grandkids have no fucking clue who that is.
shed, you & your ilk keep trying to swift-boat obama … ain’t gonna work, pale shade of whitey
me thinks “shed” needs to spend MORE time laundering and pressing his white sheet (with eye holes of course) and LESS time coming across as iBC’s resident blogging version of David Duke.
Rather than calling Wood a klansman, which I am confident is as false as it is insulting, it would be better to simply point out that the material he’s been cutting and pasting from Breitbart about Obama and Bell is meant to mislead, not vet.
For example, in reply to Wood’s cut and paste job on the topic of the course Obama taught in 1994, I can point to what legal scholars – CONSERVATIVE legal scholars – had to say about the syllabus in 2008. See my comment futher down.
hey ott. call the fucker out. skyfish is a bitch. you know it too.
absolutely pathetic.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/09/jon-stewart-reveals-sean-hannitys-radical-connections-video_n_1334741.html
stewart shows how sean hannity cavorts around with felons .. and he also shows how easy it would be to nail obama w/o the bs y’all are trying to hang your anal-OCD-perma-obama-hating hat on
I think he’s finally Shed his last hair
Wood made a cut and paste post (from Breitbart) on the topic of Obama’s 2008 course:
http://ibankcoin.com/news/2012/03/08/obama-forced-his-students-to-read-bell-at-university-of-chicago-law-school/
The opening paragraph states:
In 1994, Barack Obama taught a course at the University of Chicago Law School entitled, “Current Issues in Racism and the Law.” The reading list and syllabus for that class were made available by the New York Times in 2008, though there seems to have been little analysis of its content by Jodi Kantor, the Times’s Obama correspondent.
In fact, Kantor provided some remarkably thorough and useful analysis by having 4 legal experts (2 liberal, 2 conservative) comment on the syllabus:
We’ve asked four legal experts to take a look at then-Professor Barack Obama’s course materials and offer some insight into what they say about Mr. Obama’s teaching methods, priorities and approach to the Constitution.
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/07/30/inside-professor-obamas-classroom/
This was done in July 2008, when, according to Breitbart, Obama wasn’t adequately vetted because the media didn’t do things like look into what he taught his students in 1994.
More below.
Well that record’s a joke snOtt.
I’m not even incensed by the racism hitting this post.
While not laughable either, I am amazed at institutionalized racism. So many of you commentators are so plainly wrong headed, it’s actually a good reminder that racists are alive and well in America.
Sad and true.
WS. You’re stalwart for furthering Breibart’s publications; ignore, or as BRA sometimes does, (taunt) these bigots.
The conclusion of the Breitbart piece was:
Obama befriended Bell as an adult, and he used Bell’s work to indoctrinate his own students about race and the law.
Not true, according to CONSERVATIVE legal scholars.
For example, here’s John Eastman, Chapman Univ. law professor and former clerk to Clarence Thomas:
I am not surprised to see the intellectual diversity for which Chicago is famous reflected in then-Professor Obama’s course syllabi and examinations.
While at many law schools, such courses are frequently taught by critical race theorists who focus largely on one side of a complex legal and policy debate, then-Professor Obama’s course included, quite appropriately in my view, readings from across the ideological spectrum, from Derrick Bell and Malcolm X to Chuck Cooper and Lino Graglia.
What is more, it is evident from the sampling of proposed topics for group presentations contained in the syllabus that this spectrum of authors was included for more than mere exposure. Rather, it appears that then-Professor Obama was leading his students in an honest assessment of competing views regarding some of the most difficult legal and policy issues our nation has ever faced—a refreshing change from what passes for debate about contested questions in our political classes these days.
And here is Randy Barnett, Georgetown Univ. law professor and Senior Fellow at the Cato Institute:
The materials assigned were balanced, including several readings by Frederick Douglass, who many modern race theorists have come to disparage as insufficiently radical (as Obama would know), along with an exchange between Harvard law professor Randall Kennedy on the one hand and Charles Cooper (who is now on Senator McCain’s advisory committee) and Texas law professor Lino Graglia on the other.
What particularly impressed me was how even handed were his presentations of the competing sides the students might take. These summaries were remarkably free of the sort of cant and polemics that all too often afflicts academic discussions of race.
The exam question and answer keys manifest a keen comprehension of then-prevailing Supreme Court Due Process and Equal Protection Clause doctrine. There is no doubt that his students were taught “the law” (such as it was), not merely the teacher’s viewpoints.
He either was skillful at concealing his own take on these issues both in these materials and in the classroom (as reported by his former students) or he held no deep commitments on what one would think were matters of central concern to him.
they confirm that the former president of the Harvard Law Review is a smart guy, and an exceptionally fair-minded teacher
The comments of the four legal scholars are quite consistent with one another and are all very different from the picture painted by Breitbart.
The comments of the legal scholars provided high quality information. Breitbart provided misleading junk. What source would you use to vet a candidate?
Please. Contact Hewitt or Chemerinsky and get back to me on your lib-echo chamber’s “conservative” consensus.
The big question after midnight and a lack of hookers plus a few dozen beers is “Why waste our time commenting on these racist posts anyhow? Same shit, different week. Sounds like Wood and his kracker bros are “really pressing” their sheets. Are they sovereign citizens or some other sheeeet?
“Wood’s a racist” is your response?
LOL.
No wonder you cower behind a lameass fake sock puppet moniker.
Lefty tools, beta male cowards to the end, the lot of you.
_______________
your all a bunch of retards.
At least we are not illiterate like you.
ha ha ha ha i’m published in the library of congress.while you are a nothing.
No one cares. Get on front page of kindle books.
“published in the library of congress.” The library of congress doesn’t publish anyone. That’s the kind of stupidity I’m talking about! That’s republican-quality dumbass!
He didn’t say published BY the library of congress. A published book in the library of congress doesn’t mean that they are the publisher.
Then it makes no sense at all. To be published IN the library, then, would mean to be literally published in the building. That’s even more stupid. ‘nuph said.
you should rename your moniker to, sum” dum drummer” .now,if you know what an s2 is. then go sit on one.understand one thing dummer,once you have copyrights given to an author by the library of congress doesnt matter who publishes it,you still need my permission,and you’ll pay for it. so pray tell,how many professional magazines has any of your works been published……………….
“how many professional magazines has any of your works been published”?
You wouldn’t pass English 101 drumstickbrain.
And if you must know about my publication history, trust me, not only is my publication cv longer than yours, it’s even grammatically correct!
It has been such a joy to socialize with you!
Spooky, why did you change your i.d.?
A: Spukey’s got a mental disorder. Game on DB.
Because I’m bored and I felt like it? Isn’t this America?
Personally, Wood, you lost my respect with last week’s incident. You probably don’t give a shit. That’s fine. The point is, I don’t really have anything to say to you after that cowardly “defense” of your position and your attempt to brand me as a “race-baiter.” It’s obvious that you’re trying to bait people with this Breitbart shit. Fine, you’ve baited me, but if that’s what you want–just so you can get some traffic to your posts, then I’d like to have fun with it if you don’t mind, especially since it certainly is not anything serious you’re doing here. I think you should go back to your little excel spreadsheets, as you’re really in way over your head with complexity that cannot be easily plotted.
Spooky, there is no debate, and my position needed no defense. The proof is in your posts. You are a race baiter. To make matters worse, you change your i.d. and continue to attack people. You call that “fun.” I say it shows your true character which is that of a dissembling, sniveling little speck of man dust.
Now that’s customer service for you. The good ole’ American way. You’re such a loser, it’s sad.
what all ye OCD-obama haters fail to see regarding this old womans ‘I Lives To Harass White Folks’ schtick, and Bell stealing that line is y’all are exactly the same
the old black woman grew up being repressed, harassed and held down by those in power, those on their payroll and their low-grade moron lackeys , iow, ‘white folks’ … it was a case of rebelling against the socalled power elite …. much like todays tea party is trying to do .. or any other such group throughout history .. the color/race/creed/group/ethnicity/religion/face is different but it’s the same exact game – the haves against the have-nots – repressors against the repressed
I lives to harrass juice. Cuz you repressed me.
See how fucking stupid that is?
yeah, it is fucking stupid
but that don’t make anyone who associates with you a commie subversive who should be impeached
Jeuice: “…associates with you a commie subversive who should be impeached”; yes, you’re beginning to admit your treasonous associations.
Come to the light. Renounce your American citizenship and move!
“You can do it.”