David Yeagley is the great-great-grandson of Comanche leader Bad Eagle. 
BadEagle.com has always held the position that Barry “Obama” Soetoro is against Indians. We have suggested his campaign pretenses with the Montana (Crow) Indians was stricly for political purposes, and we surmised that it was connected with casino money. But now there are two Communist initiatives that clearly threaten American Indians: 1) federal land grabbing, and 2) the 2010 census. We’ll take the land grab first, then the census.
In return for the Crow’s campaign support of candidate Barry, President Barry gave an “Old Crow”–named Jim, the Medal of Freedom. Isn’t that just providential? Barry has a knack for circumstantial advantage. Jim Crow Meets Crow Jim. Gotta love it.
The latest news is that Barry has attempted to confiscate millions of acres of land from the states (Montana and New Mexico). That land could not be developed, though it is rich in oil and gas. The government would declare it “national monument” land, and thus prohibit any development. Says the Advocate for Property Rights:
The ability of the White House to simply snatch land from under the feet of the American people comes from the Antiquities Act of 1906. The Act was initially intended to set aside small portions of land for monuments and national parks, but has since been abused by lawmakers to control large quantities of property.
The massive land grab, begun under Democrat Communist presidents Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton, is part of the federalization of all things American, air, water, land, people, death, money, and even birth. Permission to live–soon to be a federal decision for all. This recent land grab is so outrageous that even South Carolina Republican Jim DeMint protested in the Washinton Times. The government currently owns 650 million acres, or 29 percent of the nation’s total land, says DeMint. The federal government has no right to simply take land from the states. To do so requires a serious, ominous legal process.
So, how does this affect Indians? Consider the 1,800 acres of the the Wounded Knee sacred burial grounds. According to United Native America, the federal government wants complete control over the area, to restore it to historical conditions of 1890. The government wants to make the area a national park, a national “monument” site. It’s Indian land, but the government wants absolute control over the Indians on it. Sioux Indians living there would all be moved out, and their current homes–humble as they may be, would all be removed.
The government also wants to build a visitors’ center, an amphitheater, roads, and trails, and to relocate the three main roads that intersect at the current Wounded Knee memorial and one mass grave site. These activities are wholly inappropriate for a cemetery and burial site and will disturb the spirits of the people buried there.
Get the picture? Indians don’t own anything. Our lands are “in trust.” The federal government owns all land in America. It can take what it wants, whenever it wants, for whatever purpose it wants. It’s a matter of votes in Congress. Sometimes, it’s a matter of a presidential executive order. It’s a matter of pen and ink, on paper. BadEagle.com has warned of this from the beginning, when the casino craze was spreading like a plague. With all the boasted wealth, how long will it be before Congress says, “What do you need the $2.4 billion BIA money for? Let the tribes take care of themselves now–with their $30 billion revenue from the casinos. Little does the public know that Indians get only a tiny fraction of that revenue (and only the tribes that happen to have casinos), and the rest is taken by the synidcate, the states, and the politicians.
But the 2010 Census is a danger and an insult to Indian identity as well. Chaos is coming. The census form requires no proof of anything! Anyone can claim anything–and will and have. It is a great and lethal error for Indians to claim exaggerated numbers, and to lower blood quatum for the purpose of raising numbers. The more Indians, the smaller the alotment, the less aid to each individual. And always, the smaller the “per cap” payment from casino money. Indian identity has become a plastic fix of some kind.
The Puerto Rican “Taino Indians” are now thrilled by the census. It gave them all a free claim to being Indian, and since, as Barry sees it, Puerto Rican has somehow been grandfathered in as an American state when no one was looking, the Puerto Ricans are hopeful of “federal recognition.” That way, they’ll get federal money, and a tax free casino! This is Barry’s census plan.
Never mind that the Taino (whatever happens to be left of them–and no one knows) are South American Indians, and never had a treaty relationship with the United States government, never fought American colonists, or American armies, and were simply never part of America. Why, they’re darked skinned. Let all the darkies band together. Anything to bleed white America, and denigrate American Indians.
Bird Runningwater, the “indigen-ist” of Sundance. To be accurate, the idea of uniting all darkies, or browns–all non-whites, was current in the Sundance Insitute before Soros took over the funding of the documentary division. Runningwater has clearly had the deleterious intent of diluting the meaning of “Native American” for some time.
That’s what to watch for, from liberals: denigration of the American Indian. Always. It is a principle of action. How does it work? As George Soros has demonstrated through Robert Redford’s Sundance Institute, all non-white people in the world are to be labeled “Native American.” They’ve methodically included all indigenous people of the Americas, the Pacific Islanders, the Asians, the Africans, and of course, the homosexuals. All non-white, non-Western, non-Christian people are “Native American. Ain’t that a bute? And non-contributors, all. Nearly half of American households won’t pay taxes this year. I wonder how many of those are Indian families?
But that shouldn’t matter. Indians have a legal, historical treaty relationship with the United States. Though the treaties are utterly archaic and incomprehensible in terms of modern life, the principle is sound. An agreement was made. In blood. Forever. Now tell me, just how do we think of Pacific Islanders, Polynesians, Asians, Africans, and homosexuals as “Native American”? Just how are they associated with the lords of the plains, or the kings of the forest?
The denigration of the American Indian is the sole effect of liberalism. The Communist use of race for political agitation and disruption of the establishment is the only use Indians have been put to in modern times. The latent grandeur of the past, the honor, the respect, the love that the American white man once had for the Indian is quickly vanishing–due too the white liberal Communist use of the Indian.
Now, with the Negro mascot at the head of American Communism (an oxymoron if there ever was one), the incredible racism of liberals is apparent. The true racists of America, indeed, of the world, are white liberals. Their use of race is denigrating to all, and most of all, to Indians. Indians are a unique people in the world, historically if for no other reason. We were America’s first friend, and first enemy. The country’s development was all shaped by Indians, at every step.
“You betcha” those Indian treaties are America’s sacred honor. This is why they will become the focus of liberal Communist destruction. It’s only a matter of time.
38 responses so far ↓
1 David Yeagley // Apr 9, 2010 at 10:35 am
Barry doesn’t like Jews, either. Check out Debbie Schlussel’s latest:
Party Like It’s 1939: Obama Bans Israeli Nuke Scientists From US, Bans Sale of Radiation Detectors to Israel! Why Netanyahu Canceled @ Obama’s Nuke Summit (EXCLUSIVE Exact Translation of Ma’ariv Article)
All liberal Jews should take a lesson, if they are at all interested in the survival of Jews. Can’t hide behind Communist ideology any more.
2 Thrasymachus // Apr 9, 2010 at 3:39 pm
Words fail me at this injustice that is proposed.
We currently have a government that wants nothing less than complete control over all citizens and their wealth.
I never thought things would slip into such a state during my lifetime. Of course, I only became interested in history and politics after getting the Internet. It was then that I thought there was a gleam of hope! Maybe now those without a voice could be heard and things set right.
Just the opposite of what I’d expected has occurred. The nation has moved much farther to the Left. I am dismayed and very disheartened.
3 David Yeagley // Apr 9, 2010 at 4:14 pm
Thras, we can know that the rise and fall of nations is something God tends to. Nations are all on probation. (Genesis 15:16.) It is our responsibility to do our small, individual part, toward the right The ups and downs of kingdoms are hardly our sphere.
Yet, God has been known to use individuals here and there (quite often, actually), to turn social tides back. We always have that hope. We should always act on it, too.
If we go down, we go down fighting, like a man! We will have done our simple, but noble duty.
4 Thrasymachus // Apr 9, 2010 at 4:38 pm
Your are right, Dr. Yeagley.
I think that the problem is the SIN of the MLK ‘holiday.’ This man is being literally worshiped.
Our best fighting strategy, as Christians, is to speak out against this — as the ‘Three Hebrew Children’ in the O. T.
It seems to me that the big slide leftwards began with the enactment of that ‘holiday.’
Yet have any clergymen even spoken a word against this glorification of “Dr. King”? If there is one such man in the country, I’ve never heard of him — aside from the Ku Klux Klan.
This is the fear of the White Man — he doesn’t want to be called a “racist.”
Now, my piano teacher was a very old lady who, when living, was not afraid to be called “racist.” She was a bit “cracked” in her old age in some respects — LOL — but she was outspoken in her views about black crime and black behavior. And she loved Jews. She once told me that, if she were not Catholic, she’d join the Jewish faith. Of course, she didn’t understand what she was saying, but she was a very old person by that time (in her 90s).
Not to forget:
She had reason to fear black crime, having been repeatedly a victim of it. Blacks bearing knives entered her home and took whatever they so pleased, holding her back at knife-point.
I witnessed the alarming deterioration of her neighborhood and its fall into crime and open prostitution of young white girls. This neighborhood was all white and reasonably safe when I started my piano lessons and was rapidly changing by the time entered university.
And this is the “change” our government is asking us to accept and celebrate! We are to give up our world for this “brave new world” being fashioned before our very eyes!
Obama’s spokesman asks us if we are willing to give up our neighborhoods to soothe black hurt feelings over slavery!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RgR2I3mvz74
5 Thrasymachus // Apr 9, 2010 at 4:40 pm
In conversation with an Orthodox Jew, I was assured that even in his religion, the MLK holiday was idolatrous. Even a Muslim in Egypt agreed with that.
6 David Yeagley // Apr 9, 2010 at 4:46 pm
Yeah. I saw that video of the Supreme Court nominee. (I think you’ve posted it before. Someone did.) Incredible. Absolutely incredible. More Communist than Obama, if possible. Very, deeply sick. And this kid has not tried a single case. True, several Supreme Courts Justices in the past have had no judiciary experience. But, to have never tried a case really is pushing qualification a bit too far!
But, watch, the Republicans will bow to racism. We need Women, Negroes, “Hispanics,” and Orientals on America’s highest court.
Notice: NEVER, EVER, an American Indian. We are independent in spirit–and therefore, don’t exist. I gather we finally prefer it this way. America is something different from us, in the end. We are content to be separate.
I just wish the white people who created the country felt that way about themselves. Keep this foreigners and alien races OUT of the government!! This does not help anyone “get along,” but only intensifies the social tensions in the country.
Our government wants to be a showcase of multiculturalism. Then denigrates America to nothing. To absolutely nothing. No values but sex, race, and anti-Christianity. That’s what all this is about. Seems to me, looking on.
7 Thrasymachus // Apr 9, 2010 at 4:53 pm
Well, at least in me you have one like-minded White!
Honestly, I don’t understand the “white psyche” these days. Something’s gone terribly wrong. I think it’s the influence of television and public schools education.
Most Whites in the past wanted to preserve their racial identity — although there were always a substantial portion who did not care.
But we once had a few brave men who dared to speak out in favor of preserving white genetics.
Here, for example, is the late Carleton Putnam:
8 Thrasymachus // Apr 9, 2010 at 5:14 pm
Also, I think that pornography and sexual promiscuity has taken the fight out of us Whites.
These are very weak and selfish values.
Astonishing, in as much as extramarital lust, free love, and unrestrained sexual indulgence have never made any man or woman happy in the history of Man.
Here a Hindu swami speaks on that very question of lust — with a bit of humor to make it worth watching:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uRaDG6PQ1SU
9 David Yeagley // Apr 9, 2010 at 5:30 pm
Yes. But, why are white (presumably American) young people listening to a foreign Brahman? Why the Hindu commentary? Did their pastors fail them? Did their white parents disappoint them? Had they no confidence in their own kind, their own religion, their own country?
This has always been the university approach, however, to instil disdain for one’s own Americanism of being. The object is to glorify ANYTHING BUT the white, Anglo-Saxon Protestant. Or even the Irish Catholic! Hah!
Anything BUT what’s fundamentally American. I HATE the American university! It is become an evil thing, thoroughly. Of course, that’s a gross generalization…
10 David Yeagley // Apr 9, 2010 at 5:31 pm
If white people insist on glorifying non-white, then listen to the American Indian! Isn’t he “foreign” enough? Ah, but, historically, he killed a lot of white people–something white America has never forgotten.
That’s a good thing, though. Helps keep Indian independent.
11 Thrasymachus // Apr 9, 2010 at 6:07 pm
I believe that the swami was visiting UCLA way back then to give lectures. Looks like the 1960s to me.
Actually, though, the wisdom of the swami here is not from his own caste. It is derived solely from the Brahman caste and its scriptures, and that caste was Aryan!
I think that the Christian preachers have sometimes taken the view that sex is evil and unnatural per se. This comes from the teachings of St. Augustine, not the Bible.
So, yes, I think their pastors and priests have let white young people down.
For my part, I’d be delighted to learn about the original faith and morality of the American Indian! The few that I know are all Christians. Unfortunately, I don’t think Prof. Huston Smith covered American Indian religion in his famous book on “The Religions of Man.”
The swami’s point that sex is natural and not wicked in itself is something many Christians, under Augustin’s influence, have misunderstood. The equally true fact that sex is for establishing and building family life is also important.
His point that illicit sex creates unhappiness and “hang-ups” and an artificial need to prove one’s sexual potency — virility in the male — is a good one.
Christians have often taken an irrational and prejudiced attitude toward these things, and this is why I included the link to the video.
I especially like William Shakespeare’s distinction between licit and illicit sex, as found in the play Hamlet. Shakespeare makes the whole matter clear.
12 Thrasymachus // Apr 9, 2010 at 6:39 pm
It has always struck me how Hugh Hefner has not only promoted sex as “entertainment,” but also was strenuously fighting for the then very unpopular idea of racial equality and the Civil Rights movement.
His other huge ‘contribution’ to American popular culture was his aggressive promotion of racial integration.
He has fought very hard both for his brand of entertainment and for the integration of the white and black races.
I am puzzled at what the necessary relation of these ideas has been in Hefner’s thinking. After all, there have been plenty of Whites with rather liberal views on sex who have nevertheless stopped short of advancing miscegenation with Negroes.
13 Thrasymachus // Apr 9, 2010 at 6:44 pm
I don’t think that Hefner personally would ever entertain the thought of marrying a Negress and having mixed-race children, even were he a very young man starting out in life. The same was true, in my opinion, of Ted Kennedy. However, I am not so certain about Jimmy Carter. Carter would be proud if his daughter married a black man, I do believe. Carter is a true believer in race equality in marriage.
Just why white liberals want their children freely to marry Blacks is the one great mystery to me.
14 Thrasymachus // Apr 9, 2010 at 6:51 pm
Let it be understood that when I speak of the doctrine of “race equality,” I am referring to something specific: the contradictory statements that “Race does not exist” and that “Whites are the cancer of history.”
The liberal belief that “race does not exist” and that Whites owe Blacks reparations for slavery is something most peculiar, in my opinion. Most strange.
15 Thrasymachus // Apr 9, 2010 at 8:10 pm
You make a good point, Dr. Yeagley, about whether white parents and religious leaders let down the youth.
Back in the late 1960s and early 1970s, the white youth were definitely adrift and searching for answers to life’s problems.
I do not know why this happened.
But an interest developed in non-European cultures and their traditions back then.
Here the late actor David Carradine discusses this development in an interview in which Eastern Philosophy is briefly discussed:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHpNqrLphvI
16 Phyllis // Apr 10, 2010 at 8:53 am
You forget the role of women in this break-down of values. I think the feminist movement contributed greatly to the deterioration of our moral and spiritual compass. When the female shifted from the traditional ‘mother’ role to the obsessive self fulfilling ‘me’ concept, everything went downhill. Anything goes. The pop psyche concepts of the 70′s and 80′s reinforced this. This result was that there were ‘no innate rules’ to live by. Just do whatever makes you feel good.
These women married and had kids….but actually mothering these kids was not part of the picture.
Now people don’t date…they ‘hook up’ with anything, anytime. The whole thing is a sprawling socio-cultural nightmare.
17 Thrasymachus // Apr 10, 2010 at 3:05 pm
I agree, Phyllis. Thank you for reminding me of this all important truth.
Strong, morally sound women are more important, perhaps, than men in keeping a society healthy. Certainly they are of equal importance!
Nations, like individuals, have life spans — or at the least, they rise and fall.
As Dr. Yeagley puts it, nations are “on probation.”
This is precisely why I see race and nation as important. In the Old and New Testaments, God concerns Himself with nations and their destinies, as well as with individuals.
Thus nationalism is a Biblical concept!
And yet the “conservatives” of this day and hour fear and loathe the very word, “nationalism,” so infected have they become with liberal dogma.
I do not see how it can be possible, from a Biblical point of view, for any believer to be vitally concerned with race and nation, since the Almighty has an interest in these things.
Liberalism denies that God established a Divine Order in this world. This is the reason I have rejected it. It has nothing to do with race hatred and everything to do with religion and morals.
Separate religion from personal decisions in politics? This is not a possibility, as religion, in its very nature, takes over and governs the whole of a person’s life and conduct.
The liberals are playing a very dangerous game. Even should they achieve “victory,” it will be a most ruinous victory.
18 Thrasymachus // Apr 10, 2010 at 3:09 pm
“I do not see how it can be possible, from a Biblical point of view, for any believer to be vitally concerned with race and nation, since the Almighty has an interest in these things.”
Woops! Should have proof-read before posting! I’d made a few errors in style and one in meaning! I had meant to say, “I do not see how it can be possible for it to be IMMORAL, from a Biblical point of view, for any believer to be vitally concerned with race and nation, since the Almighty has an interest in these things.”
19 colleague graduate // Apr 10, 2010 at 5:41 pm
Thras mentioned MLK “holiday”. I agree. That “holiday” drives me up a wall.
20 colleague graduate // Apr 10, 2010 at 6:48 pm
I think David has a good idea about having an Indian appointed for Supreme Court justice. There’s a black, a hispanic, a Jew female- Ginsburg, the other female- Sandra Day O’Connor. However, I don’t know of any Indian as intelligent as David, so I don’t know if there’s anyone who could be appointed. Maybe David knows of someone out there in OK and the Plains/Southwest.
21 colleague graduate // Apr 10, 2010 at 7:03 pm
Carter was a speaker at my colleague graduation back in August of ’73. He went there for his Freshman year, and then transferred to The Naval Academy. He was the Governor of Georgia then. Of course David went to Emory in Atlanta in the late 70′s to early 80′s for one of his advanced degrees, I believe in Comparative Literature or something like that. The Carter Library is very close to the Emory campus, and was starting to get built in about ’85. I was living right near there then. David has his own dislike of Carter, and he’s entitled to that, even if Carter was Governor of GA for awhile. I never thought of Carter as a Communist, I must admit. But David’s smarter than me, so he must know something I don’t. David and I are about exactly the same age.
22 MariaAnastasia // Apr 10, 2010 at 8:03 pm
Dr Yeagley, Would you please consider running for President in 2012? I mean this in all seriousness, and it is being discussed by others on the Mad Jewess blog as well.
More than anyone, I believe an American Indian is certainly entitled to occupy the highest office in the land. For one thing, this was your country before it was ours; you are very conservative; you are a committed Christian who understands the importance of seeing this as one nation under God; you have a healthy respect for the White man; you are very intelligent; and you are very handsome (which should insure the female vote.
PLEASE CONSIDER 2012.
23 colleague graduate // Apr 11, 2010 at 7:27 am
Well, David, once before you commented saying “where’s my Comanche girlfriend?”. If you haven’t found one yet, how about MariaAnastasia instead if she’s available? Lucky you. No female’s ever said I was very handsome. Congratulations.
24 David Yeagley // Apr 11, 2010 at 12:17 pm
Well, finally getting back to matters at hand…
So, Jewish women want to see an Indian run for president. Now, if that ain’t sumpthin’! I have to meditate on this a bit. This is a historical moment! The Mad Jewess. Love it!
But her’s is a volatile site! (You thought BadEagle was bad!)
An Excellent Write-Up on “The Hated White Male” By David Yeagley
Hmmm. Shall I adjust my self-perspective now? This is serious! And here’s yet another one:
Native Americans SCREWED under Obama-”Care”~They are not the right “Color”
Man, this woman it hot on the trail!
25 David Yeagley // Apr 11, 2010 at 12:28 pm
Maria, I of course deeply appreciate your sentiments. They are beyond my ken, actually. I national (or state, or even local) campaign is an enormous enterprise. The kind of backing necessary is not something available.
But, hey, we could do a media run! A kind of mock campaign. Now, wouldn’t that be interesting. Of course, you realize, most conservatives, serious conservatives, have no understanding of Indians, in fact misunderstandings, let alone have any idea how to talk about or to Indians. There is no logistical, rhetorical foundation. I’ve been trying to set one for a number of years now.
There just aren’t enough Indians to count, to be important. The only news of Indians is bad news. I haven’t been able to change that.
26 David Yeagley // Apr 11, 2010 at 12:41 pm
And look at this:
Land Deal to Push Pataki Over the Million-Acre Mark in Preservation of Open Space
The STATES are into buying up land, too. What are they all trying to do, herd everyone into the cities–so the government can have more control? Are the cities all going to become like “reservations?” This is incredible.
27 colleague graduate // Apr 11, 2010 at 1:28 pm
David’s right about needing alot of money to run a winning campaign. Usually the candidate with the most money spent on their campaign wins. Lobbyists donate money to campaigns. Anybody can donate to a campaign. With big bucks comes more advertising. And the most qualified candidate might not win, but the richest would. David might be the brightest in ’12, but not have the money. When he was on CSPAN at UMass at Amherst, CSPAN is paid for by donations, not having any commercials. There’s a case in point about David not having the money. When I was in colleague, I wrote a paper on interviewing. Research into this subject at my colleague’s library revealed this fact- that interviewers make their decisions to hire in the first two minutes of the interview. It would not matter how much you knew for the job. What would matter the most was your personal appearance. So David might run against Sarah Palin, but Sarah’s notoriety might count more that David’s being way more intelligent than her. That’s just politics. It’s a popularity contest. I also took a course on Political Science in colleague, and that helps. I also took a course in Poetry, and that helped me create my Username. I passed all these courses with Bs and Cs. David would have gotten As. I performed better than 72% of the nation on the quantitative section of the GRE in 1978, but only about better than 38% on the verbal section. Verbal is David’s expertise to this day. He would have perhaps made a perfect score, maybe on the quantitative also.
28 David Yeagley // Apr 11, 2010 at 2:18 pm
Aw, shucks! Ya’ll are makin’ me blush. (But, I’m already a red man, so, no one will notice.)
The fact that money place the key role in American elections I think is a tell-tale social philosophy. Those who are financially successful wield the power in the land. Use to be, only they could vote. In an indirect way, it’s still true.
29 colleague graduate // Apr 11, 2010 at 3:11 pm
What a funny, witty joke, that we made you blush, and you’re a red man and no one will notice! Blushing is a psychomatic response whereby a thought makes a physiological response to someone’s body. Lie detector tests are psychomatic also.
30 colleague graduate // Apr 11, 2010 at 3:13 pm
Speaking of blush, it’s 5:12 pm now, and I believe I’ll pour a glass of cab sav and sit on my back deck in the lovely 70 degree temp and blue sky with wind, and wind this day on down to a close.
31 colleague graduate // Apr 11, 2010 at 3:13 pm
Speaking of blush wine, that is
32 colleague graduate // Apr 11, 2010 at 3:14 pm
Maybe chat later before I retire for the evening
33 David Yeagley // Apr 11, 2010 at 3:28 pm
Try to figure out Jewish women while your contemplating the beauty of your environment.
34 MariaAnastasia // Apr 11, 2010 at 3:34 pm
Well! I’ve been happily married for over 25 years, but if not, I would go for Dr Yeagley in a heartbeat!
We’re both conservative classical pianists for starters. People have told me I look American Indian, probably because I’m half-Sicilian and they confuse that with Indian. (eyeroll)
If money is a problem with the concept of running for President in 2012, we could arrange a fundraiser.
35 David Yeagley // Apr 11, 2010 at 10:03 pm
MA, I do appreciate your spirit! And your confidence. I used to think the world revolved around Jewish women! I suppose one has to be immersed in Jewish culture a while to perceive that.
It is a saving thing. A real Jew is a savior. He lives to save the world. That may be partly the Jesus effect, in the last 2,000 years. But, today, certainly the American Jews are devoted to making society better–at least according to what they think is better. Now, I think some of that involves self-preservation techniques for the diaspora, but, Israel makes it all clear.
Ah, well, these are personal views of mine. Maybe I should keep them to myself. I just remember a Jewish lady (Frances B.) who acted as my impressario (impressaria?) back when I was a rising star pianist. My mother teased me. “My, my. If Mrs. B. is for you, it doesn’t matter if God is against you!” I learned pretty early an appreciation for the Jewish impetus to makes things happen. Dedication. Devotion. That kind of thing. I valued it very deeply.
In Comanche land, if you have to be nominated to run for an office. You’re supposed to respond, as in ‘responsibility.’ You honor the people, always. I think I would respond to the public, about a call to run for office. But, as I said, I have no knowlege or ability, really, for a campaign. I know what my ideas are, but, someone else always tells you what to do. I’d quicly end up like Sarah Palin, who become quite frustrated in the McCain campaign–because the professionals all treated her like a hick, which she was, but, she was a good hick! I mean, she was solid in what she believed and said. Practical, common sense, and devoted.
But, I don’t think the American people are ready for an Indian in any American public office.
36 colleague graduate // Apr 12, 2010 at 6:43 am
Sarah Palin is an applause seeker politician in her simplicity. Additionally, Todd Palin is a member of the Alaska Secede from the US party. That’s not patriotism. One only has to type in on a Google Search “Todd Palin’s membership in the Alaska Secede from the US party”, and the first page will list many articles of personal accounts of meetings of this group, one of which Sarah spoke at, and what she said there. Could all these articles be fiction, and written by people who don’t like her up there? Well, they’re news articles posted to the i-net, so they aren’t fiction. David could serve as a write in candidate just to defeat her in ’12. He would be better than her and Ron Paul, who doesn’t believe the US should enter any war overseas. I guess Dr. Paul knows better than any military general did from WW II, better than the planning of the Army Corps of Engineers to use Operations Research, a statistical body of knowledge, to diffuse land mines in Europe planted by the Nazis ahead of tanks brought in after D-Day. Ron Paul is full of bologna and full of himself too much. David would also be a better selection than a repeat by Obama, or “Genie”. McCain was Larry Hagman in the Air Force uniform, and “I Dream of Genie” was the theme in the last election. I voted for McCain here in SC, a potential real 5-star general, not one wearing female baggy genie pants. I see where Romney just won a straw poll for Republicans for their pick for ’12. I’d vote for David since he went to Emory and so did my little brother who now has a son with some Cherokee or Lumbee blood in him. Romney represents some of that bigamy stuff and can’t escape that link. Anybody who is a student at Brigham Young University also has a link to bigamy. Any Mormon. Harem, scarem is their motto from their past, and some currently. Kinda Arab-like, Desert-like. Right where Warren Jeffs was caught. David would be the best choice for a write-in behind the closed curtain of the voting machine in ’12.
37 colleague graduate // Apr 12, 2010 at 7:06 am
There have never been any bigamist American Indians. But some of their tribes are from the desert. I would not vote for a sex cult representative who’s a Mormon. I just looked at the Links on this page, and looked at the photos of the Indian males. They had high cheek bones. These photos are similar to the drawing that was just made of the 4,000 year old man who’s DNA was found in Western Greenland. He had very high cheek bones. He was originally from Siberia. Perhaps Indians are originaly from there. That means they would not be from a desert area where harems existed/exist. They would be just normal, single family people like normal white middle class families in the US, if this 4,000 year old man is a connection. AOL had this article on with the drawing of how he looked.
38 colleague graduate // Apr 12, 2010 at 8:03 am
I have been to Puerto Rico twice. Once in ’77 on a surfing trip to the surfing area on the West Coast, and again in ’79 on a recently quit surfing trip back to there just to hang out there, renting a shack both times for about 35 bucks a week in the Barrios Puntas area just north of the town of Rincon. I never saw any Taino Indians. Everybody was hispanic except for a handfull of white surfers. When I got in the publico and paid my quarter to ride from Rincon back up to Barrios Puntas, everybody sat in the seats next to each other with about four to a seat. Nobody was a Taino. Most spoke Spanish in PR, including San Juan, and a very few spoke English. I have no idea where any dark-skinned Tainos lived. Perhaps they lived on PR’s East Coast. I never saw any such Indian tribe, but then again I only went from SJ along the North Coast to the West Coast famed surfing area and back.
You must log in to post a comment.