A normally sober fellow blogger helped me crystallize something when he posted this on a recent post of mine:
C’mon, Brad, after devoting a whole column to how disappointing you
found Obama’s speech, and your conviction that McCain is The One Who
Can Reach Across The Aisle, I want to hear what you have to say about
the hatred that filled that room last night. Forget the hug.
"The hatred?" You know, I never know when you guys are kidding. You are kidding, right?
Because if you Dems are serious about the stuff I’ve seen about
"hate" (a verb that I believe, translated from the Democratese, means
"to disagree with me"), and you Repubs are serious about the… well, I
don’t even remember the words, but there were a lot of stupid ones
about how mean and nasty "the media" was supposedly being to your
precious Sarah (come on, Dems, remind me of some of the dumb words they
used), then I think all of y’all need to take a chill pill.
Dems, the woman delivered a boilerplate veep speech. I’ve tried to
think back and remember what she said that y’all might think was so
mean, and all I remember was something about a mayor being like a
community organizer but with responsibility, and a candidate who’s
authored two memoirs but no major legislation, both of which seemed
like solid, above-the-belt shots to me. This is what veep candidates
do, people — they criticize the opposition. The question about Palin
was whether she could do it. She could.
And you whiny Repubs, give me a freaking break with your Spiro Agnew
Revisited hyperventilation about the fact that the "media" — which,
although you don’t believe it, is a plural word, and does not refer to
a monolithic beast — was so terrible and awful to this woman. Come on.
She sprang from McCain’s brow like Minerva from Zeus. Nobody knew squat
about her, and there was a huge, sucking vacuum demanding such info. Of
COURSE her daughter’s pregnancy was reported when she made a statement
about it. (What I objected to in a previous post what that anyone was
idiotic enough to mistake that for an "issue." Here’s a handy-dandy
guide: Abuse of power as governor, issue. Daughter’s reproductive
status: Not an issue. Think you can keep that straight, folks?)
Or did you mean, Tim, the reaction of the GOP partisans in the room?
They like stuff like that, Tim. Just as the Dems in Denver like shots
at the GOP team. They’re partisans. They cheer. Seems like you could
let them have their moment; it’s the first time anybody in that party
has looked even mildly animated this year. Dems have been cheering themselves
hoarse since about 2006.
Related Posts
OK, I mean Athena. Athena from Zeus, Minerva from Jupiter. I think.
Ok. Why haven’t I seen anything in the paper or on this blog about Palin’s possible abuse of power?
It may be that the reason that the Republicans think that “media” is singular is that they read this blog and see it used as the subject of a singular verb (albeit in a dependent clause).
We know that “only” 86% of editors, broadcast news producers, and anchors say they are Democrats. There are some hardcore Republicans, who admit it openly, and then there are a very few independent and objective members of the infotainment industry.
Thank you, Mr. Agnew.
Karen, my “abuse of power” reference was to the allegations about her ex-brother-in-law and the guy she fired. And no, you haven’t read about that here, or about taking the money for the Bridge to Nowhere or the “book-banning” thing, or any of her supposed sins. Nor have you found here a list of her alleged virtues, such as being a popular populist on oil profits or a hockey mom or any of that pooge.
Ya know why? Because I sort of expect you to have read all that stuff before you get here, because it’s EVERYWHERE.
This is going to come as a shock, but I do not consider this blog to The Blog of Record (if there is such a thing). It’s just a place where I try to raise points you might NOT read elsewhere, however frivolous (which drives poor Lee nuts). It’s extra. It’s supplementary. It’s lagniappe. I don’t try to make it more than that, and I don’t think I COULD make it more than that if I tried (people who know what a more-than-full-time-job I have without ever blogging don’t know how I do what I do, and think I’m nuts for trying).
Actually, that’s one purpose. The other is to give y’all a chance to talk about whatever, as long as you’re relatively civil about it. Hence the posts where I don’t say much beyond, “What did you think of…”
Yeah, Brad, but have you figured out (for sure) whether the word “media” should be considered singular or plural yet?
Perfect.
We’ve finally completed the step through the looking glass, and down is up.
The mainstream mediA, including in particular the print mediUM (with it’s noted sexist editors) have attacked this woman and her family in an absolutely unprecedented and unparalelled way in the last week.
And in the impenetrable recesses of Warthens’ mind, the people who have rallied to her defense are the problem. Isn’t that precious?
Ladies and gentleman: Exhibit A.
This is exactly why I intend to live the rest of my life without ever spending another farthing on a State newspaper.
Yours truly.
Faust
Has it always been the case that a political speech packed full of lies about the opponent is standard fare for the VP candidate? (link)
I don’t have the time or the energy to critique her whole speech, but to address just one of the points you think is above the belt, her comparison of Obama’s community service to her “real job” as mayor with all its attendant responsibilities. It was comparing apples and oranges. His community service was just a job he had after he got out of college. I doubt he considers it the high water mark of his career. But Palin plainly trumps her mayoral experience as one of her chief qualifications. Why not compare her mayoral experience with, say, his 8 years in the Illinois legislature?
So what was she doing right out of college, running for beauty queen? Maybe we should compare being a community organizer with being a beauty queen.
Perhaps I could have been more precise in my application of the word “hatred.” That is to say, I didn’t intend it to refer specifically to the Palin speech. In fact, I wasn’t even thinking of her when I said it, but was instead responding to the venom spewed by Mitt Romney and Rudy “9/11” Giuliani. Even more precisely, I was talking about the crazed reaction of the sea of privileged white people who were devouring the red meat thrown out there by two of the biggest phonies to ever walk a stage.
Next time I’ll more carefully designate which hatemongers I’m referring to.
At last a real female American, career and motherhood, and civic duty too. Athlete, hunter and Wednesday night bowler.
There are Sara Palins in every township and city in America, who get fed up with the partisan hack BS and stake out a territory and fight like pit bulls.
That is actually the Real America, not the nanny state hurt feelings of the sensitive leftists of the obama mugabe Reparations First camp.
Thanks to Mr Warthen for allowing the full vent of the true hatred of the progressive leftists, once known as communists and socialists and afro marxists.
All these miscreants want to guile you dupes into giving them power to vent their spleen on all the good people who despise them.
And then they will rejoice that all people are as miserable as they are:
true radical egalitarianism ecto orgasam.
Brad’s point about the context and timing of Palin’s Wednesday speech is important, because the VP’s role has typically been that of the attack dog, working the smaller markets, tearing away at the opposition like a Pit Bull Terrier. As she noted, Palin’s difference is that she wears lipstick.
I’ve been a fan of Palin’s for about a year, just as I’ve been a fan of Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal because both seemed to be authentic folks with conservative values: a preference for small government, personal liberty, respect for culture that got us where we are, and adherence to the rule of law. Like most conservatives I recognize that those operating in the political sphere grow, adapt, and do stupid things. Even the great Ronaldus Maximus made compromises that I’d have preferred that he not make, but I was confident in his judgment at the time and swallowed hard the sausage that the Congress wrought, adding just a dab of mustard.
I don’t agree with Palin’s and Jindal’s view on intelligent design versus Darwin. But that’s okay because they are otherwise pretty solid on the fiscal and policy side, and McCain is in my camp on evolution.
I do think that Jinal is the more qualified because of his policy-nerd bent, but McCain’s conundrum was that Palin gave him a much better chance of being elected and has been in office a year longer. Besides, Louisiana needs Bobby to straighten things out much more than Alaska needs Sarah; Jindal probably will use his state to solve the healthcare mess that faces us all. He knows more about the federal regulations, the power of incentives, and the capacity of markets than most beltway policy shops.
Given my view that Obama’s either an ingénue or a far-left nutso (more below) — a great risk in either case — and not being a big fan of McCain (Romney or Thompson being more my cup of tea), I applaud McCain’s selection of someone who wears high heels.
(Disclaimer: I do not now nor have I ever thought or believed that Bobby Jindal would be less or more effective were he to wear high heels. Nor do I know how tall he is or whether he’d look good in them to others. If he does in fact wear high heels, bully for him say I.)
Karen notes Palin’s possible abuse of power in firing a manager, a state executive — she had the right to do so — who did not fire a state trooper who tasered his own kid, drank beer on duty in his squad car, illegally shot a moose, and allegedly threatened Palin’s father, the kid’s grandfather. It’s a complex story and serious matter under investigation by an ad hoc state committee that Palin agreed to but which may have no jurisdiction. The trooper in question was married to Palin’s sister and does seem to have a checkered past. BFD. We’re not talking Kwame Kilpatrick here, and the troopers’ union is involved.
As for JimT’s umbrage at what he sees as implied criticism of community organizers as opposed to mayors or other elected officials, the answer is straightforward: elected officials are accountable to the public, community organizers are not. The latter can certainly do wonderful things on a schedule that pleases their sponsors, but not necessarily the recipients, and by no means the voting public.
Obama was a follower of the prototypical and quite radical community organizer Saul Alinsky, not just of methods, but also of philosophy, it seems. But I’m not sure about all that, as I explain here. Whatever Obama is, the point is that community organizers seem to look for money and power from external sources first to solve problems rather that draw upon the talent and resources of those they pretend to help.
To put it locally with a specific example, Mayor Coble is accountable and has to satisfy constituents, community organizers do not. Yet Coble, local politicians, and most community organizers are looking for federal or state funds to solve the crime problem in certain apartment complexes. Why not use existing resources to create a neighborhood watch and provide them with communications gear to contact law enforcement more quickly? Heck, why not train the residents of the problem properties in the proper use of firearms so that they have can defend themselves? I will voluntarily contribute time and money to such efforts, but will resist any taxes that pretend to provide any ineffective solutions.
For Tim, all I can say is that conservatives — and in this day, that means Republicans — don’t deal in identity politics. The Asian, black, and other people of color you saw at the convention understand that conservatives relate to individuals, not groups. Since discrimination based on race, ethnic origin, religion, and whatever is illegal, conservatives are content to address individual concerns about success.
So, Karen, making sure a trooper who issues death threats loses his job is an abuse of power?
What did Palin do, violate his civil rights by preventing him from carrying out his threats?
What on Earth is the issue here, that evil should be allowed to run its course before anyone does anything?
The very fact that Palin is attempting to obstruct the investigation suggests she has something to hide.
Right on Wally! The heck with due process. Give ’em a fair trial, then hang ’em.
Senator Biden co-sponsored the federal law which requires police who are charged with domestic violence to be disarmed.
This trooper slapped his family around, used Mace on a child.
Where does Joe Biden stand on this issue?
For Tim, all I can say is that conservatives — and in this day, that means Republicans — don’t deal in identity politics.
-Mike
Mike, I’m not sure what that means. I guess this is some kind of Rush Limbaugh mantra that makes sense only to the secret GOP club that has the decoder ring. What conservatives do engage in is the politics of fear. We have to give up our freedom so the terrorists won’t kill us. We have to give huge tax breaks to the extremely wealthy so we can keep our job. We must spend 3 trillion dollars and 4,200 lives so we can keep our Hummers rolling. The new mantra in the GOP is fear, fear, fear. For all his talk of bi-partisan politics John McCain has that part of the GOP mantra down-pat. Politics of fear, that about describes the GOP in 2008.
What “tax breaks” do the wealthy get?
They pay almost all the income taxes.
The bottom 49% of income tax filers pay no taxes. They even get a tax credit to offset their FICA taxes.
How is Obama going to deliver on his promise to “give 95% of Americans a tax cut”, when they don’t even pay taxes?
Obama proposes adding $933 BILLION in new taxes in 2009 to the tiny minority who already pay 85% of all the taxes.
He proposes a 25% increase in income taxes on family-owned small businesses.
He proposes DOUBLING the income taxes on investment profits for the people who took the most risk. How is that going to help the economy?
The Democrats have already passed a tax increase on all tax brackets, set to take effect in 2009.
No, bad spaceman. Bad.
The Democrats haven’t passed any tax increases. The Republicans did it when they passed Junior Bush’s slight-of-hand tax cut (an historic event, the first tax cut in history during a time of war).
Every provision of the tax code you’re complaining of is in Junior’s legislation.
YOU is the problem, Spaceman, and your ilk.
It truly is time for y’all to go. You preached government is incompetent and then proceeded to prove it as administered by y’all.
Gracias, Mike the Duck. You’ve restored my faith in your inherent Republicanism.
Republicans agree on a special investigator for Little Miss Sarah, agree to testify, etc, etc., and then renege. Can you smell
S T O N E W A L L ?
Oh, and the biggest laugh in your entire post? Republicans don’t believe in identity politics.
Oh, contrare, Senor Ducky. Trent Lott, Strom Thurmond, Lee Atwater, Karl Rove, ad nauseum, have always participated in identity politics. The rest of us call it racism. Just like the fool Repub in Georgia who yesterday called Obama “uppity” and then piously said he’d never heard that term in a racial context.
David Gergen, a Republican, called it a few weeks ago. All this elitism talk is just Republican code for an uppity n*gger.
Spare us the arrogance, Senor, it just confirms your duplicity. Quack, quack.
Should McCain-Palin win this election, there will be a major revolution of the people. Whatever you may say, speaking in tongues, fighting “God’s Wars” and violating the constitution by failing to read people their rights sound more like the Taliban than American. Have we moved that far to the right that we now don’t care about our constitution? Do we blindly follow never questioning what is right and what is wrong? Brad – from your response, I take it you believe it is OK for Mitt, Rudy, Sara and Joe to out and out lie and you are Ok defending the falsehoods. Are you so determined to have backed a winner that you sell your sole. I can admit I was wrong backing Edwards. I’m waiting for the first Republican to admit they screwed up royally.
Socialists and liberals lead a revolution?
What a laugh!
They beg the government to disarm them and take care of them with hordes of police and welfare clerks.
They are cattle.
A few of them, like Obama’s friends Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dorn, will murder innocent people with bombs in a cowardly manner, but never fight. They are mice.
Sooooo, Mike, let’s see if I’ve got this straight. You think it is valid to compare any segment of one person’s professional career with any segment from another’s. Let’s presume you took a vacation last year and I say “That Mike guy is just a lazy slackard. He lays around on the beach sipping Coronas while I work hard, providing valuable services for my employer.” Never mind that I took a vacation last year and that you worked last year. According to you, all comparisons of any work segments are valid.
Her speech could just as arbitrarily said “I was working as Mayor of a small town and Obama was serving at the state level in the Illinois legislature. Looks like he’s got me beat hands down on experience and level of responsibilities.” It’s ridiculous just to think you can compare any two arbitrarily chosen segments of professional work.
And you missed my whole point anyway. I never took “umbrage” as you say that she was implying insult to community workers. My point was that she was denigrating Obama’s experience level by saying she worked a job “with actual responsibilities” but he did not.
So Lee, you and the republicans think we will sit here and take it and that we are not headed to class warfare. But I guess you agree with the analogies of the republicans and the Taliban!
Sit and take what? Less welfare?
This is America. Immigrants come here unable to speak English and become millionaires, while Democrat spend generations in poverty of their own making – “poverty” which exceeds the standard of living of 90% of the rest of the world.
Democrats stay angry at the world for not giving them more handouts.
“Class warfare” is another Marxist strategy used by Democrats. Envy, jealousy, victimhood, villians, hate, hate, hate.
Most conservatives and Libertarians just want to be left alone to make their own way in the world. Government is just supposed to protect them from predators, not be the biggest predator and parasite.
Brad, “hatred” may be too strong a word for the speakers at the convention…that’s more appropriate for the bloggers and some in the right-wing side of the media. But I think “politics of division” or “cultural politics” are apt terms for what we saw Tuesday and Wednesday. Moreover, we saw John McCain last night draw clear points of distinction and his opponent without resorting to this, so we know it can be done.
So no, I will not “get over it,” especially because I had such hopes that Sarah Palin was really a refreshing new kind of voice on the national scene. Of course I didn’t expect her to say anything that I really agreed with, but hoped that unlike most of her party in recent years, she would appeal to the best in each of us. She came up way short on this test.
So when people say who’s the real refreshing new kind of voice in the Republican party in 2008, for me Mike Huckabee seems much more like that new kind of politician, but Sarah Palin’s words are by contrast unexcitingly familiar. So far…I realize it’s just one speech.
Lee, I hate to tell you this but we’ve been in a class war for many years now. The only problem is there has only been one class doing the fighting. The very rich in this country are soaking up a greater and greater proportion of the nations wealth. The tax structure increasingly favors the rich while big companies such as Halliburton and Exxon are heavily subsidized in one way or another.
But soon with President Obama on our side the rest of us can look forward to once again taking home our share of the nation’s wealth for all the hard labor we’ve put in. If the whiny rich class doesn’t like it, tough. The tax code has been so skewed to favor the rich it’s just simply outrageous that they want even more. I say, ENOUGH!
The tax structure let’s 75% of adults pay ZERO income taxes.
Of those who file, the IRS says only the top 51% pay ANY taxes, and those making over $250,000 pay almost ALL the taxes.
The only “tax cut for the rich” was the one Bill Clinton gave Robert Rubin and friends in 1993, a reduction of capital gains taxes from 28% to 14%.
Obama appeals to the greed of the most indolent voters, who think they are entitled to an equal share of the wealth created by those who work hard, innovate, save, invest, risk and create the wealth.
We can see these sorry scoundrels cheering Obama on in letters to the editor, on the Internet, and calling talk radio to spew their envy and hate of the real workers.
Everyone should pay the same rate. Anything else is unConstitutional, a violation of “equal protection under the law”. A 10% federal sales tax would be most fair, and still more money than the government needs.
Mike Cakora, I just re-read one of your earlier comments, and–while as usual I respect your ability to coherently argue traditional conservative positions without venom, etc., I have to add my voice to Bud’s and others when I say…
“conservatives don’t engage in identity politics” is a truly laughable statement. How often are we hearing about Sarah Palin an an exemplar of the “real” America? What is that code for, Mike? And what is dividing Americans into “real” and “authentic” vs. “unreal” if not identity politics. Please, Republicans in the Atwater/Rove/Schmidt era have perfected the art of identity politics. Judith Warner has a pretty devastating analysis of this here.
“Identity politics” is fan worship of a political star, rather than intellectual engagement of real issues.
Examples include JFK, Mussolini, FDR, Hitler, Obama.
I will say this for the Pistol Packing Mama. She has really livened up the political conversations.
She is a breath of fresh air. Open that space between your ears and let some of the newness blow through.
What are the issues that concern us most?
Terrorism. Illegal immigration. Economy.
There is a dark side of Obama and his wife. Too much baggage from their past with 40 years of the two being involved with people that shaped them from childhood. You cannot “get past your upbringing” as our parents once told us.
The pistol packing mama knows how to shoot from the hip with a quick draw and this has the left spinning. She came upon the scene very quickly and has not needed to be treated like a rock star. She is like a magnet. What she needs to do is adopt the fair tax and let McCain get it through congress.
Those on this blog that want to do away with the rich should learn a little about what made this country great. “Dream the impossible dream and reach for the stars”. What would life be without reward for your brain and your hard work? You work hard, save a few dollars and reward yourself with certain things in life that your desire. Folks that is the American Dream. Not taking from the rich and reward the poor for not achieving their potential.
At the Democratic Convention, no one came out and spoke for Obama. No one from his past told about his character, or his accomplishments, or any of that.
The only person to vouch for Barack Obama was Michele Obama, and she had no specific examples. She talked about his feelings.
Would you hire someone who had no references?
Obama has no one from the past to put forward any kind of reference to his character, foundation, leadership or any thing to say about his ability to be president.
If he did, they would have been at the convention giving their testimony on his behalf.
Good point Lee. Thanks.
Re identity politics: I was not using a Limbaugh code, but a term used in political science:
An example would be: “Vote for me because I am a member of X group” where X equals women, white guys, gays, pagans, etc. It’s an old approach with a new label.
It presupposes whatever beliefs the folks involved may have. The KKK attracted members not just because they were Protestant white guys, but because they hated blacks, Jews, Catholics, and other groups who did not share their belief in white supremacy.
The illogical aspect is that group membership presupposes a belief system, but that’s obviously nonsense. Witness the Clarence Thomas appointment to the Supremes. In the run-up folks argued that a black should be nominated to the seat vacated by the retirement of Justice Marshall. As it turns out many folks wanted a black who had specific beliefs and were distraught that Thomas did not have them, and pulled about every trick in the book to defeat the nomination.
So I guess I was poorly pointing out that identity politics is a distraction and one that conservatives don’t find useful because we are about individual rights and responsibilities, not the collective or groups.
A lot of folks are voting for Obama because he is black. That’s fine by me, but I’ve got the sneaking suspicion that few of McCain’s voters are behind him because he’s white, but because of his message or in honor of his remarkable military service. His problem was that his reform message was getting little traction even among the conservatives who are disappointed with the Republicans in Congress who line up with hands outstretched and a list of earmarks for each and every appropriation passed. Of all the candidates in all the parties at the beginning of this year he was pretty low on my list because I view him as more the pragmatist than the conservative, didn’t like his instincts on economics nor his hostility to businesses, found silly his globo-warmo bent, etc.
With the approach of summer and designation of candidates for the two main parties, I and others became pragmatists and decided to get drunk and vote for McCain. Okay, not much of a plan, but we have been saving up for some really good imported beer, lots of it, enough to do a Ray Milland Lost Weekend thingy.
But then something happened: Obama got stooopid and spilled the beans, sending the message that it will be bidness as usual, the money spigot was going to open wider, and the line forms over there. He did that by selecting Biden.
We then realized that Obama and his folks are projecting: everything they say about their opponents — every criticism, every prediction, every nit — really applies to them.
There were still plenty of opportunities for McCain to seal his doom, but the glimmers of wit we started seeing from his campaign as the summer heated up proved not to be just lucky whacks but were harbingers of his hunger to win, and to win in the right way, true to his reform instinct. He found a soulmate to run as his VP, Sarah Barracuda.
Obama’s scared, Biden’s dead meat, and the elites and nutroots are bonkers. Just look at the rumors they’ve started!
If Republicans are fear-mongers, so are Dems. But you’ve known all along that Republicans will whack the living daylights out of Obama on the War on Terror and defense, saying that Dems are weak and will screw it up, because everybody, even most Dems, know they will. And Obama did little to counter that, his VP choice hurt in that respect.
I’m not one for predictions, but the way Obama’s going, he’s likely to seal his own doom by meeting with Sandanistas and giving them a big hug. We know what Big John would do, and the Barracuda would certainly point that out.
Yesterday, Obama claimed to have always supported the Surge against the terrorists in Iraq, saying he, “always knew it would work.”
Today, he claimed he will save Social Security, but as usual, did not say how.
Obama claimed that, “Everyone who invested in Social Security will get their full amount.”
What a lie!
1. No one invests in Social Security. It is a tax.
2. It is not a retirement plan. It is a welfare program.
3. There is no Trust Fund.
It is broke.
4. There are no individual accounts, because you have no claim to one cent, according to the Supreme Court.
Great post, Duckie. You’ve inadvertently summed up McSame with your link. A hot head with no judgment, who, when caught, lies about his conduct. Your conclusion that Little Miss Sarah would point out what McSame would do is particularly appropriate given her lying about The Bridge to Nowhere earmark and her stonewalling the TrooperGate bi-partisan investigation.
How arrogant of you, Duckie, to tell African Americans they’re voting for Barack based solely on race. You, of all people, would really KNOW that. The only black people you associate with are the two or three Toms who go to Republican meetings and the teenagers working fast food drive-throughs.
Alabama Republicans published a brochure with the Clintons and Camden’s own Reggie Jackson, an 11 year old who sang the national anthem at campaign appearances, titled “Clinton Family Values?”. Jim Corbett from Columbia, a delegate to this years Repug Convention, said he saw nothing wrong with the pamphlet.
Trent Lott, and other Republican Macaca moments are too numberous to name.
Oh, and by the way, who did Condi meet with yesterday? I’ll give you a hint, it wasn’t
a Sandinista but it was a terrorist.
We really didn’t need more examples of left-wing racism from “Guero”. We already know that non-black pseudo-liberals dismiss as an “Uncle Tom” every black who doesn’t behave to fit their stereotype.
Guero was already kicked off this blog by Brad once before, but is back with a vengeance under another pseudonym.
Sorry, Spaceman. Never been kicked off a blog, never posted under any other name.
You can’t respond to my specifics because they’re fact. Stick that in your commie-under-the-bed craw, Spaceman.
Duckie Cakora can’t respond either to fact.
Guero – I think a lot of blacks are voting for Obama because of this race, as are a lot of whites. Identity politics are a powerful draw for a lot of folks and the symbolism of a black president would be quite strong. That I’ll not vote for him has nothing to do with his ethnic background nor the fact that his forebears once owned slaves, but because he’s got quite the liberal voting record and because he’s not been forthcoming about his associations and work in Chicago, my old hometown.
I don’t know more than two folks named “Tom” and don’t really know if either goes to Republican meetings. As for fast food drive-throughs, I avoid them to save gas.
You seem to have a fixation on race / ethnicity and that’s not good. Try to meet and interact with lots of different people, and keep in mind Brad’s diversity policy: the more you comment here, diverse it gets.
Oh, did you see what Willie had to say? There’s one masterful pol who knows what he’s talking about.
Guero, your racism is not specific, because it’s all in your head. It is just a feeling, nothing more.
Most blacks will vote for Obama
http://www.thestate.com/presidential-politics/story/298009.html
Reasons blacks will vote for Obaman:
1. Obama is half African
2. Many voters don’t anything about Obama other than that his father was African. Race is all they have.
3. Obama has a long history with anti-Jewish groups, black nationalists, black separatists, and the slavery reparations crowd. His campaign is putting the word out that Obama will shake down “rich people” (whites and Jews), and give the money to blacks, both in the USA and in Africa.
No, Duckie, you brought up race as Republicans always do. It’s the only way your ilk can win elections. You have only your Republican instincts to cite for your fact-free argument.
Bottom line, Duckie, you’re simply not credible when you start this I”m not a Republican nonsense. You can’t stand the loss of your appearance of independence on this blog site so you refuse to tell the truth. No one ever called you on it before I did. You vote Republican and always have. You contribute only to Republicans and always have.
“Cultural strengths” “Bloc voting” These are all Republican code for they ain’t white people so we’re agin ’em.
Can you spell Macaca, Duckie?
Quack, quack.
If, as liberals maintain, the economic situation of blacks in the US has hardly improved over the past fifty years, who other than Democrats should bear the blame? After all, it’s Democrats who have whitewashed their party’s history of oppression of blacks.
Duckie, duckie, duckie, it’s a good thing no one can see your face when you type that drivel as you certainly couldn’t honestly keep a straight face.
It’s not even a nice try when you seek to blur CONSERVATISM’s sorry history by interchanging Democrats and Conservatives.
LIBERALS in the Republican Party and Democratic Party fought for civil rights forty years ago.
CONSERVATIVES in both parties fought civil rights.
CONSERVATIVES like you can’t have it both ways.
CONSERVATIVES in the REPUBLICAN PARTY still oppose civil rights. RACISTS in the DEMOCRATIC PARTY simply changed their party registration. Ergo, pm, spaceman muller, et al on this blog.
Res ipsa loquitur
The Democratic Party is full of racists:
– black racists like Obama and Jeremiah Wright
– while racists who expect blacks to be dependent on them, and smear any who think for themselves as “Uncle Toms”.