Entries Tagged as ''

Brown Skin, White Mask: Obama’s Racial Awakening

By Armstrong Williams 

The word on the street is black conservatives are flirting with the idea of supporting Senator Obama’s campaign for president.  While the media has assumed it’s because of Obama’s race and curb appeal, everyone seems to be overlooking the deeper issue they might actually have in common — each has undergone a racial reawakening that has put them at odds with the mainstream civil rights establishment.

Although Obama is classically liberal on most issues, he has taken the audacious step of moving beyond traditional racial politics in order to inherit the mantle of an American populist.  He has been tried by fire in the national media for his affiliation with racialist political ideologues.  In making a firm choice to disavow the politics of victimization – as difficult as it was for him apparently – Obama now joins the august ranks of those public figures who are often ostracized by the American black establishment.

The son of an African immigrant, Obama does not share the legacy of slavery and oppression in this country with most Americans who happen to be black.  His forefathers never picked cotton in the brutal South, and his grandmother never had to sit on the back of the bus.  He writes of feeling outcast from the circle of black elites he encountered in Ivy League and other elite institutions. Though he shared their skin color, he could not quite share their struggle.  In order to fit in, he went the extra mile. He joined a radical black church in Chicago after law school and became, literally, a born-again Negro.  By eschewing the usual high-powered law firm job in favor of community organizing, Obama further solidified his street credentials.  But ultimately, this was not enough.  When asked to take the final, incorrigible step of damning America, he refused to drink the kool-aid.

Obama’s refusal to cast his lot in with that of the eternally tormented black victim has turned him into somewhat of a pariah among the black elite. The black elite felt disempowered by his optimism, much in the same way that they feel discouraged by America ’s endorsement of the voices of black conservatives. To wit – Jesse Jackson’s recent remark that he felt Obama was “speaking down to blacks” by urging them to address the issues of absentee fathers within their community. Earlier in the campaign, Jackson accused Obama of “acting like he’s white” because of his measured response to the Jena Six episode. Conservatives who happen to be black feel Obama’s pain.  Anytime a public figure attempts to blame anything other than race as the cause for blacks’ woes, he or she is tarred and feathered by the self-appointed guardians of blackness. Except in this type of tarring, the victim is actually bleached.

But whitewashing Obama is a hard sell.  After all, unlike well known critics of victimization like Thomas Sowell and Justice Clarence Thomas, Obama is a card-carrying liberal. The fact of the matter is that urging people of whatever race to embrace personal responsibility and live within moral bounds is neither a liberal nor a conservative prerogative. It is neither a matter of black nor white.  It is simply a matter of common sense.  Jesse Jackson would have us believe that the problems of the black family must be placed within the broader context of blacks’ social and economic marginalization from the mainstream. Obama’s perspective is that strengthening family values and upholding morality may be the one thing within the black community’s control that can actually reduce their marginalization.  How refreshing it is for once to hear a plan for victory rather than a loser’s excuses coming from liberal politician.

Senator Obama, in his speech on race, laid squarely upon America’s shoulders the responsibility it has to mend its racial divide.  He has not hidden from his African heritage or the sober realities of what it means to be black in this country.  But he, like most thinking people, realizes that not all problems within the black community are caused by racial discrimination.  As he later stated in response to Jackson, advocating personal responsibility it is not an “either/or proposition, but a “both/and proposition.” 

Perhaps more shrewdly, Obama realizes that playing the race card as a Presidential candidate who hopes to represent all of America will kill his chance to win over the broader electorate.  With Americans suffering from slowing economic growth and rising inflation, no one wants to hear the old excuses anymore. No one wants to hear about affirmative action, welfare and protest politics when everyone’s suffering together in this turbulent economy.

People ask what black conservatives and Senator Obama have in common, and it is this: The politics of victimization have to end. A new day has come when people of all races are invited to sit at the American table on equal terms, yet bearing equal responsibility.  Those with something to contribute are welcome with open arms.  Those who want to sit around and complain will be turned away empty-handed.

www.armstrongwilliams.com

Is an Obama Presidency Inevitable?

By Kimberly Cash Tate

I received a mass-distributed e-mail the other day from a Christian sister, apprising those of us on the list of a charitable opportunity.  What was the cause?  Some disadvantaged boys were raising money to attend the presidential inauguration in January.  Perhaps you’re wondering if this stems from a civics course, such that it doesn’t matter who wins the election; the boys would want to attend either way.  Uh…no.  The boys—and this Christian sister—have apparently handed the election to Senator Barack Obama.  The only thing that stands between them and an Obama inauguration is the funds to get there!

A great many are convinced that this is Obama’s year, and why not?  The Democrats are super-charged about their history-making candidate; many Republicans are yawning at theirs.  Young people will likely turn out in droves to vote in favor of Obama; many tried-and-true conservatives are talking about sitting this one out.  And what about the media?  Obama’s got the big guns of network and cable news fawning over him; McCain had to do a video spoof of the love-fest a couple of weeks ago just to get attention.

Even Obama himself seems to think this is his year.  In a Washington Post article this week, the writer called him the “presumptuous nominee” because of his recent “presidential-style world tour” and his “presidential” behavior of late in Washington, which included, among other interesting things, shutting down traffic as he went about town in a “long, presidential-style motorcade.”

We might as well admit it’s a done deal.  An Obama victory is inevitable.  Give up the fight.  Call it quits.  Shut down the blog.  Try again in 201—

Well, hold it.  All of that might be true if I didn’t know about two little words:  But God.

There was a time when Ben-Hadad, king of Aram, gathered a mighty army and surrounded the city of Samaria in Israel (2 Kings 6:24).  They besieged the city with such force that a great famine came upon the land.  There was nothing they could do.  One woman boiled her son so she and another woman could eat, then got mad when the other woman wouldn’t boil hers.  The king of Israel was powerless, walking around in sackcloth, unable to change the course of events.

But God…

Without any help from anyone, He turned it around.  He caused the Aramean army to hear the sound of chariots and horses, so that they thought a great army of the Hittites or the Egyptians was coming upon them.  They fled for their lives and Israel got the victory (2 Kings 6:6-7).

And then there was the time when Sennacherib, king of Assyria, came against King Hezekiah and the fortified cities of Judah and seized them (Isaiah 36:1).  Sennacherib’s messenger, backed by a large Assyrian army, sent word to Hezekiah that he might as well give up.  The Assyrians had already destroyed Gozan, Haran, Rezeph, the sons of Eden, the king of Hamath, the king of Arpad, the king of the city of Separvaim, and of Hena and Ivvah (Isaiah 37:12-13).  Jerusalem too would be given into their hands, they said.

But God…

After Hezekiah prayed to the true and living God, God responded in a mighty way.  The people of God didn’t have to lift a finger.  The angel of the Lord went out and struck 185,000 men in the Assyrian army.  By morning, they were all dead.  Sennacharib had told Judah to give up; but he was the one who was sent packing (Isaiah 37:36-37).

And we all remember Goliath.  He was the giant star of the Philistine army that was gathered for battle against Israel (1 Samuel 17).  Every morning and evening for forty days, he taunted the army of Israel, telling them to choose a man for him to fight.  The men of Israel fled, sorely afraid.  What hope did they have?  Clearly, no one in Israel’s army could match this giant.  Not a single man could beat him.

But God…

He had already anointed David…and David knew his God.  He was indignant that Goliath would mock the people of God.  “For who is this uncircumcised Philistine, that he should taunt the armies of the living God?” David said (1 Samuel 17:26). 

With a sling and five smooth stones, David approached the giant.  Goliath thought he had a lot of nerve.  Who did this boy think he was to come against him?  But David said, “You come to me with a sword, a spear, and a javelin, but I come to you in the name of the Lord of hosts, the God of the armies of Israel, whom you have taunted” (1 Samuel 17:45).  Then David said these awesome words:  “[T]he Lord does not deliver by sword or spear; for the battle is the Lord’s and He will give you into our hands” (1 Samuel 17:47).  And the Lord did.  One stone struck Goliath square in the forehead and he was defeated.

The Arameans thought victory was inevitable and they were defeated.  The Assyrians thought victory was inevitable and they were defeated.  Goliath thought victory was inevitable and he was defeated.  With God, it doesn’t matter how much strength is amassed on the other side or how many victories they’ve already won.  It doesn’t matter how bleak the circumstances or how stacked the deck.  God is able in one night or with one stone to bring about His will.

The morality of this nation is under siege, and it appears we may lose the fight. The other side is already poised for celebration. But we know better than to give up. Like Hezekiah, we will pray to the true and living God. Like David, we understand that the battle is the Lord’s. If He grants us mercy, we may just watch on election night as the nation sits in shock…that is, everyone but those of us who knew about two little words:  But God.

Kimberly Cash Tate is founder and president of Colored in Christ International, Inc., a nonprofit ministry.  www.kimberlycashtate.com

The New Teflon Man

By Ceasar I. LeFlore III

 

Bill Clinton has got to be furious.  Not only has he lost his juice in the hood and is no longer considered the first black president by the brothers; he’s now being “out slicked” in getting away with scandalous behavior by a newcomer whose escapability when caught red handed in lies and controversial relationships is unprecedented.

 

It seems that no matter how much crap he steps in or how many crappy people he associates with, nothing sticks to Barack Obama - and nothing is held against him -making him the new Teflon Man of American politics.   It appears that most of the media and all of the mind numbed masses that make up the Obama-nation are determined to look the other way whenever chinks appear in their hero’s shinning armor, giving him free passes and excusing away the shameful behavior of those he has called mentors and close friends. 

 

Now, just watch how smoothly the excrement that has been splashed up by “Politics as Usual” - the horrible love song that rapper Ludacris penned in support of his boy - slides right off him as he deftly side steps the scrutiny of another questionable association.  Just watch how offended and surprised he will pretend to be as he publicly throws the artist who so passionately supports him under the proverbial bus.   If he did it to his pastor, he’ll do it to this player; just watch and see.

 

The Obama campaign has already moved quickly on this one - having learned a valuable lesson from the Jeremiah Wright debacle – and has publicly blasted the rapper for the offensive lyrics that crudely maligned John McCain, George Bush, and even Jesse Jackson.  But I’m wondering – as many others may be - what in Ludacris’ past would make us expect anything different.  He’s always produced vile and offensive music, which also makes me wonder why Obama would speak favorably of him recently in Rolling Stone Magazine.

 

But be that as it may, Ludacris will probably not stick to Obama; just like Jeremiah Wright didn’t stick; nor did Louis Farrakhan, or Father Pfleger; or William Aires, and others.  And he also won’t be called on the obvious duplicity of saying out of one side of his mouth that “rap lyrics today too often perpetuate misogyny, materialism, and degrading images that he doesn’t want his daughters or any children exposed too”; while out of the other side not only saying that he listens to the rapper on his “ipod”, but also consulted with him in 2006 about how to reach young people.

 

In the movie Rush Hour, Chris Tucker asked Jackie Chan “do you understand the words coming out of my mouth?”  Did we understand him several months ago when Obama said that “he could no more disown Jeremiah Wright than he could his own grandmother, or the black community?”  He said that not long before he threw them both under the bus to get himself off the hook for a twenty year membership at a racist church from which he was forced to resign in order to keep his presidential campaign alive.

Did we understand him when he said that bitter people cling to guns and religion?  Did we understand his commitment to campaign finance reform through public financing before he changed his direction and rejected it? 

 

Do we understand his commitment to overturn the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) that prohibits same sex marriages?  Do we understand his opposition to parental notification for minors who seek to get abortions?  Do we understand his promises to defy the generals on the ground and proceed with his troop withdrawal timetable – which he once said was a bad idea – so that he can placate Code Pink and Moveon.org? 

 

I’m sure I understood him.  Didn’t you?  I’ll tell you what I don’t understand.  How does he get away with it?

House apologizes for slavery and Jim Crow

By Wayne Perryman

Dear Friends

Three years after filing my lawsuit against the Democratic Party and just one week before the release of my new book citing the Democrat’s racist past, the House today passed a resolution to have our nation to apologize to African Americans for Slavery and Jim Crow.  The resolution was proposed by one of the leading Democrats.

As most of you know, the Democrats fought my lawsuit against them and refused to apologize.  I am convinced that the Democrats got wind of my new book: The Drama of Obama which highlights the Democrats’ racist history.  They are a little late, my book was mailed to every major news organization and radio talk show in the country on Monday.

I urge all of you to contact the various media organizations and inform them that, the Democrats are merely trying to place the blame on the entire country for what their Party did.  They must be made aware that there was a legal case against the Democratic Party in 2004, demanding that they apologize but they refused and hired a powerful attorney to represent them.  Now they (the Democratic Party) are submitting a resolution to indict the entire country for what their party did.  We can’t let the Democrats get away with this.

See the MSNBC article here.

God D*mn America!

Part II of More Christian Than African American

 

By Ceasar I. LeFlore III

 

What happened in Iowa didn’t stay in Iowa.  What happened there in January of 2008 amazed even the most optimistically progressive social engineers in America and catapulted a relatively obscure black politician into super-star status in the democratic primary, and in American politics in general.

 

Barack Obama’s astonishing victory in Iowa – a Midwestern farm state where over 90% of the voters were white – inspired many to believe that maybe, just maybe our nation has finally overcome its racially troubled past and a black man had a realistic chance of becoming its president.

 

And although they prayed for it, black people could hardly believe that a black man would be the candidate of choice in states such as lily white Iowa.  But he was!  And if he could win there, they concluded, he could most likely win in other states where whites voters would overwhelmingly predominate.  National polls taken immediately following the Iowa primary reflected that growing belief across the nation among blacks, whites, and even Hispanics.   The Obama campaign caught fire and ignited a passionate belief among its supporters that caught political pundits and political rivals alike completed off guard.

 

But just when it seemed that this election and its historical implications would lead us to join in the choruses of patriotic Americans singing, “God Bless America”, videos emerged of a black preacher, who just happened to be Obama’s own pastor of more than 20 years, exhorting us to join him in singing a different tune. 

 

Instead of “God Bless America”, Rev. Jeremiah Wright suggested that we should sing “God Damn America”; and implied that America got just what we deserved on September 11, 2001.

The Jeremiah Wright controversy ignited a passionate national debate in America that threatened to re-fracture this nation along racial divides, while at the same time calling into question exactly what we knew about Senator Barack Obama, his religious views, and how he really felt about America. 

 

Rev. Wright’s hateful and racially charged statements shocked the nation, and Obama supporters were now placed in a politically precarious position.  “What do we do with this,” many of them asked.    ”How do we explain Obama’s relationship with someone whose rhetoric presented him as one who was both anti-American and un-Christian?”   As a faithful disciple of Rev. Wright, does Obama’s views on race and theology match those of his mentor, or was he only pretending to be a willing protege’ in order to gain some advantage in Chicago that associating with Jeremiah Wright might afford him?    

 

An emotionally charged national discussion ensued, even within the non-media black community as represented by the two letters that we will present tomorrow.  Both were written by black leaders of the Christian faith and reflect well the challenges of answering the important questions concerning where black evangelical loyalties should lie. 

 

If Barack Obama’s worldviews do not line up with those of patriotic Christian Americans, should blacks continue to support him simply because he is black?  And what will be the cost to our credibility and to the legacy of those brave Americans who gave everything to fight racial discrimination if we practice oursleves?  Are we more Christian than Black - and what are we going to do with our vote?

 

 

 

 

 

Are You Ready For $6.00 a Gallon Gas?

by Harry Jackson, Jr.

Two weeks ago, more than two-dozen civil rights, African-American, agriculture, senior citizen, and veteran advocacy groups came together to begin the STOP THE WAR ON THE POOR Campaign. We announced our support of legislation of any kind that will increase domestic energy supplies and decrease energy costs for our domestic poor.  We especially like the Americans for American Energy Act (HR6384), which offers significant short-term and long-term solutions to our energy woes that amount to economic enslavement of the poor. The increase of African-American and senior groups speaking out on this issue is a new and unexpected twist in this debate. Evidently, it has made a lot of people nervous on Capitol Hill.

This week a partisan political group, funded by radical green groups, is answering our call.  US House of Representative Majority Whip James E. Clyburn and several African-American leaders will release their take on the impact of climate change on the poor - especially the African-American community. Although credible experts will be called to stand with them, the central question of how to alleviate the short term suffering (5 or less years) of the urban and rural poor will likely remain unanswered.

My premise for continuing my comments from last week is that no one has realistically taken up the cause of the poor in the discussion of energy policy. I hope that the information here will inspire you to join a growing army of justice-minded Americans that believe we should not turn over our national checkbook without knowing the specific return on investment we will receive for our efforts. Further, environmental justice must include consideration of the domestic poor who live in New York, Chicago, and DC.  This faceless and voiceless group must be represented.

If gasoline prices rise to $6/gallon, the situation will financially destroy many vulnerable citizens who are living on the edge in this challenging economic environment.

Here are some facts I would like you to consider:

  • Median-income families devote about a nickel on every dollar of income to energy costs, while poor families must devote as much as 50 cents on their dollar.
  • High-energy prices are one of the single biggest drivers of homelessness.
  • The nation’s low-income population pays three to seven times more on energy than non-low income households.
  • In order to cope with higher home energy and gasoline costs, 70 percent of households have reduced food purchases; 30 percent reduced purchases of medicine and 20 percent changed plans for their own or their children’s education.
  • Eight percent of households with incomes between $33,500 and $55,000 have had their electricity shut off this year due to non-payment.
  • Rural counties in the South and West are hit hardest. Families in many southern counties, and several in Wyoming, are spending 10 to 15 percent of their income on fuel.
  • Escalating energy prices have a disproportionate impact on the elderly. In a recent survey, more than two-thirds of people 65 and older said that the recent rise in gas prices has caused them a great deal or a fair amount of financial hardship. Given their median household income is less than $30,000 a year seniors have been forced to make significant changes to their daily schedules and spending habits.
  • Rising gasoline prices have severely affected the volunteer base, which serves the poor and needy. Meals on Wheels reports that 58 percent of its centers have “lost volunteers due to gas prices” and 48.3 percent reported that “increases in gas prices had forced them to eliminate meal delivery routes or consolidate meal services”
  • The National Association of Area Agencies on Aging reported that over 73 percent of agencies said it is more difficult to retain volunteers and over 74 percent said it is more difficult to recruit volunteers.
  • In some areas, Goodwill will no longer do home pickups for donated items because gas prices are too high.

Our group of diverse representatives from African-American, civil rights, agriculture, Christian, senior citizen, veteran and consumer rights communities are linking arms to conduct a national campaign to:

  • Educate the American people to the fact that this “War on the Poor” is occurring,
  • Educate the news media to look behind the press releases and the political spin of some of our politicians and see the cruel impacts of these policies on the poor, and
  • Educate policy makers to the real and daily impacts of policies that restrict energy supply and raise prices.

There are a few glimmers of hope, however. For example, President Bush has lifted the Executive Order on new oil and gas exploration on the Outer Continental Shelf.  This is an important first step, but must be followed by specific congressional action. Billions of barrels of oil and new supplies of natural gas are available to America if we do this. We have decades of supply under our control – but we must act now.

We will not stop until we change federal policies and encourage more US energy for Americans, and better incentives for energy conservation. We are thankful that we have legislators from both parties in our campaign. Bi-partisanship is truly rare in these days.

Will you join us? Visit http://www.stopwaronpoor.org to educate yourself on the issues.  Start discussions with your co-workers and friends to increase their awareness of the problem.  Finally, let your congressional representatives know that you are watching how they respond to this crisis and this will greatly influence how you vote in the upcoming elections.

Kumbaya falls flat in Berlin

by Star Parker

The headline on the website of German magazine Der Spiegel about Barack Obama’s speech in Berlin: “Huge Crowds Left with Mixed Feelings.”

Two hundred thousand turned out for the speech, but CNN’s Candy Crowley reported an “absence of euphoria” at the event.

As Senator Obama went global with “Yes, we can” and “Change we can believe in” he left at least some of the horde in Berlin scratching their heads. Perhaps these Germans, out to hear what all the excitement was about, were looking for leadership and substance rather than kumbaya.

What they got was the global version of “There is not a White America and a Black America and Latino America and Asian American America — there is the United States of America.”

Obama spoke not just as a “proud citizen of the United States but a fellow citizen of the world.”

His message: “The walls between races and tribes, natives and immigrants, Christian and Muslim and Jew cannot stand. These now are the walls we must tear down.”

At least some of the Germans listening to Obama surely sensed there was something problematic with what he was saying. His analogy of the tearing down of the Berlin wall to tearing down all lines of distinction between nations and religions was obviously fractured. The Berlin wall was a political wall that divided one people. It separated Germans from other Germans, a far cry from distinctions between nations and religions that Obama apparently wants to obliterate.

The German, French and British each have a strong sense of national history and identity.

Efforts for a European Union constitution that would establish links in Europe going beyond economics and extending to politics have thus far failed.

Perhaps the realities of Europe delivered an unanticipated surprise to the slick marketing machine driving the Obama presidential campaign.

Unlike in the United States, where you drive coast to coast and hear one language, where national culture is at least as influential and pervasive as regional differences, Europe consists of different countries. When you get to national borders, languages and cultures change.

For Obama, differences seem to be what cause the world’s problems. We endlessly hear the story of his mixed-race background and his translation of his personal history into a message of the meaninglessness of difference.

It may come as a surprise to Obama, but for Christians, for Muslims, and for Jews, their differences do not amount to barriers to a better world but sources of meaning that define themselves and the world.

They want to be Christians, Muslims, and Jews. They just want protection. They want to be able to be who they are and live peacefully and securely. Those disturbing this security are the problem. Not the differences.

Which gets to Obama’s very problematic idea about freedom.

He does not seem to grasp that the beauty of freedom is its respect for differences and creation of conditions, legal and political, which allow them to exist, flourish, and provide benefits to all. In fact, politicians with agendas to “unify,” who think they know who and what everyone should be, are invariably those who threaten freedom.

Obama used the occasion of this speech to apologize to Europe about his country. “We’ve made a lot of mistakes, and there are times when our actions around the world have not lived up to our best intentions.” But, covering his bases, he made a point to follow up and assure the crowd that “. . . I know how much I love America.”

What every American should demand from Obama is clarification of what, if anything, he sees unique about the America that he claims to loves so much. For a man whose ideal seems to be the global village, with no barriers or differences, is there anything special about the United States that makes it distinct from other nations — that defines it as uniquely great?

What is the distinction between the “proud citizen of the United States” and the “fellow citizen of the world.” Those in Berlin heard none and many went home legitimately confused.

Help Has Arrived!

Both Ways Barack

Where does Barack Obama stand on the issues? Is it possible for one person to take both sides of an issue at the same time? Take a look at this and you decide.

The ant and the grasshopper

This one is a little different…Two Different Versions!  Two Different Morals!

OLD VERSION: The ant works hard in the withering heat all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter.

The grasshopper thinks the ant is a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away. Come winter, the ant is warm and well fed.

The grasshopper has no food or shelter, so he dies out in the cold.

MORAL OF THE STORY: Be responsible for yourself!

———————- ———————

MODERN VERSION:

The ant works hard in the withering heat all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter.

The grasshopper thinks the ant is a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away.

Come winter, the shivering grasshopper calls a press conference and demands to know why the ant should be allowed to be warm and well fed while others are cold and starving.

CBS, NBC, PBS, CNN, and ABC show up to provide pictures of the shivering grasshopper next to a video of the ant in his comfortable home with a table filled with food. America is stunned by the sharp contrast.

How can this be, that in a country of such wealth, this poor grasshopper is allowed to suffer so?

Kermit the Frog appears on Oprah with the grasshopper, and everybody cries when they sing, ‘It’s Not Easy Being Green.’

Jesse Jackson stages a demonstration in front of the ant’s house where the news stations film the group singing, ‘We shall over come.’ Jesse then has the group kneel down to pray to God for the grasshopper’s sake.

Barack Obama exclaims in an interview with Larry King that the ant has gotten rich off the back of the grasshopper, and both call for an immediate tax hike on the ant to make him pay his fair share.

Finally, the EEOC drafts the Economic Equity & Anti-Grasshopper Act retroactive to the beginning of the summer.

The ant is fined for failing to hire a proportionate number of green bugs and, having nothing left to pay his retroactive taxes, his home is confiscated by the government.

Hillary gets her old law firm to represent the grasshopper in a defamation suit against the ant, and the case is tried before a panel of federal judges that Bill Clinton appointed from a list of single-parent welfare recipients.

The ant loses the case.

The story ends as we see the grasshopper finishing up the last bits of the ant’s food while the government house he is in, which just happens to be the ant’s old house, crumbles around him because he doesn’t maintain it.

The ant has disappeared in the snow.

The grasshopper is found dead in a drug related incident and the house, now abandoned, is taken over by a gang of spiders who terrorize the once peaceful neighborhood.

MORAL OF THE STORY: Be careful how you vote in 2008