FRIDAY'S HEADLINES IN THE NEW YORK TIMES Included A CHARGE BY GOVERNOR PATTERSON THAT HE IS THE VICTIM OF RACISM IN HIS QUEST FOR ELECTION TO A FULL TERM.
And he follows this outrageous charge with a statement that President Obama is next.
This is nothing more than a desperate attempt to play the race card when there is no argument that as governor , he has done nothing to want the voters of New York state to re-elect him!
Thus he joins the ilk of many notorious race baiters like Obama's pastor for twenty years. The Reverend Wright!
But clouded by the propaganda of this type tripe and the health care smears going out of the White House and Congress about anyone who dares oppose Obamacare. Is the fact that our justice department has been taken over by reverse racists who refuse to obey the Rule of Law.
The following is an excerpt from Saturdays Patriot Post that explains the preferential treatment the radical group Black Panthers is being afforded.


The outstanding example of this cynical manipulation of justice is how a case against the New Black Panthers, which the Department of Justice described as a "black super-racist organization," has been quickly and quietly shelved with minimal attention to the law and the Constitution.

The evidence is right there on the videos recorded Election Day, 2008, when uniformed members of the Black Panthers showed up at a Philadelphia polling station, one of them wielding a billy club. They shouted insults and made threats: "Cracker, you about to be ruled by a black man," one of the Panthers informed a voter. Two Republican poll watchers, a black couple, were called traitors to their race -- an accusation that will be familiar to any white Southerner who stood up for simple decency back in the bad old days.

Thank goodness for modern technology, which can make any citizen with an iPhone and its camera a crusading reporter. When all this made the Internet, not even the Obama administration's Justice Department could ignore what had happened on Philadelphia's streets. Particularly after the department's own investigation revealed that the New Black Panthers had called for "300 members to be deployed" at various polling places across the country.

So early this year, the Department of Justice proceeded to file a complaint against the Black Panthers, and specifically against the stormtroopers who were captured on video. So far, so fair.

A lawyer and survivor of many a legal battle for civil rights, Bartle Bull, filed an affidavit in support of the Justice Department's complaint. He characterized the incident in Philadelphia as "the most blatant form of intimidation I have encountered in my life in political campaigns in many states, even going back to the work I did in Mississippi in the 1960s."

But the Black Panthers didn't even bother to respond to the charges -- as if they were above the law. And maybe they are. Because after a court had ordered a default judgment against them, including one of their national leaders, the Justice Department caved. It dropped all charges against the Panthers except one, and that one was settled with a light tap on the wrist. The department got an injunction forbidding a member of the Panthers, identified as one Samir Shabazz, from brandishing a weapon at a polling place through November 15, 2012. How's that for a tough defense of Americans' right to vote without risking intimidation?

There doesn't seem to be any explanation for this perversion of justice except the Panthers' political pull with this new administration. This case is no longer about the Black Panthers so much as it is about a newly politicized Justice Department. At some point the career lawyers in the Justice Department's civil rights division changed their minds about pressing charges -- or had their minds changed for them. By whom? Why? Those questions need answering. Under oath.

Why hasn't there been a greater sense outrage, betrayal or just disgust at the administration's handling of this case? My theory: Because none of this comes as a surprise. What else could be expected when The People in their wisdom elect a president of the United States who's a product of Chicago's machine politics?

H. L. Mencken said it: "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard."
SOURCE:PAUL GREENBERG

Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.” —Ronald Reagan

When you look at the decisions that have been made by the present Attorney General you might get the impression, as I do, that justice is being administered the way they did it in the Capone Days in Chicago.
Beginning in the last days of the the Clinton administration Asst.AG Holder was involved with Clinton's last-minute pardon of fugitive felon and Democratic contributor Marc Rich.
Holder was also involved in Clinton's decision to reduce the criminal sentences of 16 members of the Boricua Popular Army, an organization that has been categorized by the FBI as a terrorist organization. The clemency request was initially opposed in 1996 by U.S. Pardons Attorney Margaret Love.
In July 1999, Holder recommended clemency to President Clinton with a report from then U.S. Pardons Attorney Roger Adams that neither supported nor opposed clemency. A month later, the clemency was granted by Clinton. According to The Hartford Courant, the clemency was unusual because it was opposed by the FBI, the federal prosecutor and the victims.
In the aftermath of the murder of the late term abortionist Dr. Tiller, Mr. Holder dispatched U.S. Marshals to guard some Abortion clinics.
However, when an Army recruiter was murdered and a Naval recruiter was severely wounded in a recruiting location. There were no Marshalls stationed outside recruiting depots, nor was there condemnation of the murder forthcoming from the AG's office.

Since being appointed Attorney General, Mr.Holder has made many decisions that indicate to me that he is inclined to view American justice through the prism of race.
He called the United States "a nation of cowards" during his speech to honor Black history month!

Then "two weeks ago, in a highly unusual move, Holder dismissed default judgments his department had won against two of three defendants charged with violating the Voting Rights Act. On Nov. 4, 2008, a billy club-wielding militant in military-style boots and beret stood outside a Philly polling location with a similarly dressed partner. Citizen journalists from the Pennsylvania-based blog Election Journal captured the menacing duo on video. One of the watchdogs observed: "I think it might be a little intimidating that you have a stick in your hand."
The defendants were black, and I doubt that if they were white the decision would have been the same.Default judgements have never been dismissed before, to my knowledge!

"On the heels of this voter intimidation protection plan, the Obama Justice Department issued another decision that undermines electoral integrity -- but bolsters Democratic voter drives. The department this week denied the state of Georgia the ability to enact strict citizenship voter verification rules previously approved by two federal courts. As Georgia Secretary of State Karen Handel explained: "DOJ has thrown open the door for activist organizations such as ACORN to register non-citizens to vote in Georgia's elections, and the state has no ability to verify an applicant's citizenship status or whether the individual even exists."

On top of all that, Holder recently politicized the legal review process involving the contentious issue of D.C. voting rights. After careful study, the DOJ's Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) issued an opinion that a House bill on the matter was unconstitutional. Holder, who supports D.C. voting rights along with Obama, overrode his staff lawyers' ruling -- and simply ordered up an alternative opinion that fit the White House agenda".SOURCE:MICHELLE MALKIN

The office of Attorney General was established by Congress by the Judiciary Act of 1789. The original duties of this officer were "to prosecute and conduct all suits in the Supreme Court in which the United States shall be concerned, and to give his advice and opinion upon questions of law when required by the President of the United States, or when requested by the heads of any of the departments. Source:Wikapedia

The "Rule of Law" means clear, generally applicable laws by which individuals can organize their affairs and which are applicable consistently, without respect to status. Source: American Heritage.com
Thus,by favoring the union over the creditors with superior rights. Obama violated a fundamental principle of our Constitutional government, and the Attorney General should know that and enforce the law by advising Obama that he was violating the law. But politics take precedence in the Obama administration!

As such, Holder should have advised president Obama that his firing of the CEO of General Motors and assuming over 60% percent ownership of General Motors was no within his power as defined in the United States Constitution. But since he was appointed by Obama and could be fired at any point by Obama, I understand how he might have been reticent to give that opinion.

Apparently, Lady Justice is now protected by an Attorney General who has a blind eye to violations of the Constitution, and a security force armed with billy clubs and lawyers who serve the cause of protecting the re-election of Barack Obama over the rule of law