David Yeagley is the great-great-grandson of Comanche leader Bad Eagle. 
Our elected officials in the United States Congress tried to read the U.S. Constitution, on the floor of the House, for the first time in American History. Democrats tried to create a Negro issue in the very opening moments of the historical event. Negroes must rule. Negroes must be first. Negroes must dominate, on stage, on camera, and in law. This is America. This is the Democrat.
Democrats of course scoffed and mocked at the idea of reading the Constitution to begin with, for obvious reasons. They despise it, in case anyone had any doubts before now. Limbaugh says “they hate it.”
But, on such a historical day, to make the Negro the center of attention, in the opening moments of the event, shows how weak white people in this nation have become. The behavior of the Negro, to disrupt, to interfere, to denigrate, to “get down” in any an all circumstances show how little control, little training, little propriety exist in Democrats and Negroes–even at the very highest levels of government. Once again, the Democrats and especially Negroes bring disgrace and embarrassment to the country. The Negro has no taste, no class, and nothing to say–but complaint. The Negro has been a curse to the society, by law! White people’s law–oedipal white liberal law, that has little or nothing to do with true equality, but only redistribution of wealth and miscegenation. Liberal law is about free money and free sex.
Speaking of highest levels, the acting President of the United States, Barry (“Obama”) Soetoro can be easily impeached now. Article I, Section 1 states that the House has “sole power of impeachment.” The speaker has the power to consider such a postion. I say go for it. Why allow the lying, black African Communist traitor to continue? Why let him wreak havoc another minute in our country? This is the opportunity to remove him, not waste time trying to undo what he’s done.
This is simply my opinion, of course. These are all my notions of social reality. Nothing more.
However, I have been asked again to present my opinions at the American Renaissance Conference next month. Readers will recall last year the conference was cancelled due to Communist (Marxist) operatives, apparently fomented by union representatives, and their death threats to any hotel mangement and staff who offered to host the American Renaissance conference. This year, the place of the conference is undisclose except to those invited, and members.
At this conference, I will speak my peace about the white race, about the White Anglo-Saxon Protestant in particular. I will express my opinion about his accomplishments, failures, neglects, and visions of the future. I will surely report here on BadEagle.com the contents of the conference, and make available any audio/video records.
Yes, I’m angry. I’m disgusted. I’m offended. Now, how to be thus, without angering others, without being disgusting and offensive myself, I do not yet know. I take no pleasure in being offensive, however often I may be. And I take no pleasure in being offended, either.
I think it is a matter of what you love. If you really love the country, you are offended at those who abuse it, who have no respect for it, who are low, greedy, and arrogant. Love is protective. We don’t need “momma grizzlies.” We need warriors. Men of courage. Men of truth. The lack of such is what has produced the momma grizzlies. Every conservative brunette in the country now thinks she’s Sara Palin. Fine. This only indicates the absense of strength in the white male.
I look forward to the 2011 American Renaissance Conference.
17 responses so far ↓
1 David Yeagley // Jan 6, 2011 at 11:19 am
“Gentlewoman”? The official yields to the gentlman from…, and then yields to the “gentlewoman”?
Ridiculous.
The cognate term is “Lady.” Apparently, there are no ladies in America. They done pass away wit da nigguhs.
This is truly unbelievable, the denigration of our country, even through stupidity of language! Liberals literally make up words, to express their racism and sexism. It isn’t about equality. It is about denigration!
2 David Yeagley // Jan 6, 2011 at 11:27 am
The Democrat House rep who made the ruckus at the very beginning, before the reading had even begun, brought up the business of the first version of the Constitution, which contained the terms of “3/5 of a person,” referring to the Negro. The Republicans had already chosen to read the revised version of the constitution,
“Negro” and “person of African descent” are not terms found in the constitution, or in the Amendments. Only the word “slavery,” and there were plenty of English, Scottish, and Irish slaves in that day.
I will document all this, as it happened on TV, as soon as the tapes are available.
3 David Yeagley // Jan 6, 2011 at 12:00 pm
Jesse Jackson, Jr. was the one who had akst which version of the constitution would be read. Read about that in the liberl, mocking LA Times article by Michael Muskal.
4 Pamela K. // Jan 6, 2011 at 2:04 pm
“The cognate term is “Lady.” Apparently, there are no ladies in America. They done pass away wit da nigguhs.”
What the heck is that suppose to mean? Are you saying that all American women naturally lust after black men? Guess again!
Jesse Jackson Jr. is a nasty, arrogant race-baiter and black opportunist just like his old man. What’s that old saying, the apple doesn’t fall from the tree? That’s him!
Somebody should have clocked him yesterday, not so much for disrupting the Senate proceedings but for being the stupid, arrogant black opportunist that he is!
Why doesn’t he just go back to Chicago and round up some more entitlement class Baby Mamas and teach them how to sponge off the government and us by laying on their backs?
That’s all someone like him is good for anyway, teaching the dregs of society how to “get over” on the rest of us.
You ought to know by now that the Negro is the poster child of the Democratic Party. With them, everything revolves around the appeasement of black skin and not for any more reason than the wussie liberals are terrified of them. And you can be sure that blacks like Jackson and Maxine Waters and others pushing an agenda of black empowerment through racial intimidation are well aware of their cowardice too!
The Republicans are back, but will things change? While they seem less intimidated by radical black activists, how long will they too, continue to put up with them?
Furthermore, in a related manner, if the dreaded “N” word is to be removed from the works of Mark Twain, namely “Huckleberry Finn” and “The Adventures of Tom Sawyer” than it should be removed from all black rap songs, black movies, black literature, etc.
It was black idiomatic speech corruption of the word, “Negro” that first coined this word in the first place. So, if it is deemed offensive for a white man to use it than it should be deemed offensive for a black man to use it too!
5 David Yeagley // Jan 6, 2011 at 3:04 pm
I’m saying that I don’t hear the word “lady” used anymore. When our congress has to be so stupidly “politically correct” as to fabricate words like “gentlewoman,” I say they’re still wimped out.
Nothing to do with American women and black men. The word “Lady” doesn’t exist anymore, just like “nigger” doesn’t exist anymore–according to our fabricated word-itions in DC and in the media.
Sorry if you misunderstood. I was so ticked off when I fumbled out this blog that it may appear irrational. I may take it down.
Dick Gregory thought that if there wasn’t any word “nigger,” there would be any niggers. Dick Gregory, Nigger (Washington Square, 1964), p.209. At least that’s the way Robert Lipsyte expressed Gregory’s though.
6 David Yeagley // Jan 6, 2011 at 3:06 pm
I’m trying to access either the transcript or the video of the beginning of the meeting. The Democrat who made the protest was in fact not recognized by the chair. But, it was just the thought that he would do that–make the Negro the center of attention on this most historic day.
Historic–in the normal arrogance, impropriety, perverted egotism, that will wreck all civilization–just to get center stage.
7 zephyr // Jan 6, 2011 at 3:32 pm
Impeachment would be a great start . . . but only a start.
David and Pamela–both on target. Except that we DO need grizzlies–AND warriors.
8 David Yeagley // Jan 6, 2011 at 3:35 pm
Here’s a story on it what happened!
GOP-led recital of Constitution sparks testiness over omissions.
“Testiness.” A Freudian slip, apparently. We’re looking for testosterone. All we saw was abysmal wimp-ocity. Democrats, crying over Negroes. Negroes asserting superiority.
Rep. Jay Inslee (D-Wash.) was the —- who tried to make an issue, through the Negro.
with the parliamentary manoeuvering assistance of I believe Peter Fong, Democrat California assemblyman, 22nd District.
Thank you, ABC. Watch the video, see the anti-Constitution, anti-American, anti-civility agent, Democrat Jay Inslee. Remember that name. White, oedipal liberal, with Pacific Islander/Asian Peter Fong (who seems much older than his picture on the Assembly page.
9 Pamela K. // Jan 6, 2011 at 4:30 pm
You’re right, Zephyr, they should start with impeachment. Furthermore, anyone holding higher office who must have known about this fraud being perpetrated against the American people-Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Elena Kagan, Eric Holder, to name a few- should be charged with conspiracy with the intent to commit treason. And treason is a capital offense, is it not? Punishable by death, or life imprisonment.
10 David Yeagley // Jan 6, 2011 at 4:45 pm
The term “impeachment,” which I noted in the blog, is meantioned right away in the Constitution. I pointed out that the Republicans own the House now, which has “the sole power of Impeachment.”
The word first appears in Article 1, Sec. 2. Then we’re told in Art. 1, Sec. 3 (6th par.) that the Senate has “the sole power to try all impeachments. The next par. says the jugment is only to remove from office. No other penalty imposed by Senate.
Removal from office–of any unworthy soul, was practically the first order of business in the Constitution! That’s how important it is. But our beloved, patient, kind, forebearing, self-righteous leaders don’t have the “testiness” to follow through on this. Very rarely.
11 Sioux // Jan 6, 2011 at 4:55 pm
And once the Senate votes to impeach, and the PINO, Barry Soetoro, may then be tried in a civilian court for his treason to our country. We have no proof that he is a citizen, natural born or otherwise, so this is going to be very interesting. We’ll see if there are any true warriors in the House of Representatives or just pretenders with very short attention spans.
12 Sioux // Jan 6, 2011 at 4:59 pm
Vis a vis, “Ladies” – methinks this word is a descriptor of behavior not gender identification. Ladies are women, but not necessarily the reverse. Thank the feminazis who never wanted any kindness or politeness offered to them because of their “womanhood.” Nothing helps a man to know better whether he is with a lady or not than on such behavior. Very few ladies left in the world – to our own detriment.
13 Pamela K. // Jan 6, 2011 at 6:38 pm
Very true, Sioux.
Senator Barbara Boxer’s rebuke of a military general for addressing her as “Ma’am” instead of “Senator” is proof of this! Actually, he should have responded to the author of the Partial Birth Abortion Act, “I beg your pardon, Senator Baby Butcher”.
And then, there are those repugnant “reality show” females like “Jersey Shore” star Snookie Polizzi, the spoiled, foul-mouthed Khardashian sisters, and the equally priviledged, botoxed walking nightmares known as “The Real Housewives of New Jersey.” Believe me, they are not the real housewives of New Jersey! Nor is guttersnipe Polizzi any kind of representative of the real Jersey Shore. Besides, we never call it “Jersey Shore” we say “Down the Shore.”
14 David Yeagley // Jan 6, 2011 at 8:31 pm
I think a lady is a great thing, personally. I can appreciate a woman like Sarah Palin, of course, but, she’s not really a lady. This isn’t about good or bad, right or wrong, at all. Just, a thing. A phenomenon. A tom-boy is a great thing, too! I really don’t know that a woman can be both. I don’t know.
15 Following Him // Jan 7, 2011 at 12:12 am
David … you said, “I really don’t know that a woman can be both. I don’t know.”
If I remember your bio … you’re not married, right?
I love the momma grizzly that came out of Pamela K.
16 Asaph // Jan 7, 2011 at 7:13 am
I must admit to feeling let down at Boehner’s remark about Cao’s interruption on the eligibility issue. If THAT is the type of leadership he is going to offer American’s, after taking the time to have the Constitution read to Americans, it remains obvious the Constitution means nothing to these people. So, strike one against RINOs and incumbents, like Boehner, offering lip service on sticking to the Constitution. If they don’t have the guts to request Obama release his birth certificate and other important past documents, to end this growing controversy they aren’t going to do anything about anything else, but status quo RINOism.
So, the entire reading of the Constitution was show boating, that’s about all.
17 David Yeagley // Jan 7, 2011 at 10:23 am
Political, emotional, professional, all these things matter to those in DC. Some have a sense of history, and the country. Others really don’t.
Of all the branches of gov’t, the House is closest to the people. Their’s is the sole power of impeachment. It’s their job. Someone has to make the motion, file the papers. It is Boehner who will direct it, if it ever happened. It is his option.
They’re just going to say, “We have other, more important, pressing issues…”
You must log in to post a comment.