David Yeagley is the great-great-grandson of Comanche leader Bad Eagle. 
Rush Limbaugh: In passing commentary about liberal reporters and their dehumanization or objectification of human subjects, Limbaugh said this:
We are putting the audio together even now. No, I know NBC did cover Nikki Haley, but they didn’t know that she’s a minority. They just thought she had a good tan. They didn’t know that she has Indian roots. So we got one by ‘em. We snuck one by ‘em. High cheekbones just like Elizabeth Warren, but they didn’t catch that. They just thought, you know, brunette, dark skin. This is the way they look at people.
Truth has always been, Rush doesn’t like Indians. Never has. Conservatives don’t like the race element, or anyone claiming it. But in his furious humor, Limbaugh thinks Nikki Haley is American Indian, when the woman is half Hindu. This is the disrespect and denigration that non-race venues create. This is why I refuse to refer to people from India as “Indian.” Their historical name is “Hindu.”
Binders: Women in binders? The way the liberal (libido-enhanced) Democrats handle the Romney reference, it is clear that, for them, “binders” is a subliminal reference to some kind of women’s underwear.
Guns in Oklahoma: Guns save lives again. A twelve-year-old girl in Bryan County shot a home invader. Didn’t kill him, but, easily might have. Guns save lives, homes, and countries. Guns keep’em down on the farm. At least guns keep’em safe. Bless them farm kids.
To the Dogs: A delivery postman died apparently as the result of a dog attack, in Stanton, Delaware. People who do not care for their dogs should be impounded themselves, like their dogs. Misbehaved dogs reflect the improprieties and character failings of their owners, in most cases. Check it out. Unruly dogs are owned by unruly people, or people who are negligent in other matters besides pet care. Mark the owners of unruly dogs.
“The gang’s all here,” at Al Smith’s annual dinner.”
Catholic Honor: On her radio show this morning, Laura Ingraham lamented the fact that Chris Matthews and Katie Curic were seated on the extensive dais with Cardinal Dolan, for the annual Al Smith charity dinner. “The Church seems to elevate the ones who defy her core beliefs,” she said. I would suggest a different interpretation. The Church turns the other cheek. The Church is trying to display a species of forgiveness in the most formal and public ways. No?
RedSkins: The same ol’ superficial issue still has a payoff for desperate media players. But now Indians are “Pig Skins.” That’s a great liberal improvement. The weekly Washington City Paper refuses to call the NFL team by their name, but instead insists that the “offense” of a tiny minority of white liberals and white liberal-trained Indians should be honored. Obviously the paper is completely ignorant of the fact. Indians don’t care. Most are not offended at all. So say Peter Harris and the Annenberg Foundation, by about 90%. Well, the team is actually mostly black anyway, and blacks are generally not offended by being considered anything other than black, so, why not let it be? There sure aren’t any Indians on the team to be offended.
Maybe Rush has a point after all, but, Indians will be Indians, regardless of American political discussion. Only whites can pretend they’re not a race, conservative or liberal.
20 responses so far ↓
1 Thrasymachus // Oct 19, 2012 at 2:39 pm
This disconnect of the press with the American people totally baffles me! I know for a fact that white people never had a problem with the name Washington RedSkins. Growing up, the thought that I or anybody else should be offended by this simply was totally non-existent!
No white person, until perhaps recently (and ONLY because of insane media propaganda) would be other than proud to wear this shirt — especially if this were the home team.
If the link did not work, here’s the page:
Washington Redskins Women’s Tee Shirt
2 Thrasymachus // Oct 19, 2012 at 2:54 pm
Dr. Y,
You probably have considerably more patience than I in this matter. It actually angers me that the press would deliberately misname the sports team. I find THAT offensive. It is a form of LYING. It convinces me that the public press cannot be trusted because of its bizarre biases.
The deliberate misnaming of things is the worst practice a newspaper or media source can indulge in and a sign of corruption.
3 Thrasymachus // Oct 19, 2012 at 3:24 pm
“A dog reflects the family life. Whoever saw a frisky dog in a gloomy family, or a sad dog in a happy one? Snarling people have snarling dogs, dangerous people have dangerous ones.” — Arthur Conan Doyle, The Case-Book of Sherlock Holmes
4 Bonus Gift // Oct 19, 2012 at 3:25 pm
Is anyone offended by the Vikings’ name; I am not. The issue is generally not about the name or American Indians per say, it seems to be about scrubbing the country of its past cultural Marxist style. One of the keys to this is to constantly attack the history and associated symbols of the group or groups you are trying to destroy, and no word, symbol, etc. is too small to attack and/or replace. For example, why so many streets named MLK? Thus, it’s not so much calling it MLK as getting rid of the past name. This also, at least in part, explains why socialists/cultural Marxists/progressives/etc. are a bit conflicted with respect to American Indians, they want to use them to bludgeon whites with but then again they represent a reminder of the history of the country. That’s a tough one when you want to get rid of Whitey and his related history at the same time. Their solution, and directly out of Lenin’s and related players playbooks, get rid of your most hated enemy first then mop up the small fry once that is done. They view the Muslims in the same light. In fact, that is exactly what some Marxist gay idiot in England recently said when it was pointed out the Muslims don’t tolerate gays. Again, first destroy Whitey then shout and drown out, mentally or physically beat down, bully, or just outright kill anyone in the way of your utopia. The ends always justify the means, and the only evil is not to do it. So why get rid of the Redskins team name? Answer: It’s not the name per say, it’s that the target group is attached to it; it’s essentially the same reason a psychopath goes out of his or her way to grab a piece of candy from a baby and throw it down on the ground in front of the now crying child: (1) because they can, (2) because they want to, (3) because they hate the happy child for being happy, and (4) because they are miserable.
They came for Main Street and renamed it MLK Boulevard and no one said anything because no one wanted to be a called a racist, they allocated ten spots for Chicano studies and no one objected because to do so would be “intolerant”, they renamed my cherished Redskins “Pigskins” because the Washington City paper said so and we paid attention because the media knows better, they came for my gun and no one stopped them because it was said to be an “assault rifle”, they came for me and no one knew because Whites are third or maybe fourth class citizens only good to steal from, rape, or kill for what they did to the exalted others, they came for the Comanche and no one stopped them because Dr. Yeagley should have known his place and stuck to music, etc. etcetera, … I figure at this pace Ozymandias would represent quit a good outcome for the psychopaths that are the cultural Marxists.
“’My name is Ozymandias, king of kings:
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!’”
Nothing beside remains: round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare,
The lone and level sands stretch far away.”
5 zephyr // Oct 19, 2012 at 3:26 pm
Have you ever contacted Limbaugh’s show (via email or whatever) to explain your issue? Can’t hurt.
As for the Catholic thing ~ have to side with Ingraham on this one. It’s all about garnering political power. The church should base its decisions on biblical values, and as an organization, oppose those whose agenda is clearly directed toward thwarting all things pertaining to Christ.
You’ve pointed out yourself how the obligations of the individual are often very different from the obligations of the organization. Particularly true when it comes to spiritual issues.
I have prayed Obama (and his ilk) would turn from their evil course; God would certainly forgive them if they repented. Maybe some of them will yet.
But no organized church body should show support for the communist agenda. Ever. If they do, they are doing so because they want to be a–or the ONLY– state-sponsored church. That always works out so well.
Catholic Church leadership often makes decisions based on what will help the Vatican gain political power. Not an incentive Jesus ever used.
6 Thrasymachus // Oct 19, 2012 at 3:43 pm
No one ever gives a derogatory name to a sports team. A positive and inspiring name is always selected. That much should be obvious to all.
So I agree with BG that it’s really about destroying the entire American Heritage and all its symbols, for Cultural Marxist purposes.
7 Thrasymachus // Oct 19, 2012 at 3:53 pm
I normally don’t like to criticize the Catholic Church. But sometimes I get the impression that if someone sins on a small scale they are threatened with Hellfire, but when someone sins on a huge scale (i.e., gaining wealth and power), the Church is silent — not saying that they are going to Heaven, but simply not speaking out.
In fact, in Plato’s Republic, the character Thrasymachus makes this very argument, viz., those who commit injustice on a small scale are cursed, whereas the one who committs injustice on a huge scale — an Adolph Hitler, for example — are called blessed.
8 David Yeagley // Oct 19, 2012 at 4:33 pm
Well, I don’t know that the RCC has blessed Adolf, but, they seem reluctant to damn Islam.
Anyway, I still think the behavior of an institution is different from that of an individual. I don’t say I agree with their decision to ‘exalt’ their members who flaunt opposite values (like Kerry, Mathews, Pelosi, etc.). I’m only trying to account for how they might be justifying these kinds of public exaltation.
Essentially, the Church would have to excommunicate about every major Democrat Party leader and half the Democrats in the country!
The Church doesn’t dramatize, much, the very few excommunications that happen. Strange.
Nobody wants to drop members. No country, no organization, no church, no group. Sticky business, group-ism.
9 Asaph // Oct 20, 2012 at 4:12 am
The reason religious groups exist is to promote and forward a message about God (gods) as they believe it, and worship. The very act of removing those in the religion who disregard or advocate rebellion is an act of loyalty to their deity. This shows the real reason the RCC exists – political power. Was that way from the start and remains so. Otherwise, she WOULD warn and then remove the vast array of rebels to her proclaimed standards within the American government and any and all others.
All religions and groups have the very acts of God in this matter for examples, from removing Lucifer from heaven, to the rebellion of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram, to the removal of Ananaias and Saphira, in Acts.
“Groupism” is not “sticky business” if people in leadership, and in the ranks are loyal to their beliefs and source of those beliefs. For professed Christians the honor of God and His truth should be far greater than the honor of fallen men. Groupism only becomes sticky business when apostasy forms in leadership and ranks of “believers.”
Obama is still in the White House because of this apostasy. Pelosi and Co. still in the Catholic Church, and the same can be said for any and all other churches where the policy is found.
It is either policy or principle. They cannot abide together.
“The policy principle is one that will assuredly lead into difficulties. He who regards the favor of men as more desirable than the favor of God will fall under the temptation to sacrifice principle for worldly gain or recognition. Thus fidelity to God is constantly being sacrificed. Truth, God’s truth, must be cherished in the soul and held in the strength of heaven, or the power of Satan will wrest it from you.”
“Those who are controlled by policy rather than by principle are not to be trusted. They will pervert the truth, conceal facts, and construe the words of others to mean that which was never intended. They will employ flattering words, while the poison of asps is under their tongue. He who does not earnestly seek the divine guidance will be deceived by their smooth words and their artful plans.”
“Selfish policy is not heaven-born, but earthly. The leading maxim is, “The end justifies the means.” And in pursuing the course entered upon, it stops at nothing, but seeks its own success. This may be traced in every department of business; it is the prevailing element in every class of society; in the grand councils of nations, and in every meeting where the Spirit of Christ is not the ruling principle.”
10 zephyr // Oct 20, 2012 at 5:46 pm
“I don’t know that the RCC has blessed Adolf, but, they seem reluctant to damn Islam.”
Wonder if the RCC will bite on this new Muslim-initiated plan:
“Sheikh Siddiqui, a barrister from Nuneaton, said he wanted to form a coalition with the Church of England, Catholics, Jewish groups, Trade Unions and even Conservatives to encourage their ranks to join his “campaign for civility”.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/9607763/Muslims-protest-age-of-mockery-as-thousands-descend-on-Google-HQ.html
“campaign for civility”–from Islam. Laughable, except that some ppl are still so spiritually ignorant they will actually fall for it.
11 Thrasymachus // Oct 20, 2012 at 5:58 pm
I actually was thinking of how the RCC honors “successful” members of organized crime with grand funerals. I mentioned Hitler as an illustration of what Thrasymachus (the real one — not I!) was arguing for in the Republic of Plato. Sorry for the confusion.
I did a search engine enquiry into Elvis Presley’s heritage, as I had thought that he might well be part Indian.
“Elvis Presley: Native American Lineage
Elvis’ great-great-great-grandmother, Morning White Dove (1800-1835), was a full-blooded Cherokee Indian. She married William Mansell, a settler in western Tennessee, in 1818. William’s father, Richard Mansell, had been a soldier in the Revolutionary War. Mansell is a French name—its literal translation is the man from Le Mans. The Mansells migrated from Norman France to Scotland, and then later to Ireland. In the 18th century the family came to the American Colonies. The appellation ‘white’ in Morning Dove’s name refers to her status as a friendly Indian. Early American settlers called peaceable Indians ‘white’, while ‘red’ was the designation for warring Indians or those who sided with the British in the Revolutionary War. It was common for male settlers in the West to marry ‘white’ Indians as there was a scarcity of females on the American frontier.”
Source
12 David Yeagley // Oct 21, 2012 at 10:18 am
I think Wayne Newton is Cherokee, also. Of course, Cher, and now Ann Coulter–as I have so brilliantly proven…
Speaking of frontier women, I recommend
Annette Kolodny, The Land Before Her (1984)
Lillian Schlissel, Women’s Diaries of the Westward Journey (1982).
Part of the women’s studies junk wave, but, in this case, really interesting–and important, and definitely not junk.
13 Thrasymachus // Oct 21, 2012 at 11:32 am
I appreciate the recommended reading. It would be good for me to read something in a new direction, and these titles are indeed interesting.
14 David Yeagley // Oct 21, 2012 at 11:48 am
Most of white blood found in 19th century plains Indians was from white women–who had been taken captive. They were used to “breed” more numbers for hunting bands and raiding warriors. Plains Indians were quite the minority, relatively speaking.
Quanah Parker was one of these “breeds.” Half white from mother Cynthia.
15 Thrasymachus // Oct 21, 2012 at 4:29 pm
History is full of stories of the women and children taken captive. I am guessing that some of the women taken captive by the plains Indians were only young girls at the first. What was the most common fate of the young white boys? Were they simply killed — or were some of them, as in John Wayne movies(!) — “adopted” in some fashion into certain tribes. (N.B., I am thinking that this is a most unlikely scenerio, only concocted in the Hollywood imagination.)
I am thinking of some John Wayne movie I saw once — don’t know which one — in which an Indian warrior grabbed a white boy, cut the boy’s thumb and his own with a knife to mix the blood issuing from the wounds and forthwith proclaimed that they were now “blood brothers.” (Don’t remember how that fit into the plot.)
I realize, of course, that motion pictures and reality are two very different worlds!
16 Sioux // Oct 21, 2012 at 7:15 pm
I listened to Laura on my drive North last Friday. She was complaining not to bluntly about not getting an invite — as a RC convert, Laura believes that she is a better Catholic than the ones stretched across the dais. That’s when I realized – the most devout Catholics are converts these days: Laura, Dinesh, Bobby Jindal. Any others? Maybe the Church fathers thought they would get less grief having the cradle Catholics up there..maybe they might be inspired by the evening…Hah…oops sorry for judging Katie C and Chrissie thrill up the leg man.
Heck, the Vatican is positioning for being the Church of the NWO – all that social justice nonsense is part of the ploy.
17 David Yeagley // Oct 21, 2012 at 7:16 pm
Let me alter my interpretation of the Democrat fetish of women in binders. It’s not their version of women’s magic underwear. It’s some strange S&M reference, which excites the Dems, at least subliminally.
18 Thrasymachus // Oct 21, 2012 at 7:33 pm
“Heck, the Vatican is positioning for being the Church of the NWO – all that social justice nonsense is part of the ploy.” — Sioux
True. Also, not too many mainline Protestant churches are resisting current political trends. We’re on a course in which Liberalism is temporarily bound to win out and prevail. However, it is like building a house of cards. It is eventually very likely to collapse.
I predict that if Romney is elected, the Liberals will fight just as hard as ever and Liberalism will still advance. This should not, however, be taken as an excuse to vote for minority rule. That will not purchase any time for civilization. More crises are simply inevitable, no matter what is done at this point, as a sufficient number of people simply do believe in and desire Liberalism to one degree or another.
19 Thrasymachus // Oct 21, 2012 at 7:50 pm
In my humble opinion, Liberalism is like a huge steam locomotive. It has been building up speed and momentum ever since the Enlightenment. It can’t just come to a screeching halt at this time. In fact, unless God helps us, I would suggest that the White Man has invented the technology that will ultimately destroy his biological heritage.
One thing that puzzles me is on the cultural level. I should imagine that the pop culture — the more extreme elements thereof — would begin to pall on people. Yet it seems that there’s little competition even now. Where is the amazing youthful talent that is giving a rebirth to Western culture? I’m slightly surprised that people don’t get just a little weary of cheap and tawdry entertainment and desire something just a little more substantial.
I suspect that it’s the education system that’s at fault, primarily. But I honestly do not know the full answer.
20 AvengingAngel // Dec 7, 2012 at 5:19 pm
Haaaaaaaaa. Rez dog Yeagley seems to have a problem with Blacks. But see, Blacks are strong. They came as slaves to America and have produced great people. Meanwhile the LAZY NATIVE REZ DOGS just keep on whining. Use your energy to save your pathetic race and leave Blacks alone. Weird-looking donkey. Useless feather-wearing people.
You must log in to post a comment.