Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Obama Praises Indian Chief Who Killed U.S. General
Fox News ^ | November 15, 2010

Posted on 11/17/2010 6:21:28 AM PST by USALiberty

A series of two-page spreads asks questions ("Have I told you that you are creative?") across from short tributes. He writes of Georgia O'Keeffe: "She helped us see big beauty in what is small: the hardness of stone and the softness of feather." His most controversial choice may be Sitting Bull, who defeated Custer at Little Bighorn: ("A Sioux medicine man who healed broken hearts and broken promises.")

(Excerpt) Read more at nation.foxnews.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: kenyanusurper; propaganda; sittingbull; treason
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-173 next last
WOW! Now the Kenyan Usurper is openly praising terrorists? He is not even PRETENDING to be a loyal American anymore! We need to make sure this anti-American book NEVER gets into the schools.
1 posted on 11/17/2010 6:21:32 AM PST by USALiberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: USALiberty

C’mon now. Sitting Bull was not a terrorist. Let’s not diminish the word so quickly. Besides, you have to admit Custer had it coming.


2 posted on 11/17/2010 6:25:32 AM PST by SeeSharp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: USALiberty

I think it’s a stretch to call Sitting Bull a “terrorist.”


3 posted on 11/17/2010 6:25:32 AM PST by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: USALiberty

Little Big Horn = White Man got what he deserved

Wounded Knee = White man committed atrocities

Ya’ just can’t win if you’re a white man...


4 posted on 11/17/2010 6:25:32 AM PST by Old Teufel Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: USALiberty

Obama will praise anyone that KILLS, TERRORIZES or MAIMS Americans because HE HATES patriotic AMERICANS!


5 posted on 11/17/2010 6:26:32 AM PST by nmh (Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeeSharp

Pet peeve of mine: wasn’t Custer a colonel when he was killed? Or a Lt. Col.?


6 posted on 11/17/2010 6:27:53 AM PST by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: USALiberty

Obama shares dreams for his kids in book on 13 Americans

President Obama’s picture book for kids, Of Thee I Sing: A Letter to My Daughters (Knopf, $17.99), pays tribute to 13 Americans whose traits he sees in his own children.
The 31-page book, for kids ages 3 and up, is filled with lyrical questions for Malia, 12, and Sasha, 9, opening with, “Have I told you lately how wonderful you are?”

The book, out Tuesday, is illustrated with Loren Long’s paintings of the Obama girls and their dog, Bo, as well as the 13 famous Americans as kids and grown-ups.

A series of two-page spreads asks questions (”Have I told you that you are creative?”) across from short tributes. He writes of Georgia O’Keeffe: “She helped us see big beauty in what is small: the hardness of stone and the softness of feather.” His most controversial choice may be Sitting Bull, who defeated Custer at Little Bighorn: (”A Sioux medicine man who healed broken hearts and broken promises.”)

...

Obama’s publisher says he’s not planning interviews or events for the book. His royalties are to go to a scholarship fund for children of soldiers killed or disabled.

(I’d bet the proceeds if they go anywhere will go in Obama’s pocket. Obama HATES the military.

http://www.usatoday.com/life/books/news/2010-11-15-obamabook15_ST_N.htm


7 posted on 11/17/2010 6:30:21 AM PST by nmh (Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Old Teufel Hunden

How come Obama didn’t comment on how the native Inddian SCAPED people and killed WHITE, CHRISTIAN people?


8 posted on 11/17/2010 6:31:04 AM PST by nmh (Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Old Teufel Hunden
Ya’ just can’t win if you’re a white man...

It does seem like there is very little that can go wrong in America that someone can't figure out a way to blame on a white guy.

9 posted on 11/17/2010 6:33:11 AM PST by papertyger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: USALiberty
Sitting Bull was not the battle leader of the Native Americans at the Battle of the Little Bighorn. He was present but was an older man. If anyone should be credited, it would be Crazy Horse, the Lakota chief whose flanking cavalry maneuver completed the annihilation of Custer and his troops.

General Custer had his permanent rank of Lieutenant Colonel restored following the Civil War. It is not uncommon to refer to a Lt.Col. as "colonel." Custer was usually addressed as "General" respecting his Civil War service at that temporary rank.

10 posted on 11/17/2010 6:40:30 AM PST by NoControllingLegalAuthority (What this country needs is an enema.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy
Pet peeve of mine: wasn’t Custer a colonel when he was killed? Or a Lt. Col.?

Yes. He made general during the war, but it was a brevet rank and he returned to the rank of captain when the war ended. He was promoted to lieutenant colonel when he got command of the 7th Cavalry.

11 posted on 11/17/2010 6:41:29 AM PST by SeeSharp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: USALiberty

Well, we can blame THIS one on a white guy. Custer blundered horribly and paid the price.


12 posted on 11/17/2010 6:42:21 AM PST by Seruzawa (If you agree with the French raise your hand - If you are French raise both hands.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NoControllingLegalAuthority
Prince William, White future King proposes to fiance in Kenya

Its gotta Kill Obama

Can give the Bust back like Churchill. Little Kenyan is pissed.

13 posted on 11/17/2010 6:43:46 AM PST by scooby321
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: USALiberty
Have I told you that you are creative?

Hmmmm, what is the subject of this sentence....?

14 posted on 11/17/2010 6:44:00 AM PST by FourPeas (Pester not the geek, for the electrons are his friends.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: USALiberty

Custer pretty much commited suicide, too bad he took a bunch of real troopers with him.


15 posted on 11/17/2010 6:44:10 AM PST by SWAMPSNIPER (The Second Amendment, A Matter Of Fact, Not A Matter Of Opinion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeeSharp
"C’mon now. Sitting Bull was not a terrorist. Let’s not diminish the word so quickly. Besides, you have to admit Custer had it coming."

Sitting bull was a terrorist. You haven't read your history on the Indians yet, or have the wrong books. I was once a collector of antiquarian books, and you just cannot find better history than when reading the books of the actual times, when "history" was current events. These Indians were trecherous people, with no guiding principles to reign in their human instincts. And they were heartless butchers, routinely slaughtering women and children, asking for everything they recieved in return. They were not one iota different than the Roman Empire barbarians or the women and baby sacrificing Aztecs, both of whom were too base a people to build a real civilization.

16 posted on 11/17/2010 6:46:40 AM PST by jiminycricket000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy

You are exactly right - Obama is a hunk-o-crap (duh), but of course Sitting Bull was not a terorist.


17 posted on 11/17/2010 6:49:42 AM PST by Hegewisch Dupa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: USALiberty

It wasn’t exactly a great achievement to kill Custer; he wasn’t much a brain trust. Also, I agree with previous posters, Sitting Bull wasn’t a terrorist.


18 posted on 11/17/2010 6:50:42 AM PST by brothers4thID (http://scarlettsays.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy
I think it’s a stretch to call Sitting Bull a “terrorist.”

Actually, there were some very strong parallels between some Native American tribes and today's terrorists. Especially the Comanches (they made lopping off heads look like child's plan).

In fact if we emulated the strategy of the Texas Rangers today we could greatly reduce terrorism worldwide.

19 posted on 11/17/2010 6:51:23 AM PST by The Duke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: USALiberty

Sitting Bull?
I thought it was Crazy Horse that defeated Custer!...............


20 posted on 11/17/2010 6:51:40 AM PST by Red Badger (The House finally fell on Nancy Pelosi..........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: USALiberty

How did Sitting Bull heal broken hearts and broken promises?

By doing what?

I think whoever wrote this was just entranced with the word ‘healing’. It’s very dernier cri.

the Native americans were warriors. It was a warrior society. Women were treated like beasts of burden. In the aftermath of the battle small children were encouraged to hack up the bodies to toughen them. so it goes.


21 posted on 11/17/2010 6:52:15 AM PST by squarebarb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jiminycricket000
You haven't read your history on the Indians yet, or have the wrong books.

The fight over history is usually about what gets put into the books.

I'm sorry, but the history of Indian affairs in this country is a largely shameful one. William Penn showed that it was possible to live peacefully side-by-side if affairs were conducted fairly.

22 posted on 11/17/2010 6:53:50 AM PST by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: jiminycricket000

The worst “history books” of all are the ones written by the people of the times................


23 posted on 11/17/2010 6:54:16 AM PST by Red Badger (The House finally fell on Nancy Pelosi..........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: USALiberty

Georgia O’Keeffe’e work may be beautiful, but is mostly va-jay-jays


24 posted on 11/17/2010 6:56:48 AM PST by KosmicKitty (WARNING: Hormonally crazed woman ahead!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: USALiberty

WOW! Now the Kenyan Usurper is openly praising terrorists?
***************************

Custer was the damned terrorist.

Sitting Bull, Crazy Horse et alia were Red State Americans clinging to their guns and religion and antipathy to people who weren’t like them, who incidentally were also trying to kill them, their wives and their children. The defenders at the Little Bighorn understood the nature of the federal government and its benevolent intent early on.


25 posted on 11/17/2010 6:57:25 AM PST by Psalm 144
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jiminycricket000
heartless butchers, routinely slaughtering women and children

That, unfortunately, was a two way street in the Indian wars.

These Indians were trecherous people, with no guiding principles to reign in their human instincts.

I assume you got this from your antiquarian books. Did those same books tell you about the soldiers who "routinely slaughtering women and children"? Probably not. A more accurate history requires a little distance from the events. Ask George Bush.

26 posted on 11/17/2010 7:00:00 AM PST by tbpiper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy

Pet peeve of mine: wasn’t Custer a colonel when he was killed? Or a Lt. Col.?

*******************************

Brevet Major General of Volunteers during the Civil War, Lieutenant Colonel in the Regular Army after the Civil War.

Just an aspect of the much smaller scale of the US Army after the war.


27 posted on 11/17/2010 7:02:01 AM PST by Psalm 144
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: USALiberty

This is the only thing I agree with Obama about. Custer was an arrogant Indian killer who thought his 600 men could swoop down on a village of 12-20,000 Sioux and Northern Comanche and rout them. He deserved what he got. Too bad for the innocent soldiers that had to follow him. All he had to do was to wait for Gen. Terry and success would have followed.


28 posted on 11/17/2010 7:02:50 AM PST by 2nd Amendment
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KosmicKitty
Georgia O’Keeffe’e work may be beautiful, but is mostly va-jay-jays

Yup. Beautiful, colorful porn.

29 posted on 11/17/2010 7:04:32 AM PST by T Minus Four (Duh. We were talking about in the old days or not-so-distant old days)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: nmh
Of Thee I Sing: A Letter to My Daughters (Knopf, $17.99), pays tribute to 13 Americans whose traits he sees in his own children.

He sees traits of Sitting Bull in his two pre-teen daughters?

30 posted on 11/17/2010 7:05:09 AM PST by Rummyfan (Iraq: it's not about Iraq anymore, it's about the USA!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Rummyfan

Ah, but this is The Obama. He sees whatever he needs to see in his daughters to get His Name praised.


31 posted on 11/17/2010 7:11:27 AM PST by FourPeas (Pester not the geek, for the electrons are his friends.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: tbpiper

I assume you got this from your antiquarian books. Did those same books tell you about the soldiers who “routinely slaughtering women and children”?

*****************************

I think the Time Life series had a photograph of a cavalry trooper’s tobacco pouch made from an Indian woman’s tit. I loved the old matinee movies too, but they were kid’s entertainment, not history.


32 posted on 11/17/2010 7:12:36 AM PST by Psalm 144
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: 2nd Amendment

This is the only thing I agree with Obama about.

***************************

Obama does not always (although it seems that way at times) get his facts wrong, but his use of them is always perverted.


33 posted on 11/17/2010 7:14:50 AM PST by Psalm 144
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: SeeSharp

Correct; Sitting Bull was a freedom fighter, not a terrorist. The American Indians were mistreated horribly (a few deservedly, but most not so) for a lot of years. Remember that when we thought that Obama’s minions might become a physical threat to us (conservatives in general), we were prepared to fight them. And fighting “fair” only gets you killed quicker!


34 posted on 11/17/2010 7:17:42 AM PST by JimRed (Excising a cancer before it kills us waters the Tree of Liberty too! TERM LIMITS, NOW AND FOREVER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: USALiberty
Leave it to Obama to use a childrens' book to re-open old wounds and stir more racial hatred and resentments.

By the way, weren't Custer's attackers led by Chief Crazy Horse, not Chief Sitting Bull?

Leni

35 posted on 11/17/2010 7:19:58 AM PST by MinuteGal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy
Pet peeve of mine: wasn’t Custer a colonel when he was killed? Or a Lt. Col.?

Lt. Col. And 2nd in command of the 7th Cavalry. The actual commander, Col. Samuel D. Sturgis, who replaced the original commander, Col. Andrew Johnson Smith, in 1869, never held a field command. Custer had field commander.

36 posted on 11/17/2010 7:20:50 AM PST by bcsco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger
Sitting Bull?

I thought it was Crazy Horse that defeated Custer!...............

My website will give you a fair idea...

37 posted on 11/17/2010 7:24:28 AM PST by bcsco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: 2nd Amendment
This is the only thing I agree with Obama about. Custer was an arrogant Indian killer who thought his 600 men could swoop down on a village of 12-20,000 Sioux and Northern Comanche and rout them. He deserved what he got. Too bad for the innocent soldiers that had to follow him. All he had to do was to wait for Gen. Terry and success would have followed.

Northern Cheyenne, not Comanche. As for waiting for Terry and success being assured, that's quite debatable...

38 posted on 11/17/2010 7:27:46 AM PST by bcsco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: MinuteGal
By the way, weren't Custer's attackers led by Chief Crazy Horse, not Chief Sitting Bull?

Neither were chiefs, per se. Sitting Bull was a Hunkpapa Sioux and considered a mystic, Crazy Horse an Oglala warrior of influence (a shirt wearer). Both of the Teton division of the Sioux nation.

39 posted on 11/17/2010 7:33:01 AM PST by bcsco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: bcsco

Northern Cheyenne, not Comanche. As for waiting for Terry and success being assured, that’s quite debatable...

****************************

Thus the infected blankets and extermination of the buffalo.


40 posted on 11/17/2010 7:34:25 AM PST by Psalm 144
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: 2nd Amendment

Oh, I failed to mention that the fighting strength of the Indian camp Custer attacked on June 25th was in the neighborhood of 1800 warriors.


41 posted on 11/17/2010 7:35:36 AM PST by bcsco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: bcsco

It’s an interesting site, but I find it hard to read the dark text against the graphics in the background.


42 posted on 11/17/2010 7:35:36 AM PST by FourPeas (Pester not the geek, for the electrons are his friends.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: nmh
"How come Obama didn’t comment on how the native Inddian SCAPED people and killed WHITE, CHRISTIAN people?"

Because Obama knows what he's doing, he's distorting the truth for own purposes, namely, to divide the nation against whites. The Indians were nothing more than base barbarians who were constantly at war with each other, slaughtering each other for land, or just for the fun of it to see whose braves were better. I can only imagine what the European settlers felt when they arrived in America from a true civilization with great advancements in technology, building techniques, machinery, language, culture, universities, cities, medicine, and men treating women as precious ladies, (not as squaws), just to see these screaming, painted faced aboriginies running around naked and completely without scientific advancements. They were a throwback in time culturally, morally and mentally.

And for those of you who have been brainwashed with the lies that these aboriginies treated whites well and just wanted peace, you've been taught error, lots of error. The Indians were barbarians who did barbaric things to each other and to the white settlers. They seemed to especially like killing white women and children. That was their way to commit genocide against the whites; no women, no children, then eventually no whites. Sort of backfired though, didn't it?

43 posted on 11/17/2010 7:38:05 AM PST by jiminycricket000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: bcsco

Very good site. Concise and thorough. That was a lot of work!


44 posted on 11/17/2010 7:38:55 AM PST by Psalm 144
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: FourPeas

Thanks. Someday I’ll get around to revising the site. Irons in the fire and all that... :)


45 posted on 11/17/2010 7:39:32 AM PST by bcsco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: tbpiper
Did those same books tell you about the soldiers who "routinely slaughtering women and children"? Probably not.

It wasn't routine.

That's why the PC history books make such a big deal out of Sand Creek and a few other occasion where it actually took place.

Did women and children get killed? Absolutely, but in most cases as a result of collateral damage. At Sand Creek, quite a number of Chivington's officers objected strongly to his murderous orders to take no prisoners. The massacre was a huge scandal at the time, precisely because it wasn't "routine."

For an alternative where "kill them all" was the norm, may I refer you to the history of Argentine, which was fighting its last Indian wars at the same time we were.

Argentina has no Indian problem because it has no Indians. They killed them all.

OTOH, it was indeed routine for American Indians to kill white (and enemy Indian) women and children, often by torturing them to death.

46 posted on 11/17/2010 7:40:06 AM PST by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: bcsco

Yup. You and me both.


47 posted on 11/17/2010 7:42:35 AM PST by FourPeas (Pester not the geek, for the electrons are his friends.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Psalm 144
Thanks. A culmination of a life of reading and research...

The best site on the LBH is Friends of the Little Bighorn. It's a treasure trove of information, and a great organization to boot...

48 posted on 11/17/2010 7:43:39 AM PST by bcsco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: SeeSharp
C’mon now. Sitting Bull was not a terrorist. Let’s not diminish the word so quickly. Besides, you have to admit Custer had it coming.

I could not agree more. Terrorist my a$$!

Calling Sitting Bull a terrorist is analogous to calling the little tin god an outstanding Christian and excellent president.

Both statements have equal levels of truth in them.

Moreover, Custer - at least from a military viewpoint - blew this one for sure. It didn't help the cause that there was a great deal of mistrust and dissention in the chain of command, bad intelligence, overconfidence, and lousy scouting either. But since he was the overall commander, the fault and the loss lies with him and him alone.

49 posted on 11/17/2010 7:46:34 AM PST by Logic n' Reason (You can roll a turd in powered sugar; that don't make it a jelly donut)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy
the history of Indian affairs in this country is a largely shameful one.

Quite true. But it's shameful because we violated our own laws and principles. What happened here is what has always happened whenever a primitive people comes into contact with a more advanced one.

William Penn showed that it was possible to live peacefully side-by-side if affairs were conducted fairly.

True, in the short term. In the long run, the exploding white settler population would eventually want the land of the Indians, who were declining in number. The only way to prevent them from taking it would be by means of an absolute monarchy which would protect the Indians.

Does anyone think there was some scenario by which white settlement could have been permanently stopped at the Appalachians or Mississippi? If the US had done so, it still wouldn't have saved the Indians, as the unprotected land would have been settled by some other white nation.

50 posted on 11/17/2010 7:46:57 AM PST by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-173 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson