Someone in the comments back on this post asked,
Why does it matter whom Mr. Warthen and his shrinking enterprise endorse for President?
Of course, there is no modest way for me to answer such assertions. I can only say that it mattered enough to Barack Obama and John McCain to make time to come see us and seek that endorsement. Also to Joe Biden, Mike Huckabee and Sam Brownback.
Hillary Clinton opted not to come see us. Whatever happened to her anyway?
Related Posts
Hillary braved an interview with Bill “Junkyard Dog” O’Reilly. She could have held her own with y’all, too.
She is probably just tired of this election now too…
Hey, it matters to me, too. I like a pro/con discussion of the candidates, even when the reasons for or against a person would cause me to lean in the other direction. At least such editiorials lay out bases for choice utilizing some reasoning powers. I don’t have to agree with you to be interested in the discussion.
is there any recent research on the role endorsements by newspaper play in national elections? i would imagine local or even state races maybe because of the number of candidates/races involved. in re national elections i think that “national” opinion leaders like Limbaugh or Winfrey have far more influence.
I think for some local races newspaper endorsements are helpful because they give information about people we otherwise don’t know much about. But for the big national elections, I doubt they change many minds.
And as for Hillary Clinton, I’m trying to remember, did The State ever have one kind word to say about her? Hmmmm, I wonder why she never gave you guys an interview.
It’s probable that the likes of Limbaugh, and even Matthews have more sway in the choice of national candidates than do newspapers. However, after listening to one of them, all I can do is either nod like a bobblehead, or cuss. I cannot go back and trace their argument, nor can I check their facts (unless I took notes–and that’s unlikely, to say the least). I can’t go back, analyze their sentence structure, and realize that they’ve tried to slip in a fast one. These things I can do with a newspaper, a magazine article, a book, or a blog. That’s why I like opinions in print a lot more than the stuff that comes via TV. And yes, I realize that the stations can go back and rerun what was said, but I can’t, unless I want to tape Limbaugh, which I certainly don’t. I don’t even want to tape Olberman, and I usually agree with him (which doesn’t automatically make him right, or even left). So, if I want to be able to apply reason and analysis to any opinion, I can do it best if that opinion is written.
Yes, Mr. Warthen and The State were amongst the first of the MSM to fall in line behind BO, who might be known as BHO, if it were fair to use his middle name, which just happens to be a Muslim staple and the name of the dictator the U.S. deposed in the war it is currently concluding.
Mr. Warthen was also amongst the first to recognize John Edwards as a phony, before he fathered a love child now developing in the womb of someone other than his cancer-stricken wife.
That’s a story The State, Mr.
Warthen and the MSM have completely ignored, because, unlike Larry Craig or anyone the MSM will tar with scandal, Edwards is not a Republican, and he has been mentioned as a VP possibility for the new imam of political rock ‘n’ roll, whose campaign is working a “shut yo mouth” deal with rap “artist” Ludacris.
The rapper’s “Politics” says GOP candidate McCain doesn’t belong in “any chair unless he’s paralyzed,” calls Bush “mentally handicapped” and says “Hillary hated on you, so that bitch is irrelevant.”
Yes, that’s the same Ludacris that Obama once claimed to have in heavy rotation on his iPod and lists among “great talents and great businessmen.”
And that’s the same Obama who never noticed the Rev. Wright was speaking hate despite spending 20 years in his church.
The same Obama who wouldn’t visit wounded soldiers because the cameras couldn’t join him, so he went to work out in hope of raising his bowling score from 37.
The same Obama who snnounced his Iraq policy before his fact-finding campaign in the country of his namesake and before he pretended he was president by trying to share the space once occupied in Germany, historically, by John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan.
That’s Barack Hussein Obama, the charlatan of “change.”
Hmmm. I cause a brief nationwide sensation calling Edwards a "phony," his campaign dries up and blows away, I completely lose interest in him, and you’re worked up because I’m not writing about some dirty laundry about a has-been? You’re kidding, right?
As for "ever" having "one kind word about" Hillary Clinton…. well, this is ALL we had to say editorially about her, and I would submit that not only does it include a kind word or two, it is no more negative than one would expect in an editorial endorsing her opponent rather than her:
And it was necessary to say those things because that was WHY we were endorsing Obama.
Now, let me say again that that’s all we said editorially about Hillary. I mentioned her frequently on the blog, and occasionally in columns. But most of what I was said was neutral, and sometimes favorable. I was even known to stick up for her now and then.
Finally, let me point out that Karen gets it — she understands what endorsements are about:
As I often say, an endorsement is successful if it helps a reader think a little harder before voting, however he or she votes. Often, our function will be to help you remember why you DON’T like the candidate we picked. Of course, that’s a little LESS often the case, since voters usually end up agreeing with us.
Like it matters what Karen “Brad’s Perpetual Brown Noser” McLeod has to say. She’s a parrot. Not ONCE has she taken a position that deviated from your own, Brad. Pretty soon, Karen, Claudia and your wife will be the only ones reading your ego-inflated, pseudo-intellectual garbage.
As it stands now, most of the folks who read your blog do so for entertainment purposes, not edification. Keep us laughing.
John,
Wrong. Karen is 180 degrees different from Brad on the Iraq “War” and is very vocal about it.
It’s a matter of not respecting the endorsement of The State paper.
* The State editors seem themselves as part of the political class. Their job is to sell the agenda of the rulers to the man on the street.
* It usually endorses the biggest spenders and those who seek to skirt and subvert the democratic processes.
* Incumbents get most endorsements. Challengers are dismissed for lack of experience. Only professional politicians are considered, because they have crawled and clawed their way up a succession of jobs. Actual experience in business, engineering, science and medicine means nothing to the political class.
* Analysis of issues is shallow, because the minds of the editors are fixated on a single point of view, usually dating back to their youth.
John, That’s ludicrous. Brad and I are polar opposites when it comes to the war in Iraq (he’s for continuing; I’m against it-was in the beginning am now, and probably always will be), abortion (he’s all for outlawing it; I’m not about to make a desperate woman more desperate–I think we need to find ways to eradicate the disasterous situations that lead most women to abortion), McCain (he still likes McCain; I liked McCain in 2000–I wish that guy were still around, but McCain ’08 seems to be a repeat of the George W era), George W. himself (don’t get me started). There are probably plenty of things I’m forgetting about. I’m not supporting Brad; I’m supporting reasoned, factually checkable discussion or argument if you will, without resorting to insults, or just plain untruth. I can disagree greatly with someone on most subjects without feeling the need to call that person names, or to distort the facts as I believe them to be. If the other person can show me better facts, or better logic, I’m willing to reconsider. I don’t waste my time reading the posts from people who have shown themselves to be liars or who have to resort to rudeness, because they have no stronger argument.
How do Karen and Brad explain away all the convicted terrorists and Muslim terrorits sympathizers hanging around Obama?
No, I’m not kidding, but I’m more concerned about the MSM ignoring Edwards’ pregnancy travails than I am about Brad Warthen doing it, because, after all, your column labeling him as a “phony” put the first nail in his coffin.
I’m also a great deal more concerned about the cushioned ride the media’s giving Obama, who certainly hasn’t shown presidential judgment the last two or three months.
And I should like to point out that John has it backwards: It’s Brad who always seems to be kissing up to Karen.
And, oh, by the way, here’s one of the things that happened to Weldon (it’s what happens when I try to click on your link):
The webpage cannot be found
HTTP 404
Most likely causes:
There might be a typing error in the address.
If you clicked on a link, it may be out of date.
What you can try:
Retype the address.
Go back to the previous page.
Go to and look for the information you want.
More information
This error (HTTP 404 Not Found) means that Internet Explorer was able to connect to the website, but the page you wanted was not found. It’s possible that the webpage is temporarily unavailable. Alternatively, the website might have changed or removed the webpage.
Lee has it right as usual. Brad thinks of himself as an elitist. If Brad’s ego were currency we could payoff the national debt and have enough leftover to fund the next 10 generations.
I voted for Obama in an effort to stop Hillary. Besides, Obama is a nice guy. Having said that his presidency would be a disaster as would McCain’s. All that is left to do is pick one of them and spend the next four years praying.
Cousin Weldon asked me to come to his defense here, but your “Whatever happened to weldon” post is unopenable, at least for me. Whether that’s some sly communitarian plot against my IP address or just more anti-Sanford propaganda I don’t know, though I suspect it’s a programming flaw related to sand, surf and too much beer.
Weldon’s “Wallop and Wither Warthen” petition is going well. The men in black suits, dark shirts and white ties should meet you one day soon when you’re trying to catch the bus to get to work like all the other vice-presidents with upper quintile income.
Karen,
You can check Rush Limbaugh’s facts, because he posts the transcripts of his show and links to documentation, on his web site.
He has been fact-checked by independent journalists and found to be over 98% dead on, much higher than TV or newspapers.
And yes, he has more influence. That’s why he is paid $20,000,000 a a year.
“Like it matters what Karen “Brad’s Perpetual Brown Noser” McLeod has to say. She’s a parrot. Not ONCE has she taken a position that deviated from your own, Brad. Pretty soon, Karen, Claudia and your wife will be the only ones reading your ego-inflated, pseudo-intellectual garbage.”
“John”
Interesting… just read that I’d been referenced in the same category as Brad’s wife (who I don’t know from Adam’s housecat) and Karen (who I also don’t know but find myself mostly in agreement with on the relatively small number of posts that I’ve read).
For the record, I disagree quite strongly with Brad on a number of issues, Iraq and abortion rights being only two. I do, however, respect the man, much as I respect Herb Brasher, who I also disagree with on a number of issues.
As for the “pseudo-intellectual” label… well, all I can say to that is go find an original thought, John. You might learn something.
Local newspapermen aspire to be like Tom Friedman and William Greider, glib folk who think they have reported on enough news to have somehow morphed into policy experts, and are able to write with an air of confidence while fabricating background “facts”.
I’m sure you’ve got the original sources for these statements (who these people are, and the documentation proving it) available, so please post the links, or, if a written source, the page number, so we can check these, Lee. And if you have posted them before, I apologize, but since I’m sure you have them handy, it shouldn’t be much trouble to link us to them again.
And by the way, it is not us who have to document your sources. If you are calling a major public figure, such as Obama, a traitor and terrorist sympathizer, it is you who has to document the fact from original sources. Of course, what you actually said was, “terrorist sympathizers hanging around Obama,” but your intent is obviously to insinuate that Obama is one by implication.
I’m sure that I don’t have to remind you that the motivation of some to crucify Jesus was the fact that the dregs of humanity were following him. One of his disciples was a Zealot. Not that I am comparing Obama to Jesus–the point is that a person cannot necessarily be judged by their followers, even necessarily by some of the closest.
Pontius Pilate crucified Jesus to keep out of trouble with the religious leaders of his day.
Much akin to why this paper crucifies Governor Sanford. To keep out of trouble with the political “leaders” of our day [that handful of crooks that runs the GA].
By Herb’s logic, the dregs of society are Christians and Obama is more than a cult figure. (?)
Herb,
Are you so uniformed that you can’t name at least 2 of Obama’s friend or campaign leaders who are terrorists or terrorist sympathizers? Turn in your voter registration card.
—– Obama’s terrorist pals ————
Bill Ayers – convicted bomber. Pardoned by Clinton. Says he would like to kill more police. FBI most wanted list
Bernadine Dorn – convicted bomber. Also pardoned. Also unrepentent. Co=conspirators killed while building a bomb. FBI most wanted list
Angela Davis – 1960s radical, FBI most wanted list
Obama’s father – supporter of several Marxist African dictators.
Obama’s uncle is a communist and radical Muslim.
Obaman’s brother is a communist and radical Muslim.
Frank Marshall Davis – Communist Party USA activist, close friend of Obama’s mother, and mentor to Barack Hussein Obama.
Hamas leaders – endorsed Obama after Obama Mideast advisor Robert Malley met with them.
Boston Globe, AP
May 9, 2008
http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2008/05/obama_adviser_c_1.html
Prior to that, in numerous other op-eds, Malley had advocated policy of engagement with Hamas, and expressed agreement with their blaming Israel.
Omar Khaddafi – endorsed Obama.
Iranian anti-American demonstrators hold up signs saying “Change”, “Obama!”, and “Yes, We Can”, on television week of July 20.
Jeremiah Wright – known racist and hater of Israel.
Louis Farakhan – hater of whites, Christians and Jews.
Shawn Hannity [a beacon of truth and light @ Fox News] documents all of Lee’s assertions on at least a weekly basis.
Herb, Those more hopeful than I have repeatedly refuted Lee with the truth. He continues to repeat the same old lies, with the same old venom. It does tend to get in the way of those of us, who like you (I think) want sane discourse.
Karen, you are to be commended as one of the FEW female bloggers here who are treated with a favorable equity quotient. I.E., they tolerate your opinions. For a token purpose.
P.S.
Where is the Cindy Factor we have been suggesting? Sic Willie has the Mande Factor. We want the Cindy Factor.
Lee Muller,
What do you think of this:
Let the media STAY OUT of SC’s business for TWO WEEKS. Let the bodies (Executive, Legislative, Judicial) take care of some business, SANS THE OVERBEARING SCRUTINY, SANS the ***meddling personal agendas***…
…maybe the We The People would actually score an advantage for once.
What do you think, Lee Muller?
Karen,
Would you be more specific about which of these terrorist buddies of Obama is being falsely accused by everyone, including myself? We have lots of documentation.
Obama announced for the Senate at the home of convicted bombers Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dorn. That’s right, these former Weathermen are married.
Hillary Rodham, Bill Clinton, and John Kerry have well-documented ties to the Communist Party USA, but at least they cut loose and created new images before running for office.
Read the book, “Radical Son” for a good personal history by one of them who turned conservative after some Black Panthers murdered his friend. Hillary Rodham worked on their defense, paid for by Gus Hall, of the Communist Party USA.
In fact Hillary and Obama have a common Chicago mentor, Saul Alinsky. He was not a doer, just someone who trained and agitated others into violence.
Lee,
You’re doing it again. You’re making stuff up or confusing facts in your head. William Ayers was a member of the Weather Underground, but was neither convicted nor pardoned. Bernadine Dohrn (you continue to misspell her name) was convicted, but not of any bombings. (I’m not saying she didn’t take part in bombings–just that she was not convicted, as you assert.) She was not pardoned for her convictions. President Clinton did pardon some other members of the Weather Underground. If you are going to argue that Senator Obama’s acquaintances somehow make him suspect, at least do it with honesty.
Bill Ayers and Dorn are a close friends of the Obamas, who share a hatred for America. That’s the fact, Jack. They are not “acquaintances”.
Bill Ayers said he wished more policemen had been killed, and that he would do it again.
Bernadine Dorn was convicted of being an accessory to bombings.
Bill Ayers hid out for years under an assumed name until the statute of limitationns had run out on hard charges. The Clinton administration decided to let him go on accessory to murder charges, because his co-conspirators had been killed by their own bomb.
Ayers served as an advisor on several Obama campaigns. Obama held his announcement for the Illinois Senate at Ayers’ home.
This really is the silly season in American politics. The laughable ad by the ever more disgusting John McCain comparing Barack Obama to Britany Spears and Paris Hilton is really nothing but a mudslinging attempt to falsely discredit a truly gifted and capable United States Senator. Really, is that the best the McCain campaign can do? I guess when you’re an integral part of the massive economic problems in this country it’s best just to focus on silly stuff.
John McCain has become a joke. His economic plans are pretty much just a continuation of the failed policies of the Bush administration. The Bush years have resulted in economic stagnation, rising unemployment, $4/gasoline prices, declining real wages and the mass destruction of the manufacturing sector in this country. The housing and auto industries are on the ropes. So what does McCain talk about? The popularity of Barack Obama. Of course he’s popular, he represents a change from the failed policies of the Bush/McCain years. The senile John McCain of 2008 is nothing like the vibrant, maverick McCain of 2000. He’s just a pitiful joke of a man who looks old even next to George Bush Sr. The prospect of this ridiculous relic becoming POTUS is frightening. Let’s make sure it doesn’t happen.
I just finished reading some of Dick Morris’s recommendations for the McCain campaign. Basically he was suggesting a negative attack campaign that would essentially scare people away from Obama. Morris actually suggested a type of “swift boating” assault. He even lauded the effectiveness of the Willie Horton ads.
Ok, fine. If the GOP is going to play that game it’s high time the Dems respond in kind. Frankly this would be like shooting fish in a barrel. McCain’s character is suspect in many respects. His ties with Charles Keating and more recently Phil Gramm demonstrate just how much of a disaster he would be in managing our economy. Whoever is in charge of the Obama campaign needs to understand clearly just how important it is to go after McCain on the economy. Paint him as a man who doesn’t understand the plight of the working folks of America. He’s helped get us in to the housing crisis fiasco that has led to the ruination of millions of American households. Show pictures of foreclosure sign. Show auto workers lined up to pick up their pick slips. Stress the rising rate of unemployment, the sinking state of the manufacturing sector with boarded up factories. Then show the Chinese sweat shops that are replacing American industry. Link McCain to these problems. Stress and stress hare how John McCain would just continue destroying the American economy It’s high time the Obama campaign went after him on it. And they need to go after him hard, very hard. Softball politics has failed the dems for far too long. It’s time to get tough, really tough.
Actually, bud, the Spears-Hilton ad is one of the most brilliant political ads I’ve ever seen. Hits a political candidate who’s all style and no substance right between the eyes.
The ad solidifies McCain’s base and marginalizes the latest of the tax-and-spend Democrats, who just played hypocrite yet again by backpedaling on his former position and stupidly backing the release of some of our strategic petroleum reserve now that gas prices are headed back down thanks to decreased demand.
You’ve railed against releasing oil from the reserve here repeatedly, bud. because it won’t amount to a nickel’s worth of difference for a week. Why aren’t you telling us how stupid Obama is today to be preaching such a silly idea?
By the way, bud, it was only after Obama reached the United States Senate and Pelosi started running the House that gas hit $4 a gallon. Is there a connection?
And, bud, when both campaigns go negative, Obama’s chances of being elected will disappear. America will come to its senses.
Obama, Mr. Affirmative Action, he’s the man who truly doesn’t understand the plight of the working folks of America.
McCain spent time in the military. He understands the school of hard knocks.
Obama understands Harvard Law Review and robbing the rich to benefit the bureaucrats.
We should remember
As we approach November
That a vote for Obama
Could cause too much trauma
And a vote for McCain
Won’t leave a stain.
The ad solidifies McCain’s base and marginalizes the latest of the tax-and-spend Democrats.
-pm
The ad is completey empty. It says nothing in the way of policy. It draws this utterly absurd comparison between a respected United States Senator who worked hard to graduate near the top in his law school class and a couple of immature young ladies who have not yet grown up. It speaks far more to the empty rhetoric of the GOP and their mud-slinging minions than it does of Obama.
Fact is the right in this country just doesn’t know how to campaign on issues or facts relevant to the well-being of the American people. Of course they have nothing to run on so I guess some ridiculous slander ads are as good as anything. Given the scandel-ridden past of John McCain and his horrible policy proposals on energy (summer tax holiday), health-care (more of the same GOP failures that have led to 47 million uninsured, jobs (continuation of the tax cuts that have cost America it’s manufacturing sector), foreign policy (a continuation of imperialistic-colonization) it’s no wonder that they resort to fear tactics.
Well it’s worked for me. I’m scared to death of this senile relic of the past. I’m tired of seeing my wealth eroded away by the likes of John McCain. It’s just frustrating that the Obama campaign can’t get the truth out. John McCain is a disaster for working Americans. That is the big truth of the 2008 campaign.
The Paris Hilton Obama ads work because they are true – Obama is an airhead. His followers have no interest in anything of substance, other than what handouts he promises THEM.
The Swift Boat ads worked because they expressed the genuine outrage of Kerry’s fellow sailors in Vietnam over his phonying up his war record.
Kerry couldn’t shake the photos of him with long hair, sitting with communists.
Obama can’t shake images of himself with Jeremiah Wright, Ludicrus, Bill Ayers, and his supporters in the world of radical Islam.
ALWAYS READ THE LABEL!
Warning label on Democratic and Republican kool aid packages:
Warning: Consumption of this product has been proven to cause myopic vision in laboratory animals. Long term use of this product may result in severe retardation of the synopsis’s in the area of the brain that regulates COMMON SENSE!
Bud, if your arguments had had any credibility before you called McCain a “senile relic of the past,” that phrase would have ruined your argument.
1) Calling a war hero a senile relic is hardly a hallmark of your cogent sensitivity.
2) The phrase is redundant.
McCain is now senile. That’s obvious by his clear lack of understanding basic facts such as which countries border each other. He was a relic some time ago. Today that would qualify him a relic of the past. Now he’s a senile relic of the past. It takes a lot to earn that title. Yet I think McCain qualifies. But whatever you call him let’s not call him president.
I’ve already decided that I will not vote for either Obama or McCain. I will vote but it would be hypocritical to try and choose the lesser of these two evils.
I don’t trust any Democrat President to reduce taxes and decrease government spending. No Democrat President will address the issue of the Social Security welfare system. No Democrat President will touch Medicare’s below market price controls and the that has impact on rising healthcare costs for everyone else.
I don’t trust any Republican candidate to reverse our war mongering policies that cost hundreds of billions of dollars we don’t have and kills thousands of people in the name of “security”.
Specifically, I don’t trust McCain to value the rule of law and enforce immigration policies that the majority of Americans support.
I voted for Ron Paul in the primary. Neither Obama or McCain are close enough to Paul to earn my vote.
I’ll vote for:
Flat tax, limited (much smaller) government, privatizing social security, strong borders, and a defense policy built on defense and not imperialism.
Point 2 was that you can’t be a relic of anything but the past, bud. That’s what the word means: reminder of the past or something past.
And, as I implied in Point 1, you’re calling your own judgment into question when you call a war hero a “senile relic.”
If Obama is insensitive enough to call McCain a “senile relic,” he’ll be inviting a landslide victory for McCain.
Lee, none of your accusations above are backed up by links or quotes. Back them up, or shut up. I ask you not to engage in defamation of character unless you can quote the source, and the source is reliable.
Your accusations read like gossip lines. Is this what you call “facts”? Because someone said it, it is therefore true? What research professor would let this kind of stuff pass muster?
P.M.,
We’re seeing McCain handled now like Ronald Reagan was in his second term. The Republican convention will be the end of the line for McCain’s chances. Eight years ago, maybe. Now, forget it. Bob Dole all over again.
And I’d be interested in hearing Brad’s take on how his dream matchup for President is working out? Seems to be a whole lot of politics as usual from both sides. I haven’t seen anything that looks like it’s the start of a new era in America.
Herb,
I take it you don’t want to do any reading on even one of Obama’s dirty friends. Are you afraid you will have to admit they are terrorists, or sympathizers, or swindlers?
Pick one of the Obama creepy friends, and I will load you up with more references than you have the stomach to read.
Well, keep lurking and learn more, if you aren’t up for joining adult discussion.
Sean Hannity is not a source, not any more than Katie Couric is a source.
I’ve tried Google Scholar to come up with some serious articles substantiating some of Lee’s accusations, so far without result. Perhaps he can help.
Doug, Obama’s been shooting himself in the foot since he left on his overseas trip. His bump in the polls from that has disappeared. The race is even, because Obama has voluntarily portrayed himself as a racial victim when McCain hasn’t attacked him racially and probably never will, and because Obama is preaching a pie-in-the-sky windfall profits-rebate plan that has no chance of getting through Congress and wouldn’t pass constitutional muster if it did.
People know when they’re being sold a bill of goods. Obama’s blowing it. He’s distancing himself from so many people, pretty soon he’ll be standing alone complaining he’s been discriminated against. That won’t get him elected.
Again, Herb, stop dodging the issue and pick one of Obama’s slimy associates from my partial list of them.
Obama supporters bought a bill of goods, now don’t want to face the facts. Their candidate takes both sides of the same issue on the same day. He is a pathological liar, telling every audience what they want to hear, all in platitudes and sweeping promises, but not details of how.
If Obama is insensitive enough to call McCain a “senile relic,” he’ll be inviting a landslide victory for McCain.
pm
You’ve hit on the double standard in American politics. McCain has accused Obama of being an empty headed celebrity on the order of Brittany Spears and Paris Hilton. Ha Ha, very funny. But if Obama shows some photo-shopped pictures of McCain pushing a walker or have an actor portray a hard of hearing McCain trying to have a conversation he would be accussed of tasteless mudslinging politics. But that would be closer to the truth. McCain is simply a decrepit old man whose time has come and gone. He has no business running for president.
Socialism’s time has come and gone.
Obama is a political relic – all old, failed ideas.
Reject racism.
Reject Obama.
Lee, I’ll post my comments from down below here as well. We’re in the middle of our yearly audit, so time is short.
But I am surprised that someone like yourself who is convinced of Aryan superiority calls other people racist. I’m not sure you are seeing the log in your own eye, while you are so busy showing everyone else the splinter in theirs.
Repeated from below:
After pursuing the Washington Post link, I’d say that it appears Obama is guilty of claiming originality when he did not have it. You can call this “lying,” I suppose, and strictly speaking, it is, though I would imagine fairly common among politicians on all sides of the isle. Evidence of being a traitor, or a hidden sympathizer of Muslim terrorist, it is not.
But what it also is, is evidence that you may well be willing to use anything to blacken an opponent, and that is very troubling.
I would suggest, however, that you and all of you who listen to Rush on a regular basis read the following serious article and pay close attention to the section on “poisoning the well,” particularly the following words:
In order to inflate his own credibility in the minds of his listeners, and to undermine information at odds with his viewpoint, the propagandist may ridicule other sources of information and link these to the “enemy.” The propagandist uses divisive, anti-intellectual comments to subvert prominent critics and reinforce his position as a “man of the people.”
The whole article is worth reading, and quite frankly, chilling. The tactics of Rush, and others, both on the right and left, are far too reminiscent of Nazism, and ought to make us all wake up.
I’ve said it before; I’ll say it again, getreligion.org is a great website for analyzing journalistic reporting on religion, and can be a good source of good criticism of media reporting in general. I’m sure there are other similar sites. I’ll ask around.
I hope that you and those who follow you are honest seekers enough to read on all sides of issues, and not just the one you are pre-disposed to believe.
Now perhaps you’d like to post something that proves Obama is a terrorist sympathizer, or something of that nature. I’m sure that you are aware of the Scriptural injunction not to judge unless you are very sure of your information.
Excuse me, I should have mentioned that the particularly relevant section of analysis of Rush’s language and journalism is beginning on page 43. That whole particular article by Kathryn Ruud on Limbaugh’s tactics is very illuminating.
Oops, the link of course didn’t come through. This is the link to the article by Ruud.
“Ayran superiority” to what?
You are the one who said it, not I.
Modern pseudo liberals are hung up on race.
I note only the fact that some CIVILIZATIONS, like America, are a thousand or 2,000 years ahead of many of the homelands of many illegal immigrants.
Everyone needs to recognize that fact.
Lee, yes it was I who used the term “Aryan superiority” more than once to try and sum up your views, but at no point up until now did you contest the term. I take it that you now do so. But take the following form June 28:
There were other remarks that you made that led me to conclude that you are an Aryan supremacist, and I would imagine still are.
And now you say our civilization is 1000 to 2000 years ahead of people that you called “savages” in another comment, commenting how gratified they are when they can go into a Walmart.
Wow, what an incredible civilization! We have a Walmart! Well, don’t get me wrong, I have been in Walmart too, and I like their pharmacy prices.
But if you think we are 1000 years ahead of other peoples, you had better think again. We are more materialistic and individualistic, for sure. We have some good things going in terms of political process (some, but by no means, all). But pardon my critical view, but when someone has lived abroad for decades, as I have, one tends to see things differently.
I fear God’s humbling work if too many people in our country are overcome by this arrogance and pride, coming as it does from too much ignorance of other cultures, that you seem to be expressing. Policing our borders is necessary, but claiming moral superiority is not. There have been periods in American history when Americans went across the country looking for a job wherever they could find it.
What the apostle John said about the church in Laodicea (Rev. 3:14-20) might be said of our whole culture. We think we are “rich and increased with goods, and have need of nothing” but in reality we are too often disconnected, relationship-poor individualists. Having lots of toys keeps us busy; I’m not at all sure we are the happier for it, and certainly not more superior.
I also note this quote by Wade Hampton on another thread:
To your credit, Lee, you made one positive comment about Jews, but in general you defended Mr. Hampton’s white supremacist views, or am I mistaken? Your scapegoating of Mexicans may be mild in comparison, but still it seems to be in the spirit of the scapegoating of another era.
Please pardon, Lee. I perhaps should not have used that link. You have not advocated exterminating illegal immigrants. And I yet I still fear the results of spreading hate. At the same time, I don’t want to spread it myself, and if I could, I would take the link out. It is too easy to post comments, I guess, without thinking.
Herb,
I stand my criticism of backward immigrants from Mexico and Central America, and you don’t dispute a single thing I said about their bastardized Catholicism, illiteracy, lack of respect for women, morals, or our laws.
Nor have you named one benefit they bring to America, besides working cheaper than the blacks who dropped out of our expensive government schools.
Herb,
I have not defended anyone’s racist views. My only mention of Walt Hampton was to note that his views represent the alter ego of the racism of those white liberals who want to remove the Confederate flags, monuments and street names.
I was working to register black voters in SC 35 years ago. I don’t like the condescending racism of white liberals.
Lee,
I dispute your hateful attitude, your generalizing and demonizing of all illegal immigrants, and your contention that we are 2000 years ahead of a lot of the rest of the world, whom you refer to as “savages.”
You would benefit from reading books like Peace Child and Lords of the Earth, by Don Richardson. There are many others, some on the popular level like these, and others more anthropological in nature. These volumes document the transformation by Christian truth in what are often referred to as “primitive” societies. They have entered the 2ist century within a few years. The situation is very different when it is Western or Asian business people who first make the contact, and exploit them for all they are worth, and that has been happening for a long time.
I take issue with your primitive approach to life, which I understand as “we are the good guys, and everybody else in the world are the primitive bad guys.” I find this arrogance appalling.
You are in denial, Herb, as demonstrated by your refusal to discuss any negative aspects of illegal immigrants, from their lack of morals and law enforcement problems, to how little they bring in the way of culture and job skills.
30,000,000 of these criminals inhabit the US. 800,000 are in prison, and over 1,000,000 at large on felony warrants. They consume over $50 BILLION in welfare and public services.
If we are going to have immigration, WE should decide who comes. And why not chose the best, the brightest, the more educated, civilized, who will create wealth in the private sector and improve America?
I have been lucky to have had a great deal of contact with many cultures, some of of them quite primitive, enough to appreciate their genuine finer points, instead of having just the white liberal’s racist indefinite and baseless notions of the Noble Savage.
Yes, all primitive cultures have some positive aspects which modern man would do well to make part of their conciousness, but most of the world stands to gain much more by adopting the higher aspects of Western civilization, wherever they may live, from France to Guatemala. Certainly any who are lucky enough to be come to America should seek to assimilate into our culture, if they truly seek to get the most of out becoming American.
Two brief further comments, Lee. I did not try to comment on or refute your scathing criticism of Mexican Catholicism, because it ill behooves me as a Protestant to do so. People have a religion, not just because they were born in it, but because it meets basic needs, which is the same reason, incidentally, that they come north to look for work. I would do the same, if I were in their shoes. Do our borders need to be policed? Certainly.
But do these people need to be belittled and scapegoated? No. My “religion,” if I have to call it that, is the Gospel of the Grace of God and a loving Father. I would rather use positive words to talk about it, and not harsh, negative ones that throw everyone on the defensive. After all, “Gospel” does mean “good news.” If I criticize, I try and keep it to my own kind; I can find plenty within Protestant Christianity to criticize. Jesus had some harsh words to say, as well, but they were almost always directed at those who claimed to know better, but did not practice what they preached. I just wonder sometimes if we should paraphrase what Jesus said as “the illegal alien will get into heaven before you,” especially if we look down our noses at them for being less human than we are.
And I didn’t get my views just from my armchair. I was raised in a home of parents who tried to reach out to Spanish immigrants, and we never asked them if they were legal, or not. To my shame I have to admit, that as a teenager, I didn’t want my Christmas day “spoiled” by having these people over to dinner. And to my shame I admit that I never even tried to learn any of their language. But maybe eventually I picked up just a little bit of the human kindness that motivated my parents. Maybe.
As for illiteracy, we could also approach that positively, and teach them to read. We do it in many other parts of the world, why not here?
P.S. I do not engage your “statistics,” because I do not trust them. In any case, they are generally never substantiated by reliable sources.
You don’t engage the statistics I obtained from the Department of Justice because they challenge your world view, which denies the reality of 30,000,000 criminal invaders of our country, many of whom only came here to rob, kill, deal drugs and run prostitution.
The American taxpayers have no obligation to teach criminal invaders or their children to read, nor to feed, house or provide medical care for them and their “anchor babies”. We should be billing their native countries for to social costs.
29% of our 2003 prison population was composed of illegal aliens, and the number has increased since then.
SOURCES starting in the 1990s:
# National Institute of Corrections, Federal Bureau of Prisons, June 2003.
# “Our Teeming Shore,” New York State Senate Committee on Cities, Sen. Frank Padavan, Chr.; Jan. 1994.
# “The Unfair Burden: Immigration’s Impact on Florida,” Executive Office of the Governor; March 1994.
# “California’s Illegal Immigration Costs: A Call for Federal Leadership,” Office of the Governor; 1994.
# Zadvydas v. Davis (U.S. 2001).
# 2004 Report of the Federal Bureau of Prisons lists 107,000 new illegal alien prisoners.
Lee, this is old stuff that you’ve posted before, and when cornered with answers from able folks like Gordon Hirsch, you ducked and ran, or used the old “socialist liberal” slur.
I suggest you digest some of the material in Maier & Easton’s The Data Game, which details a lot of the uncertainty in the statistics that you so delightfully like to use, and have already been contested by many on this blog.
I’m not denying that there is a difficulty that needs to be dealt with, just contesting your scapegoating of a whole people group. Our country doesn’t need this kind of radicalization.
33 percent of our prison population is now comprised of non-citizens.
36 to 42 percent of illegal aliens are on welfare. So, for a good proportion of these people, the American dream is crime and welfare, not coming here to work.
– Source: CNN Special Reports May 2008
Why can’t the apologists for criminal aliens come up with any DOJ statistics?
I agree that we have a problem here, but did you notice that, according to one serious study (see page 143), only 1.5% of this group are serious offenders, compared to 15% of US citizens in federal prison.
It is very easy to scapegoat a group that is growing in it’s propensity, but why is it growing? Apparently because prison is a nice place to put the poor in order to get them out of the way. It is grossly misleading to quote “33% of the US prison population are illegal aliens” without looking at the whole picture.
Statistics can be used for various purposes, depending on how they are construed. The right-wing would like to construe them so that undocumented aliens appear in the worst light possible.
I suggest a balanced reading on the issues, including this book.
According to DOJ, over 34% of the federal prison population consists of illegal aliens. There are so many that federal prisoners are being sent to local jails.
Poverty is not the cause of crime – immorality from an immoral culture of crime in Mexico is the problem.
Pseudo-liberals are silent about all the hundreds of thousands of women and girls forced into prostitution by Mexican and other Latino gangs. Again, much of this violence against women is legal in Mexico.
The place for poor people in the rest of the world is their native country.
Stop turning the USA into a garbage dump for the dregs of Latin America. Mexico is exporting its crime problem to the US.
Shawn’s not looking so beacon-y anymore. He looks rather nose-up-someone’s a55-ly, actually.