Marcus is internationally known for his columns, music recordings and participation performing on political tours including the hugely successful Tea Party Express tour.

Marcus says he is not alone in his opposition to Americans hyphenating. It began in March 2009 at a Tea Party in Orlando Florida. Before performing his original song, “American Tea Party Anthem”, Marcus addressed the audience. “I am NOT an African American. I am Lloyd Marcus…AMERICAN!” To Marcus’ surprise, the audience of 6,000 erupted with applause.

Marcus experienced the same overwhelmingly positive and supportive response from audiences at 34 rallies across America while traveling on the Tea Party Express tour. “Many came to me with tears in their eyes saying, Thank you! I can’t tell you how much what you said means to me.” says Marcus. Americans told Marcus that while they have no problem with people honoring their ethnic heritage, we should all be Americans first. These patriots feel hyphenating divides us.

Marcus recalls a heartwarming incident at a tea party. An Asian gentlemen with his wife and four kids approached Marcus. Responding to Marcus’ earlier comment, in broken English he said, “Me no Asian-American, me AMERICAN!” Then, he and Marcus embraced.

Another reason for ending hyphenating is hopefully it will reinforce the pride, honor and privilege of being an American. Over the years, secular progressives have taught in our schools that American patriotism is arrogant, unsophisticated and insulting to the rest of the world. Meanwhile, it is acceptable for other nations to hold their homeland in the highest regards.

The revelation that most Americans do not like hyphenating confirms to Marcus that Americans have been manipulated by political correctness, accepting things we do not want.

Marcus’ campaign to end hyphenating is not one of condemnation. “I highly respect and celebrate freedom for which many brave have suffered and died. All who wish to continue hyphenating have a right to do so and will not receive judgment from me. I simple will not hyphenate. I believe most of my fellow Americans will follow.”

Lloyd Marcus, Black unhyphenated American.

LloydMarcus.com

TWENTY TEN, Take Back America video

But then along comes Harry Alford, the President and CEO of the Black Chamber of Commerce of America…He walked in there obviously having already pegged her as an elitist, racist pig. Strap your jaw closed because you are going to see an exchange that will blow your mind!

“That road the Chair went down is God-awful.” Indeed.

Torture? I’m so glad you brought up the subject. Mr. President and Attorney General Holder, Conservative African Americans have been waiting a lifetime to have this conversation. But before you and the sensitive members of the Democratic Party start with the Bush Administration, why don’t we review the torture tactic of the Democratic Party.

Read the entire article at Conservative Black Woman>>

Congratulations, Kevin on your new videography endeavors! Keep up the good work!

Another Uniformed Individual said:
“If they didn’t include the legalese at the bottom of the last frame in the ad, I think The National Republican Trust PAC would have had space to add the phrase they really wanted to use: ‘TOO BLACK’” 

The first thing I heard was that Barack Obama was rated the most liberal Senator in 2007. I knew right away that there was a good chance that he and I would not see eye-to-eye on a lot of things.  So in spite of the color of his skin, I had to choose a different horse in this race.

I have found a complete irony in the actions of voters this election season. Now, I am not naive enough to think that there were not bunches of people who wouldn’t vote for Barack Obama because of the pigmentation of his skin, but I am not one of them.

Nevertheless, I found that it was the very people that WERE supporting him that continuously, repeatedly, sickeningly brought race into the discussion ad-nauseum. Too much hyperbole for you? Imagine the sorts of hyperbole that was used in these little notes:

“How Racism Works:
What if this one divorced and that one wasn’t?
What if this one was this and that one was this?”
…and so on…

And then they’re gonna divide the red states and blue states:

“To sum up briefly: You (red states) get Texas, Oklahoma and all the slave states…We get 85 percent of America’s venture capital and entrepreneurs…You get a bunch of single moms …they (Evangelicals) don’t care if you don’t show pictures of their children’s caskets coming home…Red States, on the other hand, you will have to cope with 88 percent of all obese Americans…

First of all, we will take the slave states…after all, Repuclicans FREED THEM! Republicans have also been champions of civil rights since the mid 1800′s.

The Democratic party gave birth to George McGovern, Robert Byrd and a whole host of other bigots that have been elected to office. Here is a list: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1329788/posts Yeah, there have been some Republicans that have said some really stupid things, but let’s not just put a label on one side of the bottle, ok?

I can’t even go on about the rest of these idiotic diatribe I received from someone. Suffice it to say that of all the stuff I saw that she was spewing, only one had any sort of substance – even if it was so weak that she would not refute my response; all the rest hinted at race and other bigoted issues.

Tolerant? PFFFTTT!

Thomas Sowell

By Thomas Sowell By Thomas Sowell

Many years ago, a great hitter named Paul Waner was nearing the end of his long career. He entered a ballgame with 2,999 hits — one hit away from the landmark total of 3,000, which so many hitters want to reach, but which relatively few actually do reach.

Waner hit a ball that the fielder did not handle cleanly but the official scorer called it a hit, making it Waner’s 3,000th. Paul Waner then sent word to the official scorer that he did not want that questionable hit to be the one that put him over the top.

The official scorer reversed himself and called it an error. Later Paul Waner got a clean hit for number 3,000.
What reminded me of this is the great fervor that many seem to feel over the prospect of the first black President of the United States.

No doubt it is only a matter of time before there is a black president, just as it was only a matter of time before Paul Waner got his 3,000th hit. The issue is whether we want to reach that landmark so badly that we are willing to overlook how questionably that landmark is reached.

Paul Waner had too much pride to accept a scratch hit. Choosing a President of the United States is a lot more momentous than a baseball record. We the voters need to have far more concern about who we put in that office that holds the destiny of a nation and of generations yet unborn.

There is no reason why someone as arrogant, foolishly clever and ultimately dangerous as Barack Obama should become president — especially not at a time when the threat of international terrorists with nuclear weapons looms over 300 million Americans.

Many people seem to regard elections as occasions for venting emotions, like cheering for your favorite team or choosing a Homecoming Queen.

The three leading candidates for their party’s nomination are being discussed in terms of their demographics — race, sex and age — as if that is what the job is about.

One of the painful aspects of studying great catastrophes of the past is discovering how many times people were preoccupied with trivialities when they were teetering on the edge of doom. The demographics of the presidency are far less important than the momentous weight of responsibility that office carries.

Just the power to nominate federal judges to trial courts and appellate courts across the country, including the Supreme Court, can have an enormous impact for decades to come. There is no point feeling outraged by things done by federal judges, if you vote on the basis of emotion for those who appoint them.

Barack Obama has already indicated that he wants judges who make social policy instead of just applying the law. He has already tried to stop young violent criminals from being tried as adults.

Although Senator Obama has presented himself as the candidate of new things — using the mantra of “change” endlessly — the cold fact is that virtually everything has says about domestic policy is straight out of the 1960s and virtually everything he says about foreign policy is straight out of the 1930s.

Protecting criminals, attacking business, increasing government spending, promoting a sense of envy and grievance, raising taxes on people who are productive and subsidizing those who are not — all this is a re-run of the 1960s.

We paid a terrible price for such 1960s notions in the years that followed, in the form of soaring crime rates, double-digit inflation and double-digit unemployment. During the 1960s, ghettoes across the countries were ravaged by riots from which many have not fully recovered to this day.

The violence and destruction were concentrated not where there was the greatest poverty or injustice but where there were the most liberal politicians, promoting grievances and hamstringing the police.
Internationally, the approach that Senator Obama proposes — including the media magic of meetings between heads of state — was tried during the 1930s. That approach, in the name of peace, is what led to the most catastrophic war in human history.

Everything seems new to those too young to remember the old and too ignorant of history to have heard about it.

http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell042908.php3

Other Articles of Insight by Mr. Sowell:

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell1.asp