Zimmerman Speech Obama Should Have Given

My fellow Americans:

I am your humble servant. You have entrusted me with the tremendous honor and responsibility to serve you as president. I am not president of black America, Hispanic America or white America. I am not president of liberal America or conservative America. I am president of the United States of America.

Regrettably, as a nation, we have become divided. I confess that I have contributed to this division. For this failure in leadership, I ask your forgiveness.

We were each created equal by a God of forgiveness. It is now time that we do as He commands; that we forgive one another as we are forgiven and that we come together, once and for all, as one America.

With this goal in mind, I ask that every American join me in praying for the family of Trayvon Martin. No parent should have to bury a child. I also ask that you join me in prayer for George Zimmerman and his family. This tragedy has taken an unimaginable toll on both families. Finally, I ask that you join me in praying for national calm and racial reconciliation.

Today I will share with you certain truths that may be difficult for some to hear. But truths they remain.

First among these truths: The death of Trayvon Martin was a horrible tragedy.

But not all tragedies are crimes.

This case should never have gone to trial. Probable cause for charges of second-degree murder did not exist. Unfortunately, it has become evident that charges were filed based upon a purely political calculus, rather than upon the legal merits of the case. This is legal malpractice, and those responsible should be held accountable.

Before charges were even filed I publicly and inappropriately said: “If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon.” This was irresponsible of me. It was a politically motivated abuse of the presidential bully pulpit. It presumed Mr. Zimmerman guilty until proven innocent. The implication was racially charged and cynical. To the extent that I may have contributed to the spurious filing of charges, I apologize to Florida. I also apologize to George Zimmerman, his family and the American people.

Nevertheless, the trial did go forward and, after 20 days in court and 16 hours of thoughtful deliberation, a jury of George Zimmerman’s peers ultimately found him not guilty. Whether or not we agree, this is our criminal justice system and the system worked as designed.

Justice was served.

Although none of us were there – and few can know for sure – the not guilty verdict indicates that the jury found, based upon the weight of the evidence, that this tragic shooting was, in fact, legally justified on self-defense grounds. This is true whether or not George overreacted by following Trayvon in the first place. Florida’s “stand-your-ground” law was never even triggered.

The jury further found, by all accounts, that at some point during their interaction, Mr. Martin turned, pursued and attacked Mr. Zimmerman without legal provocation. This decision ultimately cost him his life.

How does this make sense? How could this have justified the shooting? Although initially unarmed, witness accounts and forensic evidence suggest that Trayvon punched Mr. Zimmerman, jumped on him and began slamming the back of his head into the concrete sidewalk while allegedly proclaiming, “You gonna die tonight, [expletive].” At this point the sidewalk became a deadly weapon. From this, any reasonable person could conclude that George Zimmerman feared for his life and, therefore, took defensive action.

A needless tragedy? Yes.

A crime? No.

Here is another truth: This case is neither now, nor has it ever been about race. That is, it wasn’t about race until I and others made it so.

There are those who, under the guise of “civil-rights advocacy,” have a tarnished history of exploiting this and other such tragedies for their own political and financial purposes. This is race-profiteering. It is shameless, dishonest and never productive. For the good of our nation, it needs to stop.

Furthermore, much of the media are likewise to blame. It is clear that, for whatever reason –ratings, perhaps – many journalists chose to intentionally fan the flames of racial discord. NBC even went so far as to splice and edit the recording of Mr. Zimmerman’s 911 call to make him sound racist. This may well be defamation per se, and NBC should be held to account.

In reality, the overwhelming evidence indicates that Mr. Zimmerman is anything but racist. He is just as much a “person of color” as am I. He is Hispanic, not white as the media narrative goes. George is half Hispanic, just as I am half black. He is no more a “white Hispanic” than I am a “white black.” This is the theater of the absurd. It’s but another example of the media’s disingenuous bid to sensationalize this case as a white-vs.-black civil-rights clash.

In reality, George Zimmerman’s past strongly suggests that he is color blind. He once went to bat for a black homeless man against the police department he desperately hoped to join. He also has a history of mentoring black children, has dated black women, has black relatives, and is a registered Democrat who voted for me – the first black president in American history. Finally, an extensive FBI investigation determined that Mr. Zimmerman is simply “not a racist.”

I understand that many people are very upset over this verdict. I sympathize with them. My heart also breaks for Trayvon’s family. Still, we are a nation of laws, not a nation of mob rule. Make no mistake, threats to George Zimmerman’s safety and civil rights will not be tolerated and will be investigated and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

Moreover, I have instructed Attorney General Eric Holder to cease and desist in all efforts to manufacture federal civil-rights charges against Mr. Zimmerman. There is simply no case and to pursue one would actually violate Mr. Zimmerman’s civil rights.

Let’s get back on track. Let’s return to Dr. King’s dream of an America in which people are “judged by the content of their character,” and not “by the color of their skin.”

It’s time to move on. It’s time to heal. It’s time to come together as “One Nation Under God”.

God bless you.

And God bless America.



About J. Matt Barber
Matt Barber is founder and editor-in chief of BarbWire.com. He is an author, columnist, cultural analyst and an attorney concentrating in constitutional law. Having retired as an undefeated heavyweight professional boxer, Matt has taken his fight from the ring to the culture war. (Follow Matt on Twitter: @jmattbarber).
  • John

    What a silly letter. "Finally, an extensive FBI investigation determined that Mr. Zimmerman is simply “not a racist.”"

    How would an investigation do that? And since when is racism a criminal offense that the FBI would investigate? Makes no sense.

    "Florida’s “stand-your-ground” law was never even triggered."

    Yes it was. I see this misinformed comment from the right quite regularly. Just because they didn't use the law as part of their defense does not mean it didn't play a role. The law is part of the criminal justice system, which means that it was used in determining the guilt of Zimmerman.

    "The written instructions that sat with the jurors as they deliberated made very clear that under Florida law, a shooter has a right to stand his ground:

    If George Zimmerman was not engaged in an unlawful activity and was attacked in any place where he had a right to be, he had no duty to retreat and had the right to stand his ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he reasonably believed that it was necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

    Since Zimmerman’s lawyers opted not to invoke Stand Your Ground as a defense, observers have characterized this case as a regular old
    “self-defense” case, rather than a “Stand Your Ground” case. But what
    these jury instructions make clear is that, in Florida, there is no
    longer an effective distinction. Stand Your Ground is the state’s self-defense law, whether or not a defendant opts to hold a hearing specifically on the question."

    • J D S

      So what is your point, exactly, John?

      • John

        Everything you need to know is in my post.

        1. The letter is ridiculous.
        2. The claim that the FBI would investigate and determine that Zimmerman isn't racist is absurd.
        3. Stand your ground laws had an impact on the verdict.

        • J D S

          1. The letter is spot on.

          2. So what? (I kinda agree, how could they tell, and what difference does it make?)

          3. Again, so what?

        • John

          uhhh....did you read the letter? It made both those points. The first one being absolutely ridiculous and truly shows the limited understanding of the author. The second one being factually incorrect. Yet considering that, you still think it's spot on. Hrmmmm

        • J D S

          Yes, I even read it again, and it still sounds like you are just trying to pull out one or two vague concepts of your interpretation of "stand your ground" law vs. "self defense" law, and whether or not we can determine if Zimmerman may have at some point in his past had a "racist" thought cross his mind. It's the overall spirit of the letter, as well as the basic facts that I think are spot on, and still do.

        • John

          What basic facts are spot on? I'm interested to hear this.

        • J D S

          Here are some good questions for us all to answer. http://www.dlas.org/questions-zimmerman-verdict/

        • J D S
    • Voting Mama

      John, the FBI DID investigate and they did make such a report that there was no basis to prosecute Zimmerman as a racist. This is from the FBI's document:

      "The Justice Department has responded to appeals to probe whether George Zimmerman committed any civil rights violations in the fatal shooting of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin — but previously filed FBI documents are already challenging the narrative that the shooting was racially motivated.

      According to the document, Serino considered Zimmerman as having “a little hero complex, but not as a racist.”

      Here's the link to it:http://www.thesmokinggun.com/file/serino-fbi-report

      Also, the defense attorneys could have used stand your ground as a defense but they DECIDED TO FORGO THAT and used self-defense instead:

      (CNN) -- George Zimmerman, set to stand trial in the 2012 shooting death of teenager Trayvon Martin, on Tuesday waived his right to a "stand your ground" pretrial immunity hearing. Zimmerman's attorneys have decided they will try this as a self-defense case."

      Here is the link to that one: http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/30/justice/florida-zimmerman-defense

      • John

        1. Is there any more evidence than that page? All I see there is one detective and what he "believes". Do you have a link to a more substantial document? I couldn't find any. I did find this however:

        "From the very beginning, Serino said that Zimmerman had a “little hero complex” and accused him of profiling Martin:
        “You wanted to catch him. You wanted to catch the bad guy, the f—–g punk who can’t get away,” Serino said.
        Zimmerman replied, “I wasn’t following him; I was just going in the same direction he was.”
        Serino responded, “That’s following.”
        Serino referred to Zimmerman as probably being a “good guy,” but found it suspicious that his minor injuries didn’t match his account of being viciously beaten by a “child” carrying candy and an iced tea. He also noted that Zimmerman had no defensive wounds on his hands, as one would expect from such a violent struggle.
        “That was a kid with a future, a kid with folks that care. Not a goon,” Serino told Zimmerman during the interrogation. “In his mind’s eye, he perceived you as a threat. He has every right to defend himself.”
        During his testimony Tuesday, Serino repeated that he believed Zimmerman followed Martin, who was doing nothing wrong."

        2. Like I said in my post, self defense in florida is automatically stand your ground. There is no difference. Under justifiable use of deadly force, stand your ground is written in. http://www.scribd.com/doc/153354467/George-Zimmerman-Trial-Final-Jury-Instructions

        Those are the jury instructions. Scroll down to the part where they talk about justifiable homicide. There's your "stand your ground".

        "If George Zimmerman was not engaged in an unlawful activity and was attacked in anyplace where he had a right to be, he had no duty to retreat and had the right to stand his ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he reasonably believed that it was necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony"

  • Screeminmeeme

    Excellent. Would to God that would have happened....but that would have required Obama to act in an honest, humble, non-political, unbiased, altruistic way....and that is simply an impossibility.

    • Bonnie Boyles

      Not his style.

  • https://me.yahoo.com/a/CfsINEYDoex3fXYF.FLFCPOcXaFQros-#f30f8 jong

    Of course I would but better odds on Hell Freezing over.

    • Bonnie Boyles

      For sure.

  • john cummins

    Speech he should have given: I am not your President but a usurper!

  • http://www.divine-way.com/ Marie Kalivas Devine

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UxATnobG_Y8 5723Michael

    This is proof that not all blacks are blind to what is happening to them.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N__hJL4qjKo painlessrisen
    Before You Negroes Go Out And Riot...Remember This.......

    • John

      And 84% of whites are killed by whites.

      The message is that homicide is usually done by someone of the same race. But you guys try and spin that into a racist message against blacks. Not surprising, I'd say.

      • gac

        You idiot. Most people are killed by someone they know. The fact remains that many more violent crimes are committed by blacks against whites than by whites against blacks. Even you can find those stats. Matters not what percentage of any race is killed by their own race. The question is, why blacks commit so many more crimes against whites.

        • John

          You call me an idiot then you repeat the exact fact that I said in my post. Not very bright, are you?

          Are you mad that I exposed you for the racist you are? A coward racist who hides behind rhetorical questions and implications without saying what you mean straight up? That's ok, I found posts which very directly show how much of a racist piece of excrement you really are.

          An easy answer to your question is that blacks are as a group poorer than whites. So the real question is, why are you so racist? Then when you answer that, answer to why white heterosexual males account for the most sexual assaults on children. Or how about bank fraud? Stealing millions of dollars? Not interested in those white collar crimes? Is it because you're ignorant or because you think skin color somehow is responsible for increased crime rates?

        • gac

          So being poor is an excuse for committing violent crime against another race. I think the reason for increased crime rates lies in the way most blacks are raised. They are not taught values.

        • John

          I never said it was an excuse. I said it was a (big) factor that leads to crime. At least now you're being more honest. You don't think blacks can raise their kids like nice gentle white folk can.

        • gac

          Why should it even be a factor? No I Don't think blacks raise their kids properly as a whole.

        • John

          Why should poverty be a factor for crime? Is that a real question?

        • gac

          We originally were talking about violent crime. My quote: "So being poor is an excuse for committing violent crime against another race." So yes, it is a real question. Do you have a real answer or just more dribble?

        • John

          I answered it already. Poverty is a huge factor for all crime. Doesn't matter whether it is violent or not.

          To get you started: http://www.criminology.fsu.edu/crimtheory/poverty.htm

        • gac

          You don't need to get me started. I've spent years dealing with it. Still no excuse for violent crime. Teach kids some values.

        • John

          By teach kids some values, did you mean like this one? "The blacks are murdering. The whites are defending."

        • gac

          YES. Seems to be the trend. Does the truth hurt?

        • John

          No, it seems to be you generalizing all blacks are murders and all whites as goodie goodies.

          Why? Easy. Because you are racist.

          Here, how about this statement?

          - The whites are sexually molesting kids.

          Seems to be the trend, does the truth hurt?

        • gac

          Why is it that when blacks don't like the truth it is racist?
          No truth hurts me sonny!

          There is a long-standing myth perpetrated by Blacks and White anti-racists like Tim Wise that Whites are more likely to molest children than any other race. This goes back to some stereotype of the creepy, nerdy, weirdo White guy who can’t get laid so he molests kids.

          About time we shot this myth full of holes like it needs to be.


          % of total child molesters:

          White 51%
          African American 25%
          Hispanic 15%
          American Indian/Alaska Natives 2%
          Asian/Pacific Islanders 1%

          Relative to their population, likelihood of abuse compared to background population rate:

          American Indian +100%
          Blacks +92%
          Hispanics no difference
          Whites -35%
          Asian -67%

          Remember Blacks are only about %13 of the population

        • John

          Care to cite your source? It wasn't yahoo answers, was it? http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20130725061816AAy0Noz

          Busted! Hahahaha

          Not really interested in your made up numbers unless you can back them up.

        • gac
        • John

          Which numbers am I to back up? I'll gladly do it.

          Regarding your BLOG which you claim as evidence. The author links his statistics to http://www.prevent-abuse-now.com/stats.htm.

          Let me know when you have official numbers, not a blog that links to some unofficial site that links these stats to deactivated webpages.

          Moving on from the lack of any real evidence with official numbers, let's look at some of the claims.

          "The figure is from the Bureau of Prisons, 1991.
          In 1991, Whites were 74% of the population, and they were “nearly 70% of those convicted of child molesting.” In other words, Whites are about 7% less likely to commit child molestation than an average American."

          Uh...how does that work? Whites are 70% of those convicted for child molestation, so how does he get that they are 7% less likely to molest a child than an average American? That makes absolutely no sense.

          Next: "The problem with the 1991 report was that, as usual, Hispanics were lumped in with Whites in terms of crime perpetrators, artificially inflating the White rate."

          That's because Hispanic denotes ETHNICITY. White denotes RACE. Does this person not know the difference? There are black hispanics, white hispanics, asian hispanics.

          "People who identify their origin as Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish may be of any race. "

          By his own admission, whites make up 70% of those convicted for child molestation. Case closed.

          "Google others. There is no shortage of information backing up my numbers."

          Actually, there is a huge shortage of numbers backing up your information. That's why you had to list someone's blog instead of an official document.

        • gac

          You have no concept of the numbers you are looking at. Doesn't matter if the site is a blog. He has references you can go to.

          You really need to take a statistics course.

          Here's the deal John. You don't care to hear the truth. All you do is holler RACIST and throw numbers around saying that whites do more of something than blacks
          and you never take into account that whites outnumber blacks by about 6 to 1. You don't look at the rate at which these things are happening. ie. the number per thousand. Learn some statistics. You see the picture of my dog. She has more common sense in her tail than you have in your entire body. I don't have time to continue to try and educate you. So go ahead and send your last idiotic reply and we will be done with it.

        • John

          That's it? You're going to throw a temper tantrum? Can't refute any of the basic things I said?

          Your own facts disprove your claims.

          "All you do is holler RACIST and throw numbers around saying that whites do more of something than blacks"

          LOL! So ironic! No, that is what YOU do. I'm trying to say that crime is crime. But to show you how your tactics can be used against you, I gave the example of sex offenders, white collar crimes, etc.

          When did I ever refute the fact that blacks are a small number of the population? Hint: Never.

          I don't look at the rate? Your statistics didn't offer any rates. So what are you talking about? Learn some statistics? Like not knowing that race and ethnicity are different things? Bahahaha, please, you're embarrassing yourself.

          Every time it's the same with you idiot right wingers. You huff, you puff, and as soon as anyone shows you the error in your claims, you run off. I know, it sucks, boohoo, poor you.

  • Eric

    Speech he should have given: ".............."

    That's right, why does he feel a need to comment at all? Leave it alone Mr. President. I do not need to hear your opinions regarding the matter nor your condescending tones. Get back to work. Your job is to be a leader of this nation; not a race-baiting circus barker. Lower the deficit; investigate your lap-dog Holder on his involvement in "Fast and Furious"; reign in your IRS; and for heaven's sake, force Hillary to testify of the truth in Benghazi.

    • virginia lemken

      Great statement, I agree with every word! ! ! ! ! !

  • notalib

    I agree that the above speech is the one the man-child should have given. It would have been a good message.

    However, he is totally incapable of giving such a speech. His mind set would never let him come up with a speech like that. He does not like our country or our values and Constitution. He is about tearing our country apart and tearing our country down. One way is to divide us in any way he can.

  • m141934a

    In your dreams would he ever humble himself. He will continue to fan the flames of racism. I fear for our country. The worst is yet to come under this person.

    • Bonnie Boyles


  • thegreatamerican

    Wouldn't hold your breath waiting for the potus to ever admit a wrong.

  • posthuf

    This speech would take two things obama doesn't possess - common sense and common decency. Otherwise known as 'class.'

    We all know Bush was the last class act in the WH.

  • UpLateAgain

    I'd have felt better if he had just tempered his actual speech with words to this effect: "Not a black man living has not had the experience of having someone clutch their purse tighter when you join them in an elevator. Of course, with crime rates as disproportionately high in the black community as they actually are, you can't really blame her. As long as that's the case, there are going to be misunderstandings, and actions taken that result in tragedies for all concerned. We need to deal with that problem, so that if injustice is displayed in the locking of doors when a black man crosses the street, it actually is an injustice, and not just the display of fear in response to a real situation."

    • John

      "Of course, with crime rates as disproportionately high in the black community as they actually are"

      Replace black with poor.

      Unless you think that for some reason, blacks are more violent because of their skin color? And not because of social factors like poverty. Is that what you think?

      • UpLateAgain

        No. Not because of their skin color, or, for that matter any other racial characteristics. I'm guessing you're a LIBERAL!! It wasn't a tough guess. Liberals always go to race first in any societal situation.

        And, no, you don't get to replace 'black' with 'poor'. There are plenty of poor of all races (including poor non-ghetto blacks) that don't commit crime at anywhere near the rates ghetto blacks do. Not because of their race, but IMHO, because of the micro-culture ghetto blacks are raised-in.

        We had poverty on a level even ghetto blacks have never seen for 17 years during the great depression, and crime rates for everybody in the country were considerably lower than today.

        Blacks come here from other countries and do as well as anyone. It's only American ghetto blacks that seem to have the problem.

        70% are born out of wedlock and are raised by single parents (the SINGLE biggest indicator of likelihood to fail in life), 50% drop out of high school. The hip-hop culture idolizes gangster lifestyles, and promotes disrespect to self and others. Mostly, there's no father around to teach them how to grow into being a man (and that is NOT something you easily learn on your own), and the first sense of community they get is if they are jumped into a street gang. They learn from an early age that violence equates to survival, and from that it's not a very far jump to equating violence to success.

        They have no concept of how the system works, so when they make attempts and fail, rather than learn what it is they need to know to succeed, they blame racism... and are encourage their whole lives to do so.

        We're several generations into ghetto blacks being raised in a culture of dependency. It's what they know. The government was trying to do the right thing, starting with 'The War on Poverty', but what they did was create an underclass that has no concept, on the whole, of how to be self-reliant or even for the most part, self-respecting.

        The disproportionality of crime committed by blacks is real. They commit 50% of the murders in this country, while only making up 13% of the population.

        Before the government started the social engineering experiments that created the black ghettos in the 60s, black criminality on a per capita basis was lower than it was for whites, rather than 300% higher.

        It has nothing to do with race, and everything to do with culture.... and the culture of American ghetto blacks is one that has been engineered by the government over the past half century.

        So you just keep accusing people of being racists. It's intellectually lazy, but it's what most liberals are most comfortable doing.... because if they can't do that, they have to actually admit there is a problem they can't lay at the feet of others.

        • John

          I'm a liberal because I think that it's a poverty issue, and not a race issue? That makes no sense. You say in your first sentence that you don't think it's race. That's also what I said. So.......what are you talking about?

          What are ghetto blacks? And can you show me statistics that led you to say that it's ghetto blacks who are responsible for the majority of crime and not "poor non-ghetto blacks"?

          Saying that we had lower crime rates in the greater depression does not in any way prove that the crime that we are experiencing now is not a result of poverty.

          Why are you pretending you are an expert in the black community? What is white culture like? Paris Hilton, honey booboo, and dumb crap like that? Does that teach you responsibility? Does that teach you how to be a man? We have our stupid culture problems, they have theirs. You have absolutely NO idea what you're talking about. You don't know what hardships they face, you don't know who they blame. You are so obviously racist that you think that they are too stupid to advance. I think you forget that until about 50 years ago, these people were second class citizens. They didn't have the same rights as you. I don't think you can appreciate how that will hold a group of people back.

          If you want to talk about welfare, first realize that 40% of the people on social welfare, like food stamps, are WHITE. Then realize that there is something called corporate welfare. We spend about 90 BILLION dollars on corporate welfare every year. Never heard people talking about how they're dependent on government money. What about the banks that got bailed out? All those rich white guys? How are they doing? They're all on the government teet, but since they're not poor, they don't get stigmatized. Do a little more research so you don't come across so ignorant.

          Why do you harp on their skin color? Why don't you treat them like Americans? Males make up 50% of the country and are responsible for 90% of the murders. Should we start attacking males now? See how your way of thinking is stupid?

          Haha, and then you talk about intellectually lazy. Too funny. I said it had to do with poverty. You say it's culture. So where are you getting ideas of racism? Projection?

        • UpLateAgain

          I don't know what banks getting bailed out have to do with crime rates among ghetto blacks, but we'll agree Obama has kept his promises to provide bail-outs and crony capitalism support to industries that agreed to support him.
          Yes.. 47 % of the people getting government assistance of some type or other ARE white. That is an almost 100% increase since Obama took office. He's doing everything he can to do to the rest of the country what Democrats did to the inner cities of our major metropolitan areas for half a century.... creating a dependency class.

          As for poor, non-ghetto blacks. The South is full of them. They are as ubiquitous as 'poor white trash', and neither group has a particularly high crime rate. It's not poverty causing the disproportionate crime rates among blacks. And you are NEVER going to fix the problem as long as you think that's what it is.

          I know several people where I live in Colorado that make less than 10,000 a year. They have no criminal records, and would be mortified that someone would consider them potentially criminal just because they were poor.

          As to the ghetto.... I know it intimately. I worked in Oakland for 25 years.

          I'm though with you. There's no point in arguing with you further... OR pointing out the obvious. You'll just keep believing the major problems in this country are poverty and racism, rather than the creation of an underclass by the government.

          That outlook has worked for us SO WELL up to now, hasn't it.

        • John

          Did you not remember the part of your post where you talked about welfare? And how you think blacks are dependent on the government? Do you usually forget things that you write about an hour ago?

          You do know that when Obama took office, that coincided with a huge economic downturn, right? The biggest recession since the Great Depression. You heard about that, right? So why are you surprised that more people are going to need assistance? So you are saying that Obama is actively trying to keep people poor? Really? Fascinating. Tell me more about this conspiracy theory. Why is he doing this? Is it related to a New World Order type theory? Why do you think he's trying to make more people dependent? How does the government create an underclass? Do you think Jesus would act like you are here? Wasn't he all about giving alms to the poor? Would he say that is creating a dependency, and underclass? Would he chastise people who are poor for being stupid? And unable to advance?

          Oh, you know several poor people who aren't criminals? Well then I guess it's settled. You can't blame crime on poverty.

        • Uptite

          Why is he doing this? Because a bird in the hand is better than two in the bush...if he keeps people dependent, and mark my words he will, they will continue to vote him in, does not take a mental giant to figure that out - as people become more dependent on all of the "free stuff" - EBT, Section 8, etc, etc.... so many programs that were designed to help the real needy and the elderly has now become like the lottery for these dependent folk. As far as blaming crime on poverty, well that's a farce in itself...you want to see crime, look no further that your fearful leader!

        • John

          Continue to vote him in? Are you absolutely ignorant? He can't be re-elected. Do you have a theory that isn't absolutely stupid?

        • Guest

          I have a theory that you are ABSOLUTELY IGNORANT!!!
          you know full well he wants to try and break some f'n record by seeking a third term...this BS only happens in communist countries - have a nice night buffoon!

        • John

          hahahahahaha, you're crazy

        • Uptite

          Only after you my fellow human.

        • John

          hahahahaahha, you even tried to delete this post. was it to hide your ignorant comment? truly pathetic.

          In case anyone is wondering who would be stupid enough to say something like this, it was Uptite.

          And look at those who upvoted him! HAhahahahahaha

        • garyd210

          John, you're getting nasty!

        • thelowdown

          ^Typical libtard rhetoric, nit picking & personalizing. I don;t know how bad that "biggest recession" was... I had a job, & paid my bills. Since Obama, 2 of my employers filed bankruptcy, massive layoffs, the unemployment here has been at 20% for years. ...(actually more like 30%) ... but like me, many are no longer counted as "Unemployed" because their 99 WEEKS of unemployment (and food stamps which made them fat & lazy & unmotivated to work)... expired & now they're living off of NOTHING & not even COUNTED as Unemployed. Obama's spending like a drunken sailor on shore leave after saying he'd CUT THE DEFICIT IN HALF! He's throwing good money after bad, giving to green engergy cronies, GM (took the dough & is building in CHINA), more money to Wall Street, and Muslim Brotherhood, et.al. AND creating Amnesty for 15-30 MILLION more ILLEGAL Democrats including healthcare, welfare, and food stamps for THEM! Seriously, have you had a bump to the head?...or do you NEED one?

      • garyd210

        How do you describe "poor"? Not everyone has the same standards for what is poor. My father-in-law, who is 86 makes around $20k/year. Not a penny in savings, but has a paid off house, 3 vehicles I couldn't risk taking on a 500 mile trip. He appreciates what he can't do for himself, but out of pride can be a pain when someone helps what he could do for himself, but doesn't. Some people making $50+k will complain that they don't make enough, rent, over utilize their credit, eat out constantly, have one+ near new car. Their life is stressed over finances that were unplanned, perhaps reckless. Are they both poor, neither poor or somewhere in the gray area? Some folks will gladly say they're poor if they know someone will come running to their aid. Others will only say they're poor when they are completely destitute with zilch, nothing! While valid word, it is so vague to describe in anyway people would all agree on.

  • http://www.survivingurbancrisis.com/ Silas Longshot

    Not gonna happen......you have to be a 'real' president to think along these lines.

  • Remag1

    Nice sentiment. What are you smoking, are you off your meds or just plain NutZ?
    He is the president of not only black America but of Muslim America. America is not the America of my youth. You do have a vivid imagination.

  • Bible believer

    Wouldn't we be a great country with a united instead of a divider? We might as well have a dictator as a pres. , as one with his patriotism. I am really afraid what he and the media and also his dems,, helping him destroy our country, are up to because they are changing our country so much for the worse I am missing the U.S. of A.

  • TAM44

    I don't listen to that lying POS illegal sissified muslim BOY barack hussein obama.

  • TPS12

    He could not say that, remember he thinks 35 years ago he was the same drug loving thug tm was.

    • gac

      And if he had a son he'd look like Trayvon. Google pics of Trayvon. You can't argue with that statement.

      • John

        Is this you trying to erase your past? So that you don't get busted by someone like me for your racist comments? Hahaha

        • gac

          I don't know what happened there but it really pisses me off. I think someone like you must have complained because I offended you and they deleted my profile.

        • John

          Hahaha, are you crazy? If there were any moderators around here, I would have been banned a long time ago.

          Maybe your comments were too racist and were flagged automatically? Who knows. Seems like you're still posting just fine though.

        • gac

          Yea. Had to start over. Lost all my other great posts. My comments are not racist. They are factual.

  • jaws4316

    When pigs fly.

  • JudyPepenellaNY

    Forget the need to UNITE the people, he would rather segregate them into categories so he can use each group as a pawn for his own agenda.
    What I would like is to hear him REALLY mean God Bless America.

  • chamuiel
  • stevor

    he could have pointed out that Trayvon was a druggie like o'bama, Trayvon going the route of using "lean" whereas o'bama snorted. Then o'bama could have told how it was a bad route and that the blacks ought to boycott drugs instead of boycotting Florida or Disney World.

    • Guest

      lolol - there are so many different ways he could have approached this situation, but chose the moronic way!

  • ynot202

    Virtues such as integrity and civility have been exchanged by Barry and the current administration in favor of manipulation and deceit.

  • 2War Abn Vet

    That is a speech Obama could not have given. He is the most divisive President in the last century and a half, and deliberately so.

    • UpLateAgain

      Airborne! All the way, and then some more!

    • Uptite

      Perhaps if it were more about him ,,,he always starts off relating every situation to himself.

  • Mr. Izz

    I could see President Obama saying maybe some of these things, but unfortunately, the President is also under immense racial and political pressure. He's just as much a pawn as others. Only he could change that, I don't know if he ever will. Btw, this President would never ever EVER bash NBC for their improper portrayal of the facts and evidence. They are his biggest supporters and he knows it.

    • UpLateAgain

      The only time I can ever remember this president ever eating humble pie was immediately after the 2010 mid-terms. That pie tasted so bad he immediately went about trying to fix it so that never happened again. Not by solving the problems the country faced, but mostly by seeing to it that the Tea Party Movement ran into the IRS, significantly inhibiting their operations, coupled with a press onslaught of labeling them racists and rednecks, and equating them to terrorists.


      • John

        I know, how could anyone call the Tea Party racists?


        "A tea party leader in Dallas is facing a backlash after saying the Republican Party doesn’t want African-American voters to show up at the polls.

        “I’m going to be real honest with you,” Tea Party leader Ken Emanuelson said at a Dallas County Republican Party event on May 20. “The Republican Party doesn’t want black people to vote if they are going to vote 9-to-1 for Democrats.”"

        • UpLateAgain

          And if you read the article, he clarified further on:
          “What I meant, and should have said, is that it is not, in my personal opinion, in the interests of the Republican Party to spend its own time and energy working to generally increase the number of Democratic voters at the polls, and at this point in time, nine of every ten African American voters cast their votes for the Democratic Party”

        • John

          Ah, yes, what he meant to say. This is one of an infinite amount of similar articles. Want to hear a similar one then try and tell me what he "meant" to say?

          "It's hard to argue with the polling they've been getting from the national level," said Rep. Kenny Marchant, R-Texas, referring to signs of serious problems for Republican presidential candidates if immigration laws aren't rewritten. "I just don't experience it locally."
          The proposed immigration overhaul "is very unpopular in my district," said Marchant, who represents suburbs west of Dallas. "The Republican primary voters, they're being pretty vocal with me on this subject." Besides, he said, "if you give the legal right to vote to 10 Hispanics in my district, seven to eight of them are going to vote Democrat."

          They don't want people to get their rights because they will vote democrat. I'm eager to see your attempt to justify it.

        • UpLateAgain

          Once again... you're equating political debate with racism. This is what I mean by intellectual laziness. And just because news articles accuse Tea Party goers of being racists.... that means absolutely nothing. That's the center of the scam. You're saying you can show me dozens of articles accusing the Tea Party as being racist in response to my saying the Obama-sympathetic press has taken the tack of accusing the Tea Party movement of being racist because it aids Obama.

          I know these people. We know our hearts. The majority of us were of the same generation as Bill Clinton. We didn't choose to not be racist. We were raised that way. We were the 'flower power' generation. You seem to think that calling us racists often enough proves we're racists.

          In fact, I actually saw a young black woman scream that very thing on TV other day. She said, "The mere fact that you deny being racist proves that you are."

          Conservatives see guys like you coming from a mile away. We laugh at you. Literally. We look at each other and say, "Ready? Here it comes." And on cue, you make some lame accusation of racism, instead of arguing the merits of an idea or action. It really is comical.

          Yes... there are racists in America, and yes, I think the majority of them are on the left... not the right.

          The thing about racists is, they are all too often willing to admit being racists. They relish it. Take pride in it. Recent polls show 33% of blacks admitting to being racist, while only 14% of whites do the same. And that's 14% of whites... not conservatives. When you restrict it to conservatives, it's only about 3% that admit to being racist.... and those are the people we in the Tea Party Movement tell to take their butts elsewhere.

        • John

          I'm sorry, but your own party accuses you of being against minorities. Look at any poll, they all say the same thing. The right caters to white, often rich men. Ask any minority person which party is on their side.

          But it's hilarious watching you squirm in denial. We aren't racist! We aren't racist! Really! We aren't!

          Which polls are you talking about regarding racism? I'd love to see your source.

        • Guest

          From "Right Black", a poster on the HubPages.

          Why Do Blacks Vote Democrat?

          As a youngster someone told me that the Democrats are for the little guy. Therefore, I decided that I must be a Democrat. I was a true Democrat until I was about nine years old and I figured out that not only were the Democrats not for the little guy but they definitely were not for me, a black person. I was nine years old in 1968, this was the year that Rev. King was assassinated and Pres. Nixon was elected. It was the Democratic Party in the south that Rev. King was fighting. He fought against segregationists like Democratic Georgia Governor Lester Maddox, Alabama Governor George Wallace and Democratic Public Safety Commissioner Eugene "Bull" Connor in Birmingham who was the man that released dogs and used skin scorching fire hoses against blacks. I can still remember convincing my mother that Nixon was the better candidate and the Republican Party should be supported because they were for all people not just “the little” people. If I am a “little” person what is it that I need? Little people need big people to take care of them. How did I figure this out at such a very early age? I read about the Civil War and the freedom that it brought my ancestors. It's just pure common sense that the people who were your enemy one day could not be your friend the next. This is the reason I have such a hard time answering the question, why do blacks vote Democrat? It’s emotional but here is my opinion based on the facts that I have read and lived over the years.

          “When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me.” 1 Cor. 13:11 This verse is what I perceive to be the whole problem. Let’s take a tour back in time to the days just before the Civil War. Most blacks lived in the south and most were slaves. Slaves were given their meager portions of food and poor lodging by their masters. They were told how to talk, “Yes, Master,” what to think, “You are worth whatever I paid for you” and when and where to go. Black people were told not to think, in fact they were told they could not think for themselves because God created them for servitude. It was the northern Abolitionist who first said this was an abomination. That one man should not enslave another. They were the ones who said we needed to live out our creed that all are equal in the eyes of Almighty God.

          Once the Civil War ended the struggle for equality began. Most blacks saw the Republican Party as the party of freedom and during Reconstruction this was true. Reconstruction had to end and the Republican Party became a minority party in the south with very few white Republicans. The Democrats or the three “s” party, slavery, secession and segregation, had all the power and wielded it with an iron fist. Virtually enslaving blacks all over again.

          Blacks in the south were left alone to fight for themselves, their paternalistic Republican Party left them to build alliances of their own. This failed miserably because the last thing the racist south wanted were free blacks, they wanted slaves, free labor and power. The violence that was released upon the freedmen was unbearable and the freedmen gave up their equality to be considered lesser men. Many injustices ensued at the hands of white racist Democrats but even when the Republicans tried to help they we rebuffed by the majority, the Democrats. President Theodore Roosevelt tried to intervene through the infamous peonage trials but could not stop the incidents of involuntary servitude. Therefore, blacks felt abandoned even though all the advances of the black race was a product of the Republican Party from 1860 to 1968 they left the party in droves when the Democrats started offering social programs to take care of “the little man.” Encouraged by the likes of Jesse Jackson more blacks voted Democrat. Because of Democratic social programs more black men left the home in order to let the government send money to take care of his family. He planted his seed far and wide and when the seed was rejected because the planter would be absent, our precious babies were aborted in the millions, all federally funded by Democratic social engineering.

          Republicans kept offering a hand up and Democrats a handout. Handouts being easier they were accepted over a hand up. Even blacks that did not take handouts were glad that they were there so they wouldn't have to be responsible for their brothers and sisters. They voted and still vote to keep government handouts going because it is easier than arguing with those who won’t work or taking care of those who can’t. This is a syndrome that has affected all of our society and the Democratic Party has solidified its base of those who want government to be responsible instead of being responsible themselves. I admit that I could be wrong about some of my observations but I think they are rational and supported by history. Why do blacks vote Democrat, because there are so few responsible black men! Many blacks have been duped into a paternalistic psychological slavery where to be taken care of by the government is encouraged, freedom of thought is discouraged and to be different from the group is not tolerated. Clarence Thomas, Condoleezza Rice and Michael Steele along with other Black Republicans are repudiated because they stand for responsibility and freedom, they are not on the Paternalistic Psychological Plantation.

          Read more from this poster:


        • UpLateAgain

          There's a big difference between not encouraging people they know are going to vote Democrat from voting and actually doing something to stop them from voting. And for the sake of argument, even if they did try to stop them from voting, that's not racism. It's voter fraud. They'd be trying to stop Democratic votes... not black votes. For it to be racist, you'd have to assume they were perfectly happy with having white people vote Democratic if they wanted-to.

        • John

          Then shouldn't they talk about a "minority" vote? They are singling out blacks and actively conspiring to discriminate against them. That is racism. Sorry!

        • UpLateAgain

          John, the simple fact is I could give my life for a black man and you'd still find a way to call me racist. Ergo, I'm completely wasting my efforts to show you something you obviously have no interest whatsoever in understanding. So I'm through. Have a nice life.

        • John

          Really? Man, I love BS hypotheticals where you tell me what I believe. Really brings your point home.

          Run away! Always the same with you guys, as soon as you're called out, you say it's not worth your time. Weird, you've said that some 2-3 times already but keep responding.

        • garyd210

          John just wants to argue! You could say "the sky is blue" and John would quote as saying "there's rain coming". There's no discussion to be had of any value.

        • gac

          Uplate. You can't argue with this idiot. I've tried

      • Nanette

        Sadly, these progressives (another name for communist) will never give up their position. There is already louder and louder talk of changing the term of the presidential office to three terms. I saw this about two years ago, it started with one voice, now the voice are growing.

  • msbets

    This pos garbage, isn't of jack shyt

  • UpLateAgain

    The only way Obama's ever going to give a speech that doesn't blame the problems he should be reconciling as president on others is if we figure out a way to put it into his teleprompter.

    • John

      How can he fix race problems when you say that ghetto blacks are too stupid to advance? The problem is in you.

      • UpLateAgain

        The only person who has used the words 'blacks' and 'stupid' in the same sentence is you. I said they (ghetto blacks) don't know how the system works, so when they fail, they generally blame their failure on racism... which they are constantly told to do. It has nothing to do with stupidity. But you go ahead and think about them any way you want-to.

        • John

          So why don't they get the system? But white people do? How come? Are white people just smarter and "get it"? You also said they have no self-respect and are not self-reliant. All very nice things to say. Shouldn't we call the 40% of whites on welfare those things too?

          So how about you explain your comments? Why is Obama working to keep them dependent? And how has the government "engineered" this dependence?

        • UpLateAgain

          'Non-ghetto people' do get the system. Their race is irrelevant. When you have three plus generations of people raised to believe that their survival is dependent on government, you are not going to convince them easily that they are actually dependent on themselves.

          You saw the same thing in Russia after the fall of Communism. My sister-in-law is Russian. She came here about ten years after communism officially fell. She will tell anyone who cares to listen how the Russian people had such a hard time immediately after the fall because they were not raised in a system based on self-reliance. They were totally lost when they had to become self-reliant.

          The 'War on Poverty' has put 40 trillion dollars into the ghettos of America, with only a miniscule rise in the poverty level.

          It's not the fact of being on welfare that makes someone not self-reliant or absent self-respect, per se. It's being raised in a culture that that thinks getting through life is all about government dependency.

          And a classic example of not understanding the system was displayed every time I had a young black male explain to me that he had proof white America was racist, 'cause if they weren't they'd just let the government print all the money they needed to give to them so they'd be as well off as the whites.' When you are dealing with that level of ignorance (not stupidity... I've heard kids that were smart as whips make that statement), you are starting so far behind the power curve in trying to get them to a place where they actually can lift themselves out of poverty (because you just cannot lift them out... they HAVE to life themselves out), that you really have very little chance of success.

          Why is Obama working to keep them dependent? The obvious reason. As long as they are dependent on government and he provides them the basic necessities, he gets their vote. Free cell phones buy a few more votes. That's why he is trying as hard as he can to not only keep them dependent, but to get as many more people dependent as he possibly can. I could write a book on the things he's done to try to do that. Starting with closing inner city enterprise zones, to cutting off access to charter schools, to opposing vouchers, to advertising food stamps at record rates and accepting anyone without checking whether or not there is a need for it, to killing workfare, to extending unemployment benefits virtually unendingly, to inhibiting energy development whenever and wherever possible, to Obamacare (the most massive program of government dependence in our history), to modifying Obamacare so they now won't be checking to see if you actually need the government subsidy at the exchanges as long as you wish to claim it, to doing everything he can by way of expanded government and government regulation to inhibit job growth (gotta depend on government of there's no jobs out there.) I could go on for the next week.

          The ten worst cities in the country for crime and poverty are also ALL cities that have had pure Democratic governments for forty years or more.

          I'm not saying the ghettos were intentionally engineered to be ghettos. I am saying that they were intentionally engineered to rely on government, and that has resulted in their becoming ghettos (where they were not before) and remaining ghettos.

          If you can think of something that is causing these ghettos, with their disproportionately high crime rates to be the way they are other than race, culture, or poverty, please tell me what it might be?

          I don't accept race or poverty as being relevant, though poverty is a convenient excuse. Race is 100% irrelevant. Lots of poor people in this country still build their lives around family and personal morality..... most, in fact. It's in these enclaves third and fourth generation government dependency as a way of life (where the government has effectively replaced the father) that you find a dearth of 'American exceptionalism' (initiative, self-reliance and the ability to strive for greatness because it) that results in short, in the existence of the ghetto, with all the negatives it displays.

          If it's not Race, or poverty that creates disproportionately high crime, that only leaves culture (unless you can come up with something else I'm just not smart enough myself to realize).

          And please, STOP making the argument that I'm saying white people are smarter or black people are stupid, or anything like that. That's your thing, not mine. I've not used an 'intelligence' argument ONCE, in any form.

          I can't tell you the number of black businessmen I met in Oakland who said to me, "I don't tell this to black folks, 'cause they call me an Uncle Tom, but I did a lot better under Reagan than I've been doing under Clinton."

        • John

          "When you have three plus generations of people raised to believe that their survival is dependent on government, you are not going to convince them easily that they are actually dependent on themselves."

          How was this done? Can you show any evidence other than your opinion?

          "It's being raised in a culture that that thinks getting through life is all about government dependency."

          Again, please provide evidence for this.

          "I am saying that they were intentionally engineered to rely on government, "

          How was this done? Any evidence? It seems to be a running theme, doesn't it?

          You point to some anecdotal evidence of your interaction with one black man and use that to generalize. I think that's the definition of racism right there.

          Then you bring up Obama needing their vote. He doesn't. Do you not know he can't get a third term? Sorry, that stupid theory doesn't work, got any others? How does Obama advertise food stamps at record rates? WHat does that even mean? Are there TV ads or something?

          "Race is 100% irrelevant. "

          Then why are you talking about the black community? Why not just say the poor community? Or the government dependent community? Why don't you use those terms?

          And you are saying that white people are smarter. You said that blacks "dont get the system". Stop pretending like you aren't saying they are stupid. It's really pathetic watching you say it then deny it in the same breath.

          And finally, if welfare is such a problem, why don't we see these same problems in countries that have more welfare? Like pretty much all of western europe? Why do Germany, France, Norway, Finland, etc, with all their extremely high levels of welfare, not have these problems? Your theory doesn't work.

        • garyd210

          Jon, you must be an attorney. All they want to do is argue and misquote what others say. There was some pretty profound comments made in response to you, but you want to argue, saying what others say is pathetic. It's just an opinion. You lack a certain amount of respect of other views, like you are the #1 know it all. You are far from it. That's my 2 cents, or will I be all wrong, too?

        • John

          How about instead of wasting your time posting this nonsense, you actually say something worthwhile, or refute the points I made?

          I lack respect? Hahahahahahahahahahahaha. I'm sorry, do you know where you are posting?

  • lordhoff

    Why do I think this was censored and the very last word left out: "NOT!"?

  • bahndon

    A true leader would make a speech just like this one.

    • nmpher29

      It would not be necessary had he NOT made that first pathetic speech. What the hell was he thinking? Divide and conquer? That would be my guess.

      • bahndon

        If everyone got along we would not need government. Only a corrupt government can divide a country as great as this one.

  • Uptite

    That was great, but OB is not intelligent or genuine enough to even think this way, much less say it - please send him a copy!

  • J D S

    Some very pertinent questions... http://www.dlas.org/questions-zimmerman-verdict/

  • NativeAmerican

    What a bunch of crap speech ! Makes me want to puke ! Get a American president ! !

  • Mark

    Makes for great reading but, come on and look at who you are asking to behave like a leader!

  • ConservaDave2

    Obama's speech from an alternate universe? Not one point from this "speech" will ever be coming from Obama's mouth. And has he ever apologized for anything?

  • 57girl

    The way I see it, Obama should have kept his nose out of this case altogether. He is POTUS, for Pete's sake. How about he solve some our Nation's problems, or at least he could quit creating them? Or better yet,still, how about he show us his birth certificate?

    Good old Obama ... always stirring the flames of racism, keeping our Nation divided.

  • WardMD


    Your comment (that 40% of whites are welfare recipients) is, well, WRONG.

    Blacks receive welfare benefits at a rate FIVE TIMES that of Whites!

    Approximately 40% of Welfare Recipients are, in fact, white, but that's a FAR difference number than saying that 40% of whites are on welfare. Only 4.1% of the ENTIRE U.S. Population is on welfare!

    The actual percentages (of welfare by race) are (http://www.statisticbrain.com/welfare-statistics/):

    White 38.8%
    Black 39.8%

    Now, blacks represent about 13% of the entire U.S. Population; Whites are about 78% (http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/00000.html).

    So, there are (roughly) SIX TIMES as many whites (244,852,920) as there are blacks (40,808,820), yet these two groups receive (roughly) the SAME percentage of the Welfare benefits.

    With a U.S. Population of (roughly) 313,914,000, that means, roughly 1,287,047 people are receiving Welfare (4.1% of 313,914,000). Of THAT number, roughly 514,818 Whites, and 514,818 Blacks receive Welfare.

    You'll note that 514,818 (roughly 40% of 1,287,047) IS 0.21% (or less than 1/4 of 1%) of the White Population of the U.S. (244,852,920) receiving welfare benefits, whereas nearly 1.26% (or 1 and 1/4%) of the Black population of the U.S. ) receive welfare benefits (a rate FIVE TIMES GREATER for Blacks, than Whites).

    MY POINT in all this algebra, is that YOU ARE GIVING FALSE and MISLEADING information by asserting that 40% of Whites are on welfare. That is, simply, NOT the case!

    MY preference would be for NO ONE to be on welfare - that EVERYONE who wanted to work, could find a DECENT paying job (that, of course, requires SKILLS that are in demand, and employers who have jobs in need of workers).

    Sadly, THIS administration has done (and WILL DO NOTHING) to make that so!

    • John

      I said: "If you want to talk about welfare, first realize that 40% of the people on social welfare, like food stamps, are WHITE."

      Thanks for the numbers. So then you are basically saying that blacks are 5x more evil/lazy/pathetic/whatever than whites? Why is that important to point out? Are you trying to say something about black people here? Spit it out.

      It doesn't really change much at all. Of all the people that receive welfare, like you said, 38.8% are white, 39.8% are black.

      Your preference although nice is not realistic. There aren't enough jobs to go around. And whatever happened to compassion for the poor? Whatever happened to giving alms to the poor? Why is it that the conservatives, where a good bunch of Christians position themselves politically, are so absolutely against welfare to the poor? Kind of ironic, don't you think?

      • Robert12Disqus

        i hardly think it is compassionate to rip off money from the working man and give it to welfare. i like it better when giving is more localized so the laziness ends and/or help ends at the appropriate time to actually help out the person instead of endless "donations" using stolen money from the citizenry to maintain a welfare state of free money.

      • Kaiser

        I take exception to you statement about Christians not giving alms to the poor. Fact is Christians give mor money to charity than non-Christians. Republicans give more to charity than Democrats. Think Bush/Cheney vs. Obama/Biden. Bush gave about 10-15% of his money to charity, Cheney gave 40% of his money. Obama gave 1% and Biden gave .1% of his money. Even poor Christians, generally, give 10% of what they have to charities. Non-Christians and Democrats are only interested in spending YOUR money, not theirs.

  • Nanette

    The saddest thing I have ever seen, and am sure in the history of America. As a black president he was in a very unique moment in time a place in history to make our country even greater than it has ever been. Unfortunately, this person was voted into office who was not honest, nor has integrity, but groomed for an agenda. I believe to get where he is, he compromised any honest values to become president by whom ever or what ever group is pulling the strings to this puppet. I also, believe his grooming started many years ago. He is not American, by anyone's standards. He is not, on his own intelligent, by any measure. He is a fake through and through. Fact, he isn't even a democrat, that is just the party that was used to bring this puppet to office. Look out, the real agenda is to transform America alright, into part of a One World Government.

    • Robert12Disqus

      voted into office would be a loose term once you start checking into voter fraud. it's not that hard to sway the vote with automated machines when the country is generally divided between two main parties. my research indicates they did sway and flay the vote and that had that not happened obama would not be in office in either election. not being dogmatic at this point, but have read enough to be confident enough to say such.

  • Robert12Disqus

    wow now that would be presidential if it ever happened. can you imagine?

    • Kaiser

      Don't hold your breath. Obama will NEVER give that speech. I like the thought, though.

  • msgttbar

    It is a sad commentary that this will never happen. Our illustratious pResident would never deign to say something with this much common sense. As a nation, we have elected a man without a country who cannot bring himself to acknowledge this country's christian heritage and our roots deeply imbedded in "the rule of law".

  • Disgusted

    It will be a cold day in hell before you hear these words from that arrogant POS. He has been the biggest racist and race divider since LBJ. I fear for my country and cry for what it has become.

    • OLDDAD

      It will be a cold day in hell before Obozzo admits that heisno better than sharpton or jackson and has done nothing but increase racial disharmony in this country.
      He is worth no more than they and belongs in the same jail as they do for inciting to riot and creating violence. He is a race baitor for political gain and doesn't deserve to be in any office in this country let alone the White House.

  • http://Poetlife.com Gerard A. Geiger

    I would be proud of Obama if he had given this speech. There is still time to do it, A statesman knows when to use humility to achieve common good from personal
    And policy failures. This is an excellent timely and much needed speech to
    Save the face and legacy of the man, President Obama.

  • toosmarttovoteGOP

    "Dear Mr. Martin,

    I have a 16-year old son. I cannot imagine losing him because some beast decided to play Lone Ranger.

    And so, with cautious humility, I make this suggestion, this plea.

    Sue the beast. You must.

    I understand you are reluctant to launch another painful trial of uncertain outcome and cost, monetary and emotional. And I know a money judgment won't bring your son home.

    But imagine this: George Zimmerman gets a half-million-dollar book deal and $25,000 a pop to appear at gun shows - plus a fee to put his name on a 9mm semi-automatic. The 'Zimmerman Protector.'

    There's only one way to put this monster out of business: Justice can only come out of the barrel of a lawsuit.

    Only in a lawsuit can you force Zimmerman to the witness stand. That's crucial. In the criminal case, Zimmerman's daddy, a magistrate no less, could say it was poor George yelling for help on that desperate phone call.

    In a civil action, your son's lawyer can say to Zimmerman, "Come on, George, let's hear you scream for help. George, let's hear you scream that this skinny kid is going to kill you. Come on, George, show us how Trayvon somehow grabbed your big fat head while he was taking the gun from your hand."

    A federal indictment won't do that: Zimmerman can't be called as a witness in a criminal case. A federal trial won't disgrace Zimmerman nor stop him from getting rich off your son's corpse.

    A civil trial has none of that "reasonable doubt" crap that can get Zimmerman off the hook with some fantasy story about Trayvon as the dangerous aggressor. Zimmerman's consigliere said it was Trayvon’s own fault he was murdered. The “decision [to get shot] was in Trayvon Martin's hands more than my client's.” Do you want that to be the last word about your son?

    Maybe you don't want the money. OK, then: Set up a foundation and make Zimmerman turn over all that blood money, those book deals and gun show fees, to the Trayvon Foundation. Make him work every day of his lousy life for Trayvon.

    There’s another advantage to civil action. To be blunt, you won't have to rely on painfully befuddled prosecutors like the ones we witnessed in that courtroom. In a lawsuit, you can choose the best legal gunslingers in the country.

    I'm not guessing about that. I asked fearsome Florida trial lawyer Mike Papantonio if he and his partner, civil rights attorney Bobby Kennedy Jr., would take on the case if called. Papantonio said his firm is standing by, ready to help your legal team if asked. And I have no doubt there are other great plaintiff lawyers who would leap to your cause.

    Americans love to complain that there are "too many lawyers." I agree that if some corporate defense lawyers drown in their hot tubs, only their mothers should cry. But it is our unique system of tort law that gives Americans the true Hammer of Justice. Plaintiff lawsuits, even more than government agencies or the FBI, are what keep drug companies from poisoning us and keep dangerous toys from maiming our kids. And, using section 1983 of the federal civil rights statute, it’s the power of the plaintiffs’ bar that stops racist jerks from denying jobs, mortgages and freedoms to people of color.

    And there's one final reason to bring a civil action. Let the word go forth to any Zimmerman wannabe dreaming that wealth and admiration requires only their hunting down another dark-skinned kid in a hoodie: Maybe sick Florida law will keep you out of prison, but you will have your sorry ass dragged onto a witness stand, where you will be ripped up, ruined and busted for the rest of your life.

    So I'm asking you, as one dad to another, stand your ground and sue this killer - for Trayvon and for all our kids.

    With respect,
    Greg Palast"

  • Jeronimo Dan

    One Nation Under God, that's one you, or the American People will never hear. We have a very sick mental person in charge. I'm sure the Secret Service have long talked among themselves about taking control, until the property authorities could come in and handle a bad situation that has gotten worst each and everyday and will continue until he is removed from office. There's a narcissistic mad man at the wheel.
    Due to lack of education and informing the people, we've let the illiterate and uninformed built up until a tyrannical individual, who was able to come in and hand out trinkets and speak words of a new dawning and here we are, in big deep dodo.
    May God Help Us

    • PSALM37

      We are under "a" god alright, just not the One who Created Everything, The God of Israel.
      It is "currently" the one who is pathetically attempting to usurp His throne.
      o-barry is a loyal ambassador, and perfect representation of Satan.
      Our nations judgment / consequence for accepting and allowing the transgression of Yahweh's laws to rule here.

      Hold on tight to Yeshua (Jesus) He Is The Only Hope.