When you login first time using a Social Login button, we collect your account public profile information shared by Social Login provider, based on your privacy settings. We also get your email address to automatically create an account for you in our website. Once your account is created, you'll be logged-in to this account.
DisagreeAgree
Connect with
I allow to create an account
When you login first time using a Social Login button, we collect your account public profile information shared by Social Login provider, based on your privacy settings. We also get your email address to automatically create an account for you in our website. Once your account is created, you'll be logged-in to this account.
DisagreeAgree
89 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
BarbaraS
14 years ago
In a different world I would like to see Reid quit. However, in the world we live in this would be disastrous. Another dem, untainted by Washington but of the same mindset, would run for his seat and maybe win. Who can tell about the electorate? Sometimes I think we are our own worse enemy.
chrisfromneenah
14 years ago
This is just another double standard that the democrats pose. I have seen Republicans do it also. However, they is a recent article that does explain this. It is about people having to much power it is at: http://bit.ly/5nNCCB. So not surprising that this is happening. This is why we need a change in government. A demand for a new direction toward protectionism. I talk about it in my blog chrisfromneenah.blogspot.com. Both Democrats and Republicans and all other Americans can agree. NO MORE FREE TRADE. Bring back the jobs to America.
DrKeithCurrie
14 years ago
Yeah, perfect said dear, we are our own enemy!!!! If we can control our mind and words we can have a better life.
Sid
14 years ago
Does this mean that Reid is a knuckle draggin’ redneck ignorant conservative tea bagging “racist” too? Heck if we can be called all these names for being conservative, what do you call the Senate majority leader who is racist?
Luis González
14 years ago
I am a foreigner with a rather poor English, so I don’t have a real sense of how hard hitting those words can be for the average american citizen.
But what was exactly the offense? Mr. Reid said “light-skinned” with no “negro” dialect.
Mr. Obama is indeed a light skinned black (or half black) person and he speaks very elocuently, so Reid simply said what is obvious.
It is a fact that unfortunately, african americans tend to be in the lower classes, and it’s no wonder they have a poorer education. This is due to historical and social reasons that I’m not going to discuss here.
Should society simply pretend that this is not true?
Is that what it means being politically correct? Ignoring reality and using euphemisms?
Should we say “african american” instead of simply black? What’s wrong with accepting that indeed, african americans are black??
I imagine that perhaps “negro” has a negative connotation in English. In Spanish it simply means “black”. Black is a color, there is nothing to be ashamed about.
If I were an coloured man, a succesful coloured man with a brilliant personality, and someone called me negro I would just say “yes, so?”.
I mean, aren’t you all drawning in a glass of water?
VERY GOOD ARTICLE WELL WRITTEN AN PUT TOGETHER FOR
MORE LIKE THIS http://bloggnet.co.cc/
B-Rob
14 years ago
If conservatives do not understand the difference between Reid (an early Obama supporter) touting him as a good presidential candidate and VIABLE because of how he looks and how he speaks (at a time when may Dem voters, Black and Clintonian alike, did NOT think him viable), versus Trent Lott looking back wistfully and wishing that child rapist/segregationist Strom Thurmond had won the 1948 election and, conceivably, set back desegregation efforts another decade or so . . . .
People, let’s get real! Trent Lott was an unreconstructed backer of the Southern Partisan crowd and the proudly racist White Citizens Council . . . Oh, sorry . . . I forgot they renamed themselves the CONSERVATIVE Citizens Council. My bad.
Honestly, cons, the GOP has about as many minority backers as would attend your average Klan meeting. The Dems, in contrast, nominated and then ELECTED the first minority president, with about 95% backing of Blacks and Hispanic and Asian support in the high 70s. Obama nominated a hyperqualified, experienced, Ivy League credentialed Hispanic to the Supreme Court, and what was the GOP response? To call her “unqualified” and question whether she knew English! What the fcuk is wrong with you people?
Cons, this is NOT a fight you want to have, comparing the sentiment toward minorities in the two parties when you had a flat out racist Tom Tancredo running for your nomination, GOP congressment referring to Obama as “uppity”, overtly racist signs at McCain/Palin rallies and tea bagger rallies alike, and Stormfront.org backing your candidate! Just let this one go . . . because it will only make you look even worse!
chrisfromneenah
14 years ago
@Luis González:
I totally agree Luis. I would like to have you come to our social network at http://www.heywhateversocial.info. You have the perfect thought process for our positive attitude social network. Too many times people make a big deal out of words rather than looking at the true heart of the matter. What really is going on here is that Reid is bringing out a specific truth that is to the Democratics advantage. However, what you may not know behind the lines is, if he did say what he said, it is probably because he care more about how Obama looked to others rather than solely on his ideas and character. These days in America, sad to say, it is as important how you look as much as what you believe in or your true convictions. Again, both parties do this way too much.
B-Rob
14 years ago
chrisfromneenah —
You wrote —
“These days in America, sad to say, it is as important how you look as much as what you believe in or your true convictions.”
The idea that you write that, given the history of Jim Crow and segregation and discrimination and slavery and antimiscegination laws in this country, all of which had as a FIRST PRINCIPAL that “how you look” is determinative of your life chances and the choices you could make about your own future, shows that you are either being increadibly obtuse for partisan purposes, or you are stunningly ignorant. Which is it?
Are you trying to claim that looks no longer play a role in US society?
chrisfromneenah
14 years ago
I do believe that looks play a role. That is why I am sad. It shouldn’t be that way. Also, I believe that people can rise above how they look. Yes, everyone doesn’t have the same chance at first but I know that I don’t look like Mr. Universe but I feel confident in myself and in my own talents that I will excel. I am going to encourage everyone I can talk to to do the same. If you don’t think this is possible, then go ahead stay negative. See how far you get and who surrounds you in the end.
I have to say that sometimes the depth of your personal racism astounds me, billy bob.
Whoops… maybe not.
Patvann
14 years ago
@Blob
The idea that you write that, given the history of Jim Crow and segregation and discrimination and slavery and antimiscegination laws in this country, all of which had as a FIRST PRINCIPAL that “how you look” is determinative of your life chances and the choices you could make about your own future, shows that you are either being increadibly obtuse for partisan purposes, or you are stunningly ignorant. Which is it?
Bwhahahahahahah!!!!!
EVERY F****N one of these horrific laws were put in place by DEMOCRATS! You stupid son of a bitch!!!!!
Pssst….Don’t tell ParaLegal2 that the Dims were also the people who tried to block the passage of the Civil Rights Act…..
Also, don’t tell him that his party is the one who has a former member of the KKK serving in the US Senate…the guy who held the title of Kleagle and Exalted Cyclops…
And the South Side Shyster wants to lecture us about racism.
Hysterical.
Patvann
14 years ago
From Larry Elder. Well-known right-wing black-hater…
If only blacks knew of the true history of the Democratic Party.
“Black History Month” has been observed for 29 years, yet many blacks know little to nothing about the parties’ respective roles in advancing or hindering the civil rights of blacks. How many blacks know that following the Civil War, 23 blacks — 13 of them ex-slaves — were elected to Congress, all as Republicans? The first black Democrat was not elected to Congress until 1935, from the state of Illinois. The first black congressional Democrat from a Southern state was not elected until 1973.
Democrats, in 1854, passed the Kansas-Nebraska Act. This overturned the Missouri Compromise and allowed for the importation of slaves into the territories. Disgusted with the passage of this Act, free-soilers and anti-slavery members of the Whig and Democratic parties founded the Republican Party — not just to stop the spread of slavery, but to eventually abolish it.
How many blacks know that blacks founded the Texas Republican Party? On July 4, 1867, in Houston, Texas, 150 blacks and 20 whites formed the party. No, not the Black Texas Republican Party, they founded the Texas Republican Party. Blacks across Southern states also founded the Republican parties in their states.
Fugitive slave laws? In 1850, Democrats passed the Fugitive Slave Law. If merely accused of being a slave, even if the person enjoyed freedom all of his or her life (as approximately 11 percent of blacks did just before the Civil War), the person lost the right to representation by an attorney, the right to trial by jury, and the right to habeas corpus.
Emancipation? Republican President Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation during the Civil War. In 1865, the 13th Amendment emancipating the slaves was passed with 100 percent of Republicans (88 of 88 in the House, 30 of 30 in the Senate) voting for it. Only 23 percent of Democrats (16 of 66 in the House, 3 of 8 in the Senate) voted for it.
Civil rights laws? In 1868, the 14th Amendment was passed giving the newly emancipated blacks full civil rights and federal guarantee of those rights, superseding any state laws. Every single voting Republican (128 of 134 — with 6 not voting — in the House, and 30 of 32 — with 2 not voting — in the Senate) voted for the Th Amendment. Not a single Democrat (zero of 36 in the House, zero of 6 in the Senate) voted for it.
Right to vote? When Southern states balked at implementing the 14th Amendment, Congress came back and passed the 15th Amendment in 1870, guaranteeing blacks the right to vote. Every single Republican voted for it, with every Democrat voting against it.
Ku Klux Klan? In 1872 congressional investigations, Democrats admitted beginning the Klan as an effort to stop the spread of the Republican Party and to re-establish Democratic control in Southern states. As PBS’ “American Experience” notes, “In outright defiance of the Republican-led federal government, Southern Democrats formed organizations that violently intimidated blacks and Republicans who tried to win political power. The most prominent of these, the Ku Klux Klan, was formed in Pulaski, Tenn., in 1865.” Blacks, who were all Republican at that time, became the primary targets of violence.
Jim Crow laws? Between 1870 and 1875, the Republican Congress passed many pro-black civil rights laws. But in 1876, Democrats took control of the House, and no further race-based civil rights laws passed until 1957. In 1892, Democrats gained control of the House, the Senate and the White House, and repealed all the Republican-passed civil rights laws. That enabled the Southern Democrats to pass the Jim Crow laws, poll taxes, literacy tests, and so on, in their individual states.
Civil rights in the ’60s? Only 64 percent of Democrats in Congress voted for the 1964 Civil Rights Act (153 for, 91 against in the House; and 46 for, 21 against in the Senate). But 80 percent of Republicans (136 for, 35 against in the House; and 27 for, 6 against in the Senate) voted for the 1964 Act.
Hey Blob…Wanna keep going with this? I have at least a half-a-gig worth of racial comments by DEMOCRATS dissin the Black Man.
Freakin masochist, go find another site to spew your hate.
Hard Right
14 years ago
Brainless rob, every time you post you hurt your cause and your side of the aisle.
You are ignorant in the extreme and serve up endless meatball pitches that Mata or the other posters hit into orbit with monotonous regularity.
I’m surprised some other moonbat hasn’t come here to declare you a Rovian plant whose sole purpose is to make the left look bad. You are to logic what Ted Kennedy was to being a lifeguard.
As was stated above, the DEMS were the ones to create all kinds of segregationist laws. It was the DEMS who trailed significantly to the Reps in their support of the Civil Rights Act.
URI
14 years ago
To Luis Gonzalez:
Yes, Negro is used frequently in Spanish and it has a better connotation than in English in the United States. Yet it is offensive. I could not call Che Negro to Chavez. Many educated Hispanics who have studied American history and understand the meaning of this word would rather use the word ‘moreno’ and not “negro”.
Words have meanings and what the Progressive liberals are trying to establish is that there is a double standard as to what a conservative white can say and as to what a “liberal’ white can say. The Liberals are trying to hijack and to corner the words racists as mean to describe white conservatives only. So, if white conservatives oppose the President: You are racist!….if the media portraits the President in a negative way: you are racist. If you protest to defend the constitution of the country you so love: you are racist! but never when liberals do it.
To whose who may not have thought of the obvious….
I’ve stayed out of the Reid comment fray for a very specific reason. And I assure you, it has nothing to do with political parties or racism, but age.
Negro is a term very much associated with a bygone era and was used sans any derogatory intent by many Americans… and that includes Martin Luther King. Too many of you live as if today’s PC vocabulary was written in stone for all time. Oh but that so many of you could have walked even a short year in our times.
It does not surprise me that Reid uses this term with such ease based on his age… not because he is biased, but because because of a lifetime of association with that term commonly used in his heyday. Remember that the Civil Rights Act was not until the 60s, when Reid was in his late 30s or early 40s.
Life was quite different in my youth than it is today. Now we are saddled our new “rules” of communication to which we find we must adhere in order to avoid media incitement and condemnation. Negro was not derogatory in my youth, however the “n” word… as so many of you like to refer to it… certainly was. In that era, the two were not to be confused as the same. And frankly the fact that it’s politically incorrect for me to even type a word used commonly in broadcast hip hop popular music… but that I never used in my life … simply because I am not the right color of skin is more upsetting to me than the existence of the word itself.
Such is the 1st Amendment social “enforcement” in the late 20th and 21st century. My personal gut feeling? Glad to be old, and you can all have it – and keep it – thank you very much.
For a reality check for the PC correct “youth”. Please examime the age demographics of the population based on the 2000 census in the graphic below. Try to imagine a historic era to which you are appear truly clueless. Read the speeches of civil rights activists then… of all colors. Then attempt to genuinely decipher what is really intended as an offensive verbal onslaught using those examples to fill in what you cannot experience.
Should Reid, a politican and immersed in PC media ‘tolerance”, have known the repercussions of using this term? But of course.
Did he revert to what was his upbringing in a moment of privacy with “friends”, not assuming it would come back and hit him later? Absolutely. Wise to fall back into ways of his middle age? Apparently not in this day and time. Another part about being old, I guess. It’s hard to get used to the fact that if you take a dump this morning, it can be used against you somewhere, somehow tomorrow. That stripping of privacy is still hard for many of us to absorb on a “real” 24/7 level.
Reid using the world Negro is probably not his greatest offense in his comments. In my opinion, I was offended by the inference that a specific dialect can found as the deciding factor… or considered unappealing to the American masses. That any particular dialect or regional accent is paramount to a POTUS is, and should be, insulting to us all. Were that true, Dubya would never have been elected… Kennedy with his New England Bostonian twang, nor Jimmah Carter with his southern drawl, for that matter. All of our high offices candidates are educated.
You might find that the “offensive” truth is triangulated somewhere between politics, racism, and generational upbringing. Fact is, I don’t believe Reid was being intentionally prejudiced with his statement… he was just showing his age. But I also believe that Steele is brillantly astute – politically, and generationally – when he points out that the dual hypocrisy is running amok.
Is it overblown to demand Reid’s resignation merely to score political points? Yes. But I tend to see Steele’s educational point when he echoes this sentiment, as this is exactly what the GOP has had to endure from the other side. Point made. Pushing the issue beyond media coverage and to the point of absurdity? Nope…
I swear – shy of pointing out the hypocrisy – this is like referee’ing kindergarden boxing matches. Steele has made the point. We have bigger fish to fry. The Dems will not get in the least big singed by prolonging such a petty battle with dedicated intensity. Why? Look one more time at the US age demographics, and you’ll figure out why most of the older, voting population is simply moving on from this.
B-Rob
14 years ago
Patvann —
The only thing sillier than your posts is . . . well, there may not be anything more silly than that.
Where to start. The Jim Crow laws. One thing you obviously know nothing about is the breadth of the state sponsored segregation. You had Jim Crow laws throughout the South, and the same kinds of laws in the North. But one thing is obviously so: you had Jim Crow in ANY STATE that was controlled by conservatives. For example, Ohio was not a Dem state, yet you had extensive segregation in housing. Indiana, which had no Dems in the 20s, was the headquarters of the Klan. The South and Southwest? Fugidaboutit!
So fast forward to the 1960s. You have the March on Washington. Truman desegregated the military, Eisenhower and Kennedy did their part, now there is a press for more extensive civil rights laws. After Kennedy died, the Dem President Johnson twisted arms aplenty to pass the civil rights laws.
There were some arms he did not have to twist, of course. Northern GOPers, moderate GOPers (y’all call them “RINOS” now) and liberal and moderate Dems — they all backed the new laws.
But you want to guess who opposed all the Civil Rights Acts? The conservatives. Bill Buckley wrote articles praising the quasi-enslavement of Blacks by their “betters”, the chaw-chewing rednecks of Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi, etc. Robert Bork wrote articles about how it was an afront to “freedom” to force states to treat Black people equally to whites. And the GOP platform in 1964, and its standard bearer, Barry Goldwater, opposed ending those last elements of slavery. But it was conservatives of the Democratic stripe who REALLY fought against the anti-segregation efforts. And the New York City salon conservatives? They clinked their martini glasses together and gave a rousing cheer for the continued second class citizenship of the Africans in their midst.
So there it is, Patvann — no matter how you try to spin it, it wasn’t “Democrats” who opposed the end of Jim Crow, or Republicans: it was “conservatives”. A Dem president signed the statutes, for God’s sake, and tons of Dems voted for it. Lots of Rockefeller Republicans and Yankees, too. No, son, it was CONSERVATIVES who opposed the end of quasi-slavery, most because they were flat out racist, some in the name of “freedom” — freedom for White folks, that is. Liberals and moderates of both parties, thank God, drowned out their ignorant cries. But it is the conservative party, the GOP, that still has not lived down being on the wrong side of justice. And with the “enlightened” leadership the party has now, it most likely never will come to terms with being flat out wrong.
B-Rob
14 years ago
Chihuahua, Patvann and Hard Right —
Larry Elder is a friend of a friend. That said, he is being intentionally obtuse. And you all know it, too.
It was CONSERVATIVES who opposed the Civil Rights Acts . . . you know . . . YOU GUYS! Some of the opponants were Dems and some were GOPers. But they were all CONSERVATIVES!
Indeed, all of those conservative Dems, the ones who opposed the Civil Rights Act, they all moved to the GOP. Which is why there are very few White Dems in the South anymore. Conversely, the Yankee Republicans are all Dems now . . . which is why there are practically no GOPers from Maine all the way down to Jersey.
B-Rob
14 years ago
And I noticed one thing — y’all didn’t even bother to address what I wrote, which is why the Harry Reid comment was NOT the same as Trent Lott cheering on the forces of segregation. But then again, he was one of the good ole boys who rioted at the University of Mississippi when the feds tried to enroll James Meredith. Trent Lott threw his lot in with the White/Conservative Citizens Council and Southern Partisans. A leopard does not change its spots.
B-Rob
14 years ago
Mata —
Please identify what I said that was “racist”. Is it “racist” to note that Trent Lott was pro-segregation? Or that Strom Thurmond was a child rapist and a segregationist? And that is who Trent Lott was praising?
And the rest of you — I still don’t see anyone explaining to me why it was OK for Trent Lott to wish the segregationist had won over the pro-integration Truman. But spew away with more revisionist history, folks! Spew away!
Patvann
14 years ago
I agree 100%, Mata. Reid’s word-use is far less “bad”, than the hypocrisy of those around him.
billy bob: Please identify what I said that was “racist”. Is it “racist” to note that Trent Lott was pro-segregation? Or that Strom Thurmond was a child rapist and a segregationist? And that is who Trent Lott was praising?
Your racism is not found in a specific sentence or comment, b-rob. But if you want one example, you can check out the first paragraph in a comment I made to you on another thread.
I occasionally wonder if I had you in a room, one on one, would you deliver your opinions with such resentment and anger. You reveal a consistency of lumping conservatives with white supremecist mentality as an underlying current in your collective dissertations. As one with a wide diverse group of friends and working cohorts (race, cultures and politically), your mentality is that which I find the most difficult to accept quietly. You aren’t old enough to experience first hand the segregation/desegregation years as a young adult, and merely rely upon racial past injustices via history and stories. Your less than subtle anger is truly baffling. Just as it is with a POTUS who is determined to “remake” the same America that provided him with a plethora of opportunity, and has catapulted him to historic legacy … good or bad.
Yet, for your posterity, you seek safe, level mediocrity… and feel morally superior and protective in doing so.
I have patience with those who were the generations before me, who experienced the injustice first hand. Oddly enough, it is never those who are whining and complaining about the past. As for those my age, we were the ones who were thrown together by mandates by cautious parents and grandparents, but didn’t necessarily harbor the fears and hatred of elders. We were those who started the genuine social desegration. Not because of a mandate, but by our common interests and exposure during school hours first, and today by neighborhood proximity.
And I’m here to tell you, everyone was, at first, thrown by a tizzy. Desegregation was not popular amongst my black high school friends. It was an inconvenience, an insult, and… in the end… a forced social experiment that perhaps increased understanding in both sides over time. We all found ourselves coveting some aspect of the other’s former school life. But perhaps you are unaware that no one wanted to be uprooted from their friends and neighborhood merely to fulfill some political racially mixed quota to emulate “fairness”.
This is not a defense of segregation, nor a proponent of desegregation. Quite frankly, most of us felt it wasn’t the government’s business to rip our lives apart for political fodder. But we lived with it, made the best of it, and grew from it all. You are part of the result of our growth… not a mover and shaker in that growth.
Today, segregation – and even desegregation – is but a historic adventure and/or nightmare to be regurgitated by those who never lived it, but still hold a grudge. But such disdain between humans was never isolated to the color of your skin… just as schoolyard bullies will be around as long as there are schoolyards.
So perhaps I should expand that while I believe you to be a racist… well, let’s rephrase that and call you a “black renditionist” (the opposite of a white supremecist in my mind)… you also present yourself as a political snob and one who engages in class warfare. None are particularly flattering to your cyber personality. (and I certainly hope the personal one is more engaging…)
But the last time I looked, we were a nation of individualists, with a potpourri of experiences and beliefs. Something you choose to forget in your campaign to influence others.
Skookum
14 years ago
Why should we assume that Reid would chance to damage the reliance of the Black vote except through stupidity or overconfidence? Keeping the Black Voter at peace with the Democrat Party and its 21st Century Plantation system of Black slavery is paramount to survival. Keeping the Democrat Voter mired in stupidity and the willingness to follow blindly requires careful programing of the Victim Syndrome rather than the typical American ideal that you can succeed if you put forth an effort. Of course this reinforces the Socialist System with its all knowing and all caring Elites and their anointed right and duty to lead the downtrodden to dependency and failure. Thus the Democrat Politician has vital importance to those who fear failure and to those who are too mentally enfeebled to even try.
And the GOP platform in 1964, and its standard bearer, Barry Goldwater, opposed ending those last elements of slavery.
Er…that’s not true.
From the 1964 GOP platform:
—full implementation and faithful execution of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and all other civil rights statutes, to assure equal rights and opportunities guaranteed by the Constitution to every citizen;
—improvements of civil rights statutes adequate to changing needs of our times;
—such additional administrative or legislative actions as may be required to end the denial, for whatever unlawful reason, of the right to vote;
—immigration legislation seeking to re-unite families and continuation of the “Fair Share” Refugee Program;
—continued opposition to discrimination based on race, creed, national origin or sex. We recognize that the elimination of any such discrimination is a matter of heart, conscience, and education, as well as of equal rights under law.
Dayum!
Other than being woefully and completely wrong on the facts…again…you weave a pretty good tale.
PS…Before you dash off on a different bunny trail, Goldwater opposed the Civil Rights Act based on his belief that it was an unconstitutional encroachment of the Fed Gov’t on the States and their rights, not based on any racial bias.
WOW Mata, that was so good I had to go back and read it again. A trip down memory lane, only thing missing was the fear and turmoil we watched on the nightly news.
The little girls dying in the church bombing, cross burnings, the loss/murders of civil rights workers, the violence at the marches, then the assasination of MLK. Also can’t forget George Wallace and his ignorant escapades. It wasn’t until later that I became aware of the other democrats, Fulbright, Gore, etc. that were doing their best to throw a monkey wrench into Civil Rights legislation.
Then, when we were stationed at Ft. Bragg in the late 60s, AA civilians were still using their own drinking fountains in downtown Fayetteville, moving off the sidewalks, just humbly moved out of the way, eyes down.
My sister-in-law and I also saw a billboard of klansmen on horses that said, “you are entering KKK country” when we drove down to NC to join my husband after he finished jump school at Ft. Benning. We had a neighbor family that would scream “damn yankees” at us because they were angry that we had my husband’s black friends come to our home.
Having grown up in northern IL, that kind of thing never happened, it was a shock, sad, shameful and so backward. When I was in school we went to neighborhood schools, later the various ethnic groups gravitated to their own sections of the city, it wasn’t until my children started school that we began to have what a few decided were, deseg issues.
Still no black against white or vice versa, just forced busing the children and families suffered through so the grand poobahs could pat themselves on the back thinking they had all the answers. Yet not wanting to face the facts that they were wasting money that would be better spent on education, instead of desegregation. Years of a big mess that failed.
But, a couple of good things came of it, similar to you and your friends, not enough to make up for the turmoil everyone faced imo, we also made some good friends we never would have met had it not been for the busing we all hated.
B-Rob
14 years ago
@ Mata —
If I had actually said anything remotely close to being “racist” you could quote it verbatim. But, no, you did not because you cannot.
I like your self-reverential dissertation about how open minded you are and how “all” your Black friends” didn’t like desegregation when they were teenagers — as if the feelings of a bunch of 16 year olds is a sensible way for the United States to set public policy.
You skip trip trop all over the place, think you are insulting me, but avoid the central point of my post. In case you didn’t “get” it, here it is:
The GOP should tend to its own sordid racial history (foisted on the party of Lincoln by its conservatives) before trying to make hay out of an INTERESTING comment made by a SUPPORTER of the country’s first Black president.
You cons LOVE to post about how the Dems are the racist party. Your hero Glen Beck called our president a racist on Fox News, then when challenged to explain what the fcuk he meant by the phrase “White culture” (a phrase right out of Stormfront.org — sorry about the .com link). A number of your leaders called an Ivy League educated federal judge with close to 20 years experience on the bench a “racist” based on her calling herself a “wise Latina” — but the charge against her was led by Jeff Sessions, a guy disqualified from the federal bench because he referred to Black men as “boy” and chastised a Black lawyer for the way he talked to “White folks”. A GOP congressman called the President “uppity” during the campaign — a word that many Black writers noted is usually followed by the “n word.” Tom Tancredo. Pat Buchanan . . . need I even say more?
There is a reason that minorities of all backgrounds — South Asian, Korean, Chinese, Mexican, Honduran, Jamaican, Black . . . you name it — avoid the GOP like the plague. It is because of the racist and racially insensitive history of the modern GOP and its leadership. If you guys tossed the racists out of your party with half the gusto that you toss moderates overboard, you could remake yourself into something that the SOCIALLY CONSERVATiVE pro-gun, anti-abortion, anti-welfare middle and upper class minorities might want to associate with. Instead, you look at the McCain/Palin rallies (check YouTube’s link of the rally in Strongsville, Ohio, my old hometown) and the tea bagger rallies. The racists signs get applauded, not shunned. THAT is why the GOP gets very few Hispanics and Asians, even though the rhetoric is anti-Black — because if you are so racist against Blacks in public, what would those Asians and Hispanics think you say about them when they are not around? That is why no Black people run as Republicans ANYWHERE, especially the South — because the GOP has become the last haven for the White racist. And everyone knows it. It is time for the GOP to tend to its own garden and stop worrying about the supposed weeds in the Dems camp.
B-Rob
14 years ago
— Chihuahua
As I always tell my lady friend, “I am right about 85% of the time.” You are right about the 1964 GOP platform. It DID state some support for the civil rights acts. mea culpe
But Barry Goldwater, the lead candidate, opposed it. And so did the National Review. The Klan and the White Citizens Council (later called the Conservative Citizens Council) agreed with them. And Trent Lott was a riot leader at Oxford. And Strom Thurmond, the man Lott lionized, was pro-segregation and against any mixing of the racists . . . unless it involved a 15 year old virgin who worked in his house, that is. Then he was all about the mixing. http://www.floppingaces.net/wp-content/themes/FA-aspire/images/send.gif
But my bigger point, of course, cannot be disputed — it was conservatives who threw their lot in with the pro-segregation side. The GOP, for its own reasons, to this day refuses to cut the cords with the unreconstructed elements of the party. And that is why, to a large extent, the word “conservative” is equated with “white” in this country — just like the White Citizens Council implied when it changed its name. It is why you champion the flag of racists traitors, the stars and bars. It is why GOP Congressmen tacitly support the whole birther nonsense. You guys just can’t seem to “quit” those dad gum White racist elements. And your minority voting percentage quickly slides toward 25%, and the percentage of young Whites voting R. is starting to cluster around the same dismal number, too.
But you guys simply don’t want to deal with that, do you? It explains the weak attempt to make hay with the Reid remark. But why you wanted to remind us of Trent Lott . . . that escapes me.
B-Rob
14 years ago
Missy —
Those terrorist acts were perpetrated by conservatives, Dems and GOPers alike. Liberal and moderate Dems and GOers were the ones doing the sit ins, risking and losing their lives ti FINALLY free the slaves. Conservatives, alas, sided with the Klan. That is the history that you cannot obfuscate by calling them “Dems” — as if those were NY Dems and Cali. Dems perpetrating the Klan murders and bombings in the name of “states rights.”
And nothing says “racially insensitive” better than Ronald Reagan praising states rights in Philadelphia, Mississippi, practically on top of the burial site of Goodman, Cheney and Schwerner. Reagan . . . the man you cons lionize as “what a president should be.” Wonder how many generations of Black voters the GOP lost with the symbolism of that speech . . . but I digress.
Donald Bly
14 years ago
B-Rob wastes so much of my time. It’s like a drug, addicting to read his ramblings knowing that no good can come of it yet I have to read on to see how he will counter each truth spoken of him. Mata says that it is the body of his blog posts that is indicative of his racsim and B-Rob comes back asking for a specific quote… so typical.
Just say NO! Maybe if there were a way to administer a high voltage shock each time a reader starts on a B-Rob post we could break the weak willed, like myself, from this destructive addiction.
But when thugs and white supremacists from all over the South converged on Oxford to mount a rebellion against federal marshals guarding Mr. Meredith, Mr. Lott, by all accounts, acted as a peacemaker. At the Sigma Nu house, he “spent the whole night dispatching phone calls and runners to order all his 120 fraternity brothers away from the riot,” according to William Doyle’s book “An American Insurrection.”
Trent Lott reportedly spent the previous night of the riot ordering his Sigma Nu brothers away from the scene of the fighting. While he was definitely not a riot leader or a rioter, or ever accused of advocating violent resistance, he was also not a visible or publicly notable advocate of “peace” in the highly emotional 2-week buildup to the riot. He was, by his own admission, then against integrating the university, like the vast majority of Mississippi whites.
On the night of the riot, however, he did something important — he reportedly pulled his 100-plus fraternity brothers away from the fighting, and only one Sigma Nu student was briefly detained by federal marshals. In this case Lott did the right thing, in the sense that he persuaded his fraternity brothers not to attack and kill federal law enforcement officers. That may be faint praise, but in the context of Oxford, Mississippi in 1962, it was something.
This reminds me of something I learned long ago:
A good attorney always knows what answer to expect prior to asking to the question.
The GOP, for its own reasons, to this day refuses to cut the cords with the unreconstructed elements of the party.
You guys just can’t seem to “quit” those dad gum White racist elements.
Yep, you’re right.
I sure wish that the GOP would purge that guy Byrd…you know, the guy who held the title of KKK Kleagle and Exalted Cyclops…..
Oh wait….that would be Senator Robert Byrd (D-WV)
Yeah….and you want to try and give gardening advice to the GOP.
Pummeled with the truth again.
Fish. Barrel. Some assembly required.
chrisfromneenah
14 years ago
Aye Chihuahua you are one of the few that make sense here. All this talk about DEMS being conservative and all conservatives are racist is ridiculous. I am very conservative but I don’t believe in all of what the Republicans are doing and what they did back in the 60s or before. I know a lot of my friends who are conservative think the same way. The south is where you had more of the slavery because that was their upbringing and they got sucked into the lies. Now Democrats are sucked into the lie that they are pro-minority. That is so hogwash. If you talk to any self made minority and I mean someone who was on their own and made it mostly because of their hard work, they will tell you that Democrats only coddle to the minorities by promising them all these handouts and advantages over others. So really who is the racist here. I believe we need to stop looking at color across the board no white, no african american, no hispanic, no native american. It is those that point out those differences that are racist. Now if the differences are pointed out before hand by someones comments or rude actions yes I agree then to speak out against racism. However, to insight racism just because one is a minority and there is disagreement is ridiculous. I am glad that we haven’t gotten to that YET with Obama. There is a lot I disagree with for what he is doing but if anyone calls me a racist for doing it then they are the biggest racist yet and is the reason why racism is so strong. That is causing more desegregation these days than anything. And to the person who said that African Americans don’t run for the Republican Party, I just googled it and took one of the first links and found over a hundred Republican African Americans. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_African-American_Republicans . Oh it is easy to type out supposed facts, it is another to bring them out accurately
URI
14 years ago
B-Rob
How about the Fugitive Slave Laws of 1793 and 1854? Democrats supported and passed them into law!
The Missouri Compromise was another Democrat beauty as well as The Kansas Nebraska Act; the Dred Scott and the Jim Crow Laws. The amendments to end slavery, make black slaves citizens and to give blacks the right to vote were opposed by Democrats. Democrats also rejected the Civil Rights Act of 1866/ 1875 and 1964!
I call that a pattern and and is sad to see that the Blacks in America have not been able to free themselves from crap who call themselves Democrats or Commies these days.
The Commie intellects of the USSR wanted to dominate the masses and I am telling you, I am not going to let a commie drive the United States to the ground like you are trying to do.
You are such a looser, you talk like one and act like too!
Go to Cuba or Venezuela! I hear that Commies there love looser like yourself. Sorry you cannot make it to China, they are too smart for your pissed brain.
For the record, let me state my position regarding the vile mass of human flesh that is Harry Reid.
I don’t really have a problem with his use of the word “negro”. As Mata so eloquently put it, Reid is a piece of a different time period.
Heck, during the last census there were over 56,000 people who self-identified themselves as “negro,” so if it’s good enough for someone to self-identify that way then it’s good enough for me.
My problem with Reid is this. By raising the issue of Obama’s skin tone and the lack of a “negro dialect” as positives for his electability Reid is aiming is gnarled, bony finger at We the People of America and saying, without saying it out loud, that we’re racist. He’s saying that if Obama had dark skin and spoke differently then he would be unelectable….
That’s absolutely outrageous and insulting.
That’s a slap in the face to all Americans. His words are an insult to all of the previous black candidates that have run for elective office as well unless, of course, they fit into Harry’s narrow version of what color and sound constitutes candidate electability.
Harry Reid is saying that the only reason Obama was electable was because his appearance and sound fit the right mold….hello Jim Crow and miscegenation laws which are based on…wait for it…a person’s looks, and as Harry was so kind to include, his/her sound as well.
I’ve always been a “content of character” kind of person. I don’t care about the color of a person’s skin. That’s irrelevant to me. I oppose Obama based on the content of his character in a myriad of different areas.
Harry’s character is dark and that darkness has not just suddenly manifest itself with these comments regarding Obama. He has proven over and over again that the content of his character is sorely lacking. Nevadans are showing that they disapprove of him as well…they were showing their disapproval before his words came back to haunt him.
No, Harry shouldn’t resign his position….let him stay there to serve as the poster child for everything that is wrong with liberalism in general, and the Democrat party specifically.
Let him stay there and serve as the ground zero pinpoint focus for the ire of the voters.
If Reid decides to tough this one out, he’s going to get shellacked in November and rightfully so.
Not just for his comments regarding Obama, but for so very many other things as well.
@B-Rob: If I had actually said anything remotely close to being “racist” you could quote it verbatim. But, no, you did not because you cannot.
I like your self-reverential dissertation about how open minded you are and how “all” your Black friends” didn’t like desegregation when they were teenagers — as if the feelings of a bunch of 16 year olds is a sensible way for the United States to set public policy.
voila… racist statement. Followed more by all the “you cons” crap you generalize. Or perhaps for your supersensitive self, I should have added that my white and Cubano high school friends also didn’t like being bussed away from their friends and neighborhood. But no. You seize upon that as a racial comment, as if I hold my friends as tokens to appease you.
Revelation, billy bob, racism crosses party lines because it’s a human flaw, driven by those… such as you… fomenting disdain and hate. To suggest no one may question the racism of a Democrat merely because they are not a party member is indeed the heart of your comments. Your sense of self superiority may give you a sense of peace at night, but while *you* skip-trod all around, you still never answer why you.. and YOUR POTUS… who enjoy fruitful benefits of opportunity want so desperately to condemn your posterity to a life of mediocrity and limitations.
You come here, spouting a veritable cascade of bizarre accusations… ie “The racists signs get applauded, not shunned.”. I’ve seen not once instance of this save in Pelosi’s mind. The tea party movement is one comprised of all political stripes who abhor the fiscal irreponsibility.
Are there neo nazis in the extreme right? And would I like them as far away from me as possible? You betcha. In fact, I’d prefer they no longer walked the planet. Just as your Black Panthers, “guarding” voting booths with walking sticks, should disappear right along with them. Yes… the Democrat party is the last stronghold of radical black renditionists. Funny how that works, eh? And while you’re at it, take your radical eco-terrorists as well. May they all perish in the depths of their own hell, away from the rest of us.
There are fringes that the majority of us deplore. You, however, are blind to your own.
Speaking of Glenn Beck… of which I never said he was my “hero”, BTW… you never did mention just how he managed to find an audience filled with nothing but black conservatives that don’t exist.
But I don’t wonder why minorities “avoid” the GOP like “the plague”… which they don’t, save in your mind. They just look at your party, which promises them gas in their car, heating oil, affirmative action reverse discrimination, and all their needs that will be provided by the neighboring rich guy who has more than they do. Social justice, you promise. You cater to a freeloader mentality, and promise they have no need for responsibility of self because government will be there in event they trip. Sounds like sheer nirvana to most.
Mediocrity and limits to achievement is what is really is. You are a destroyer of pride and ambition… all under a “protective” banner. But this they do not realize until it’s too late. For you see, if a few do manage to become the rich neighbor next door, you show up at their door to seize their personal rewards to give it to someone else.
There’s a reason that those that have lived under your vision of America in other countries reside in the GOP as it’s the closest thing to conservatism and individual freedom and opportunity going. It’s far from a perfect party, and filled with flawed humans, yes. But I identify with concepts, not people or political parties. And the concepts espoused by you and your ilk is a “remaking” of America that I will not willingly accept as long as I draw breath.
B-Rob
14 years ago
MataHarley, my soon to be ex-wife’s physician is a Black woman. Drives a Saab, son in private school, lives in a $400,000 brick house, attends church regularly and sings in the choir. She should be a GOPer by any measure. Want to know why she isn’t? Here is what you wrote:
“They [Black voters] just look at your party, which promises them gas in their car, heating oil, affirmative action reverse discrimination, and all their needs that will be provided by the neighboring rich guy who has more than they do. Social justice, you promise. You cater to a freeloader mentality, and promise they have no need for responsibility of self because government will be there in event they trip. Sounds like sheer nirvana to most.”
You took in idiotic video of like five poor Black people and you just judged the voting habits of 35 million Black people — lawyers, doctors, and accountants alike — by what you saw on that video.
That is what YOU THINK is the reason middle class and upper class Black people don’t vote GOP? You think it is because they have “a freeloader mentality” and enjoy having “no need for responsibility of self because government will be there in event they trip”? You think that is what Black people call “nirvana”? Please explain yourself. Who planted this “theory” in your brain? And have you ever actually TALKED TO any upper middle class Black people and asked them why they would rather be boiled in olive oil than give money to a GOP candidate?
Mata, it is because of people like you that Black people, Hispanics and Asians stay away from the GOP — in droves. You think any Hispanic people reading your remarks would not wonder what you think about THEM? You pejoratively judged people who worked their a$$es off to get through college and grad school — you judged them by a video of a few losers in one city? This is no different than the screeds we heard from the likes of Rush Limbaugh (college drop out), Glen Beck (no college), Karl Rove (college drop out) and Pat Buchanan (mediocre student) about Phi Beta Kappa Princeton grad, Yale Law Review editor and federal appellate court judge Sonia Sotomayor being “a racists” and not being “smart enough” in their judgment, to sit of the court next to White males who had half her credentials when they were elevated to the court. What do you think Black professionals thought when they heard that nonsense? Indeed, what do you think college educated White voters thought?
I was at a Thanksgiving dinner in 2002, chatting with a Black professional. I explained to him that, socioeconomically speaking, all Black professionals should be GOPers. But as I said at the time, the reason they aren’t is “Trent Lott and the unreconstructed racists in the party.” Then less that two weeks later, Trent made his statement praising the child rapist/segregationist Strom Thurmond. And my point was proved again. Alas, you just proved my point, too. Until the GOP rids itself of people like Trent Lott and, apparently, you, it wil continue to look like a meeting of a Alabama klavern instead of a viable political party.
B-Rob
14 years ago
Aye Chihuahua —
You say it is an “insult” to America to claim that Obama would not have been elected if he was darker and spoke differently. I have a suggestion for you:
call up some Black professionals you might know — friends, relatives, acquantances, vendors, whatever — and ask them what they think about Reid’s comments. My guess: 95% of them will agree with what Reid said. If you don’t think that Obama’s speaking abilities DIDN’T make him electable, I think you are naive.
I leave you with this from Ramesh Ponnuru:
“Lott’s comment implied that the country would have been better off keeping segregation and enforced white supremacy. What Reid said isn’t within a lightyear of that.”
@Donald Bly: One way BLOB keeps us from being more effective in reaching the Indepedents and other less well informed potential voters is by wasting our time in response to his moonbattery.
While I commend my fellow F.A. commenters and contributors for their efforts to respond to this Soros puppet, I really do feel our time would be better spent posting new information that would reach thousands and not waste our time responding to one lone loon.
Having said that, I’ll take just a few seconds to dredge up once again the real face of the Democrat Party: Robert Byrd, elected Exalted Cyclops of the KKK (an arm of the Democrat Party):
A Senator’s Shame
Byrd, in His New Book, Again Confronts Early Ties to KKK
West Virginia Democrat Robert C. Byrd, in his Senate office last week, has written a new book about his half-century in elective office. A fiddler and a student of history, Byrd has served twice as Senate majority leader. (By Melina Mara — The Washington Post)
By Eric Pianin Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, June 19, 2005
In the early 1940s, a politically ambitious butcher from West Virginia named Bob Byrd recruited 150 of his friends and associates to form a chapter of the Ku Klux Klan. After Byrd had collected the $10 joining fee and $3 charge for a robe and hood from every applicant, the “Grand Dragon” for the mid-Atlantic states came down to tiny Crab Orchard, W.Va., to officially organize the chapter.
As Byrd recalls now, the Klan official, Joel L. Baskin of Arlington, Va., was so impressed with the young Byrd’s organizational skills that he urged him to go into politics. “The country needs young men like you in the leadership of the nation,” Baskin said.
The young Klan leader went on to become one of the most powerful and enduring figures in modern Senate history. Throughout a half-century on Capitol Hill, Sen. Robert C. Byrd (D-W.Va.) has twice held the premier leadership post in the Senate, helped win ratification of the Panama Canal treaty, squeezed billions from federal coffers to aid his home state, and won praise from liberals for his opposition to the war in Iraq and his defense of minority party rights in the Senate.
Despite his many achievements, however, the venerated Byrd has never been able to fully erase the stain of his association with one of the most reviled hate groups in the nation’s history.
…
Byrd’s indelible links to the Klan — the “albatross around my neck,” as he once described it — shows the remarkable staying power of racial issues more than 40 years after the height of the civil rights movement. Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.) learned that lesson the hard way at a birthday party in December 2002, when his nostalgic words about Sen. Strom Thurmond (R-S.C.), who ran for president as a segregationist in 1948, caused a public uproar and cost Lott the majority leader’s post.
…
Byrd’s book offers a truncated description of his days with the Klan that does not completely square with contemporaneous newspaper accounts and letters that show he was involved with the Klan throughout much of the 1940s, and not merely for two or three years.
According to his book, Byrd wrote to Samuel Green, an Atlanta doctor and “Imperial Wizard” of the Ku Klux Klan, in late 1941 or early 1942, expressing interest in joining. Some time later, he received the letter from Baskin, the “Grand Dragon” of mid-Atlantic states, saying he would come to Byrd’s home in Crab Orchard whenever Byrd had rounded up 150 recruits for the Klan.
When Baskin finally arrived, the group gathered at the home of C.M. “Clyde” Goodwin, a former local law enforcement official. When it came time to choose the “Exalted Cyclops,” the top officer in the local Klan unit, Byrd won unanimously.
…
Byrd wrote that he continued as a “Kleagle” recruiting for the Klan until early 1943, when he and his family left Crab Orchard for a welding job in a Baltimore shipyard. Returning to West Virginia after World War II ended in 1945, he launched his political career, but not before writing another letter, to one of the Senate’s most notorious segregationists, Theodore Bilbo (D-Miss.), complaining about the Truman administration’s efforts to integrate the military.
Byrd said in the Dec. 11, 1945, letter — which would not become public for 42 more years with the publication of a book on blacks in the military during World War II by author Graham Smith — that he would never fight in the armed forces “with a Negro by my side.” Byrd added that, “Rather I should die a thousand times, and see old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again, than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels.“
No doubt BLOB forgives Robert Byrd for wanting to treat BLOB’s relatives like slaves, but If find it hard to do so.
@B-Rob, you are indeed pathetically hilarious. It’s you, and your party, who cater to the freeloader mentality. A vast margin of Dem voters do so because of the party’s social welfare policies. The vast majority of those who vote GOP do so because they want the party’s fiscal responsibility (which I agree they have unbelievably FUBAR’ed for a decade plus) and minimal government intervention into our private lives. In other words, people vote policy platforms.
Social welfare caters to the freeloader mentality, and destroys incentive and pride. It is the hallmark of the Dem platform…. that the average American is incapable of making wise economic decisions for themselves, and a vast net of safety nets must be put into place, funded by that rich guy down the road.
Some of the more affluent mistakenly confuse Dem government mandates to spread the wealth as charity and have good intent. That’s a philosophical education problem. Charity is not obtained by the point of an IRS gun, or threats of jail time for not paying mandated taxes. And the charities that actually pass on most of the funds collected to the intended recipients are not, I assure you, government run. If there was ever a behemoth that siphoned off administrative funds for ineffciency, the federal government is the quintessential model for a losing business proposition. As in all socialist/communist models throughout history, the chosen few at the top live in opulence, and the population becomes equalized in a level just above what that government considers “poverty”. The idea is not to tear down those enjoying success in order to “spread” economic conditions. The idea is to encourage others to rise to a higher level, and not hinder their way by sucking their wallets dry for social welfare nets that are exploited by govt administrators and many abusers alike.
Now I have no idea what “video” you are discussing, because it’s obviously not the studio audience filled with black conservatives of all income classes on Glenn Beck. Or perhaps your ability to count is as challenged as your socio-perspectives on capitalism and free market. But I didn’t link to any videos other than the Beck series.
But to point out your absurdity of prosecution, you accuse me of characterizing “35 million” professional blacks using some unknown video of “five poor black people”, then turn around and characterize all black professionals by some guy you chatted up at a Thanksgiving day soiree 7-8 years ago. Then you discuss your lucky-she’s-soon-to-be-your-ex-wife (assuming your face to face personality has the same charm of your internet presence) as a prime example that you believe yourself to be ominpotently correct in how and why any and every minority votes the way it does.
Who the heck made you omnipotent today?
Again you prove the mud you sling comes from the mud you wiped off your own face.
So now it’s “people like me” that drives those away from the GOP. Even more absurd. I’ll have to forward this to my multicultural friends, as they could use a laugh. They don’t want government aid and your nanny party handouts. They want what I do… stay out of our way so we can make it on our own. And stop taking what we earn to redistribute it to your selective classes of Americans.
I am not Republican. I am conservative, and officially a political waif. Frankly my disdain for both sides of the aisles has risen to unmeasurable lengths (as Mike’s A can attest…) But I will point out that since YOUR POTUS has been elected, the conservative mindset of “leave me the hell alone and stop robbing my wallet at federal/state gunpoint” has been increasing… across party lines. It’s not a migration to the GOP – and I’ve personally never suggested it was – but it’s very distinctly to conservative fiscal values and the demand we maintain control over our own destinies and earnings.
People end up having to register as some party member eventually, but who they vote for comes down to the candidate. I mentioned to you that I miss JC Watts, and look forward to he only candidate I’ve seen that gives me reason for excitement, LTC Allen West. I then asked you just why your party, and people like you, demonize your own race when they attempt to serve in a party you don’t approve of.
Instead you hurdle the Uncle Tom spittle…. you, against your own. I might correct your accusation that “people like me” are the reason minorities stay away in droves. In fact, you might just look at the abuse and punishment you heap upon your peers as one darn good reason instead. Intimidate is, afterall, the centerpiece of Alinsky community organizing success… coupled with making sure the masses feel cheated, miserable, and envious.
Congratulations for plotting the oppression of your own, billy bob. Hope you sleep well at night for doing so when those chickens land at your roost.
B-Rob
14 years ago
Chihuahua —
You said the following:
“By raising the issue of Obama’s skin tone and the lack of a ‘negro dialect’ as positives for his electability Reid is aiming is gnarled, bony finger at We the People of America and saying, without saying it out loud, that we’re racist. He’s saying that if Obama had dark skin and spoke differently then he would be unelectable….
“That’s absolutely outrageous and insulting.”
THAT is what you find outrageous and insulting? Er, yeah. Do me a favor: ask a bunch of Black professionals you might know — friends, collegues, relatives, whatever — whether they were “insulted” by Reid noting the OBVIOUS — that Obama’s looks and his manner of speech DID make him more electable. I think your “insult” from Reid recognizing that RACE MATTERS is quite misplaced.
“They [Black voters] just look at your party, which promises them gas in their car, heating oil, affirmative action reverse discrimination, and all their needs that will be provided by the neighboring rich guy who has more than they do. Social justice, you promise. You cater to a because government will be there in event they trip. Sounds like sheer nirvana to most.”
* * * * *
Why not just admit your post was insulting and move on?
See, I did not write that. No one put words in your mouth. You basically said that the reason my wife’s doctor, and Black people like her, and Black people in general, vote Dem is because of . . . welfare? How does that make any sense to you?
W.t.f. is wrong with you people?
And don’t try to twist it, either. I was talking about Black people in general and you went all “welfare queen” on me.
Nope, the reason she votes Dem, Mata, is because of people like you. Both the past forty years history of the party and the current make up makes her not welcome. Just look at your phrasing when you are explaining why Black people vote Dem — you mentioned “freeloader mentality” and “no need for responsibility of self.” You think that applies to the Black middle class and professional class as well as the riff raff! Welfare!
That, Mata, is why Glen Beck’s ability to round up 15 Black conservatives are, shall we say, not impressive. See if you can get them elected to any position of authority in a GOP town and then I will be impressed by the magnanimous attitudes of conservative Whites. Until then, count me in the “underwhelmed” catagory.
Another thing — why did YOU start referring to Black conservatives as “Uncle Tom”? I certainly didn’t. I fact, I was talking about why there are so few Blacks willing to align themselves with the GOP. I said NOTHING AT ALL about Black conservatives, or Black GOPers in general. So to the extent you mention Uncle Toms and Black GOPers in a sentence together, that is you projecting your own “issues” with those Black folk; it has nothing to do with moi.
Lastly, Mata, I never said I was Black. What made you think I was?
B-Rob
14 years ago
Mike’s America —
Nice try at changing the subject to Bob Byrd, former Klansman and Obama mentor. Kind of an interesting side point about his sordid but redeemed past.
But back to the subject: we know why Mata thinks Black people don’t vote GOPer, even when they are in the professional and upper middle classes. So what is your theory?
Mata — here is a hint: before you go developing any more theories about why minorities vote the way they do, why don’t you try to . . . oh, I don’t know . . . ASK SOME?! Try it . . . you might learn something. Because you will never understand minority voters sitting with an all white grouping of conservatives. All you will learn there is what you white cons THINK is the reason.
@B-Rob: Nice to know you have a soft spot for former Klansmen. It’s just Republicans that you damn to hell for all eternity.
What an ASS!
Flyovercountry
14 years ago
B-Rob has tipped his hand. He is a Saudi funded sock puppet or lackey. Al Jazeera is his credible source on Sarah Palin’s core principals. Ha!
Black Professionals who openly supported John McCain:
Larry Elder
Thomas Sowell
Alan Keyes
Walter Williams
Roy Innes
J.C. Watts
Steven F. Smith
Charles Evers
Edward W. Brooke III.
Lynn Swan
Kevin Fobbs
Deroy Murdock
Shannon Reeves
Sherman Parker
Ken Blackwell
Keith Butler
Wayne Perryman
Otto Banks
Michael Steele
Alan West
Vern Williams
Maurice Washington
Zachary Ward
Claude Allen
Renee Amoore
Lynette Boggs
Jeanette Bradley
Janice Rogers Brown
No, billy bob. That is what YOU wrote… taking the privilege of inserting “black-with-a-capital-A voters” into my words. My paragraph said “minorities”, and did not single out any race or income class. That you and your racist/renditionist attitude. Only “black” is important? Pompous as well as unendearing. Oh my….
And as a reminder, here is my paragraph in full, unaltered by your intervention and implications:
But I don’t wonder why minorities “avoid” the GOP like “the plague”… which they don’t, save in your mind. They just look at your party, which promises them gas in their car, heating oil, affirmative action reverse discrimination, and all their needs that will be provided by the neighboring rich guy who has more than they do. Social justice, you promise. You cater to a freeloader mentality, and promise they have no need for responsibility of self because government will be there in event they trip. Sounds like sheer nirvana to most.
snip
You basically said that the reason my wife’s doctor, and Black people like her, and Black people in general, vote Dem is because of . . . welfare?
That is why people vote one party’s candidate or another… because they align with a party’s platform/concept. For the Dems, your platform is social welfare and justice…. affirmative action, federal and state subsidies up the yin yang.
If you believe that’s insulting, then I suggest you contact your DNC chair and complain about your party’s social welfare platform. The heart and foundation of your entire membership concept.
Nope, the reason she votes Dem, Mata, is because of people like you. Both the past forty years history of the party and the current make up makes her not welcome.
My my… the current make up makes her “not welcome”? LOL I’m not even Republican, for heavens sake! Well, there’s enough fringe racists on the right within the GOP without them adding your hypersensitive fringe racists on the left to it as well. But if you are missing exactly how offensive that statement is all by yourself, then you’ve confirmed you are doomed with your prejudice to the grave. So be it. I shall shed no tears.
I see you upped the Glenn Beck audience to 15. It seems your math and counting ability hasn’t improved. Two suggestions… watch the series, and take off your shoes for some help with the math.
Patvann
14 years ago
“soon-to-be ex wife….”
Hmmm. Says volumes. I guess it isn’t just us!
B-Rob
14 years ago
So here is the thought construct here:
Conservatives say they are not racists, but liberals are. (See, for example, Rush Limbaugh re Sonia Sotomayor and Glen Beck re Obama).
Posters here say the Dems are the racist party.
So how do they explain why 70% of the minority voters, regardless of geography or educational background, cast their lot with the “racist” liberals and the “racist” Dem Party?
Why, those minorities are all concerned about welfare and afraid of being called an Uncle Tom, that’s why!
Cons, unless you figure out that some BIG part of your argument is based on a falacy, you are condemned to be a regional, aging lily white party in a time when the country is getting more diverse. Think about it . . . .
B-Rob
14 years ago
Mata —
I was wrong . . . again. I stand corrected. You did NOT say that Blacks voted Dem because of welfare. You actually said:
“But I don’t wonder why minorities ‘avoid’ the GOP like ‘the plague’… which they don’t, save in your mind. They just look at your party, which promises them gas in their car, heating oil, affirmative action reverse discrimination, and all their needs that will be provided by the neighboring rich guy who has more than they do. Social justice, you promise. You cater to a freeloader mentality, and promise they have no need for responsibility of self because government will be there in event they trip. Sounds like sheer nirvana to most.”
I stand corrected — it not just Blacks who you believe have the “freeloader mentality” and are looking for government cheese. No, you think it is all the minorities that are so motivated. And that is why you think they vote Dem.
Glad we got that cleared up.
Flyovercountry
14 years ago
B-Rob,
Cons, unless you figure out that some BIG part of your argument is based on a falacy, you are condemned to be a regional, aging lily white party in a time when the country is getting more diverse. Think about it . . . .
Your above statement speaks volumes about you. I don’t cast my vote based on who else is casting their ballot like me. I am casting my vote based on core principles and values. The majority is not always right. Several instances in history should remind you of this, (flat earth, belief that our planet is the center of the universe, sickness caused by demons in the bloodstream…) Your statement is made even sillier when you consider that noone in our Nation could possibly win an election without the votes of a lot of lilly white folks voting for them, and that includes the Zero who got elected President. I see nothing wrong with being lilly white. I was born that way, it is not how I define myself. Apparently though, it would seem that you are incapable of defining anybody in any other manner other than skin color. Think about it……..
In a different world I would like to see Reid quit. However, in the world we live in this would be disastrous. Another dem, untainted by Washington but of the same mindset, would run for his seat and maybe win. Who can tell about the electorate? Sometimes I think we are our own worse enemy.
This is just another double standard that the democrats pose. I have seen Republicans do it also. However, they is a recent article that does explain this. It is about people having to much power it is at: http://bit.ly/5nNCCB. So not surprising that this is happening. This is why we need a change in government. A demand for a new direction toward protectionism. I talk about it in my blog chrisfromneenah.blogspot.com. Both Democrats and Republicans and all other Americans can agree. NO MORE FREE TRADE. Bring back the jobs to America.
Yeah, perfect said dear, we are our own enemy!!!! If we can control our mind and words we can have a better life.
Does this mean that Reid is a knuckle draggin’ redneck ignorant conservative tea bagging “racist” too? Heck if we can be called all these names for being conservative, what do you call the Senate majority leader who is racist?
I am a foreigner with a rather poor English, so I don’t have a real sense of how hard hitting those words can be for the average american citizen.
But what was exactly the offense? Mr. Reid said “light-skinned” with no “negro” dialect.
Mr. Obama is indeed a light skinned black (or half black) person and he speaks very elocuently, so Reid simply said what is obvious.
It is a fact that unfortunately, african americans tend to be in the lower classes, and it’s no wonder they have a poorer education. This is due to historical and social reasons that I’m not going to discuss here.
Should society simply pretend that this is not true?
Is that what it means being politically correct? Ignoring reality and using euphemisms?
Should we say “african american” instead of simply black? What’s wrong with accepting that indeed, african americans are black??
I imagine that perhaps “negro” has a negative connotation in English. In Spanish it simply means “black”. Black is a color, there is nothing to be ashamed about.
If I were an coloured man, a succesful coloured man with a brilliant personality, and someone called me negro I would just say “yes, so?”.
I mean, aren’t you all drawning in a glass of water?
VERY GOOD ARTICLE WELL WRITTEN AN PUT TOGETHER FOR
MORE LIKE THIS http://bloggnet.co.cc/
If conservatives do not understand the difference between Reid (an early Obama supporter) touting him as a good presidential candidate and VIABLE because of how he looks and how he speaks (at a time when may Dem voters, Black and Clintonian alike, did NOT think him viable), versus Trent Lott looking back wistfully and wishing that child rapist/segregationist Strom Thurmond had won the 1948 election and, conceivably, set back desegregation efforts another decade or so . . . .
People, let’s get real! Trent Lott was an unreconstructed backer of the Southern Partisan crowd and the proudly racist White Citizens Council . . . Oh, sorry . . . I forgot they renamed themselves the CONSERVATIVE Citizens Council. My bad.
Honestly, cons, the GOP has about as many minority backers as would attend your average Klan meeting. The Dems, in contrast, nominated and then ELECTED the first minority president, with about 95% backing of Blacks and Hispanic and Asian support in the high 70s. Obama nominated a hyperqualified, experienced, Ivy League credentialed Hispanic to the Supreme Court, and what was the GOP response? To call her “unqualified” and question whether she knew English! What the fcuk is wrong with you people?
Cons, this is NOT a fight you want to have, comparing the sentiment toward minorities in the two parties when you had a flat out racist Tom Tancredo running for your nomination, GOP congressment referring to Obama as “uppity”, overtly racist signs at McCain/Palin rallies and tea bagger rallies alike, and Stormfront.org backing your candidate! Just let this one go . . . because it will only make you look even worse!
@Luis González:
I totally agree Luis. I would like to have you come to our social network at http://www.heywhateversocial.info. You have the perfect thought process for our positive attitude social network. Too many times people make a big deal out of words rather than looking at the true heart of the matter. What really is going on here is that Reid is bringing out a specific truth that is to the Democratics advantage. However, what you may not know behind the lines is, if he did say what he said, it is probably because he care more about how Obama looked to others rather than solely on his ideas and character. These days in America, sad to say, it is as important how you look as much as what you believe in or your true convictions. Again, both parties do this way too much.
chrisfromneenah —
You wrote —
“These days in America, sad to say, it is as important how you look as much as what you believe in or your true convictions.”
The idea that you write that, given the history of Jim Crow and segregation and discrimination and slavery and antimiscegination laws in this country, all of which had as a FIRST PRINCIPAL that “how you look” is determinative of your life chances and the choices you could make about your own future, shows that you are either being increadibly obtuse for partisan purposes, or you are stunningly ignorant. Which is it?
@B-Rob:
Are you trying to claim that looks no longer play a role in US society?
I do believe that looks play a role. That is why I am sad. It shouldn’t be that way. Also, I believe that people can rise above how they look. Yes, everyone doesn’t have the same chance at first but I know that I don’t look like Mr. Universe but I feel confident in myself and in my own talents that I will excel. I am going to encourage everyone I can talk to to do the same. If you don’t think this is possible, then go ahead stay negative. See how far you get and who surrounds you in the end.
I have to say that sometimes the depth of your personal racism astounds me, billy bob.
Whoops… maybe not.
@Blob
Bwhahahahahahah!!!!!
EVERY F****N one of these horrific laws were put in place by DEMOCRATS! You stupid son of a bitch!!!!!
@Patvann:
Pssst….Don’t tell ParaLegal2 that the Dims were also the people who tried to block the passage of the Civil Rights Act…..
Also, don’t tell him that his party is the one who has a former member of the KKK serving in the US Senate…the guy who held the title of Kleagle and Exalted Cyclops…
And the South Side Shyster wants to lecture us about racism.
Hysterical.
From Larry Elder. Well-known right-wing black-hater…
If only blacks knew of the true history of the Democratic Party.
Hey Blob…Wanna keep going with this? I have at least a half-a-gig worth of racial comments by DEMOCRATS dissin the Black Man.
Freakin masochist, go find another site to spew your hate.
Brainless rob, every time you post you hurt your cause and your side of the aisle.
You are ignorant in the extreme and serve up endless meatball pitches that Mata or the other posters hit into orbit with monotonous regularity.
I’m surprised some other moonbat hasn’t come here to declare you a Rovian plant whose sole purpose is to make the left look bad. You are to logic what Ted Kennedy was to being a lifeguard.
As was stated above, the DEMS were the ones to create all kinds of segregationist laws. It was the DEMS who trailed significantly to the Reps in their support of the Civil Rights Act.
To Luis Gonzalez:
Yes, Negro is used frequently in Spanish and it has a better connotation than in English in the United States. Yet it is offensive. I could not call Che Negro to Chavez. Many educated Hispanics who have studied American history and understand the meaning of this word would rather use the word ‘moreno’ and not “negro”.
Words have meanings and what the Progressive liberals are trying to establish is that there is a double standard as to what a conservative white can say and as to what a “liberal’ white can say. The Liberals are trying to hijack and to corner the words racists as mean to describe white conservatives only. So, if white conservatives oppose the President: You are racist!….if the media portraits the President in a negative way: you are racist. If you protest to defend the constitution of the country you so love: you are racist! but never when liberals do it.
To whose who may not have thought of the obvious….
I’ve stayed out of the Reid comment fray for a very specific reason. And I assure you, it has nothing to do with political parties or racism, but age.
Negro is a term very much associated with a bygone era and was used sans any derogatory intent by many Americans… and that includes Martin Luther King. Too many of you live as if today’s PC vocabulary was written in stone for all time. Oh but that so many of you could have walked even a short year in our times.
It does not surprise me that Reid uses this term with such ease based on his age… not because he is biased, but because because of a lifetime of association with that term commonly used in his heyday. Remember that the Civil Rights Act was not until the 60s, when Reid was in his late 30s or early 40s.
Life was quite different in my youth than it is today. Now we are saddled our new “rules” of communication to which we find we must adhere in order to avoid media incitement and condemnation. Negro was not derogatory in my youth, however the “n” word… as so many of you like to refer to it… certainly was. In that era, the two were not to be confused as the same. And frankly the fact that it’s politically incorrect for me to even type a word used commonly in broadcast hip hop popular music… but that I never used in my life … simply because I am not the right color of skin is more upsetting to me than the existence of the word itself.
Such is the 1st Amendment social “enforcement” in the late 20th and 21st century. My personal gut feeling? Glad to be old, and you can all have it – and keep it – thank you very much.
For a reality check for the PC correct “youth”. Please examime the age demographics of the population based on the 2000 census in the graphic below. Try to imagine a historic era to which you are appear truly clueless. Read the speeches of civil rights activists then… of all colors. Then attempt to genuinely decipher what is really intended as an offensive verbal onslaught using those examples to fill in what you cannot experience.
Should Reid, a politican and immersed in PC media ‘tolerance”, have known the repercussions of using this term? But of course.
Did he revert to what was his upbringing in a moment of privacy with “friends”, not assuming it would come back and hit him later? Absolutely. Wise to fall back into ways of his middle age? Apparently not in this day and time. Another part about being old, I guess. It’s hard to get used to the fact that if you take a dump this morning, it can be used against you somewhere, somehow tomorrow. That stripping of privacy is still hard for many of us to absorb on a “real” 24/7 level.
Reid using the world Negro is probably not his greatest offense in his comments. In my opinion, I was offended by the inference that a specific dialect can found as the deciding factor… or considered unappealing to the American masses. That any particular dialect or regional accent is paramount to a POTUS is, and should be, insulting to us all. Were that true, Dubya would never have been elected… Kennedy with his New England Bostonian twang, nor Jimmah Carter with his southern drawl, for that matter. All of our high offices candidates are educated.
You might find that the “offensive” truth is triangulated somewhere between politics, racism, and generational upbringing. Fact is, I don’t believe Reid was being intentionally prejudiced with his statement… he was just showing his age. But I also believe that Steele is brillantly astute – politically, and generationally – when he points out that the dual hypocrisy is running amok.
Is it overblown to demand Reid’s resignation merely to score political points? Yes. But I tend to see Steele’s educational point when he echoes this sentiment, as this is exactly what the GOP has had to endure from the other side. Point made. Pushing the issue beyond media coverage and to the point of absurdity? Nope…
I swear – shy of pointing out the hypocrisy – this is like referee’ing kindergarden boxing matches. Steele has made the point. We have bigger fish to fry. The Dems will not get in the least big singed by prolonging such a petty battle with dedicated intensity. Why? Look one more time at the US age demographics, and you’ll figure out why most of the older, voting population is simply moving on from this.
Patvann —
The only thing sillier than your posts is . . . well, there may not be anything more silly than that.
Where to start. The Jim Crow laws. One thing you obviously know nothing about is the breadth of the state sponsored segregation. You had Jim Crow laws throughout the South, and the same kinds of laws in the North. But one thing is obviously so: you had Jim Crow in ANY STATE that was controlled by conservatives. For example, Ohio was not a Dem state, yet you had extensive segregation in housing. Indiana, which had no Dems in the 20s, was the headquarters of the Klan. The South and Southwest? Fugidaboutit!
So fast forward to the 1960s. You have the March on Washington. Truman desegregated the military, Eisenhower and Kennedy did their part, now there is a press for more extensive civil rights laws. After Kennedy died, the Dem President Johnson twisted arms aplenty to pass the civil rights laws.
There were some arms he did not have to twist, of course. Northern GOPers, moderate GOPers (y’all call them “RINOS” now) and liberal and moderate Dems — they all backed the new laws.
But you want to guess who opposed all the Civil Rights Acts? The conservatives. Bill Buckley wrote articles praising the quasi-enslavement of Blacks by their “betters”, the chaw-chewing rednecks of Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi, etc. Robert Bork wrote articles about how it was an afront to “freedom” to force states to treat Black people equally to whites. And the GOP platform in 1964, and its standard bearer, Barry Goldwater, opposed ending those last elements of slavery. But it was conservatives of the Democratic stripe who REALLY fought against the anti-segregation efforts. And the New York City salon conservatives? They clinked their martini glasses together and gave a rousing cheer for the continued second class citizenship of the Africans in their midst.
So there it is, Patvann — no matter how you try to spin it, it wasn’t “Democrats” who opposed the end of Jim Crow, or Republicans: it was “conservatives”. A Dem president signed the statutes, for God’s sake, and tons of Dems voted for it. Lots of Rockefeller Republicans and Yankees, too. No, son, it was CONSERVATIVES who opposed the end of quasi-slavery, most because they were flat out racist, some in the name of “freedom” — freedom for White folks, that is. Liberals and moderates of both parties, thank God, drowned out their ignorant cries. But it is the conservative party, the GOP, that still has not lived down being on the wrong side of justice. And with the “enlightened” leadership the party has now, it most likely never will come to terms with being flat out wrong.
Chihuahua, Patvann and Hard Right —
Larry Elder is a friend of a friend. That said, he is being intentionally obtuse. And you all know it, too.
It was CONSERVATIVES who opposed the Civil Rights Acts . . . you know . . . YOU GUYS! Some of the opponants were Dems and some were GOPers. But they were all CONSERVATIVES!
Indeed, all of those conservative Dems, the ones who opposed the Civil Rights Act, they all moved to the GOP. Which is why there are very few White Dems in the South anymore. Conversely, the Yankee Republicans are all Dems now . . . which is why there are practically no GOPers from Maine all the way down to Jersey.
And I noticed one thing — y’all didn’t even bother to address what I wrote, which is why the Harry Reid comment was NOT the same as Trent Lott cheering on the forces of segregation. But then again, he was one of the good ole boys who rioted at the University of Mississippi when the feds tried to enroll James Meredith. Trent Lott threw his lot in with the White/Conservative Citizens Council and Southern Partisans. A leopard does not change its spots.
Mata —
Please identify what I said that was “racist”. Is it “racist” to note that Trent Lott was pro-segregation? Or that Strom Thurmond was a child rapist and a segregationist? And that is who Trent Lott was praising?
And the rest of you — I still don’t see anyone explaining to me why it was OK for Trent Lott to wish the segregationist had won over the pro-integration Truman. But spew away with more revisionist history, folks! Spew away!
I agree 100%, Mata. Reid’s word-use is far less “bad”, than the hypocrisy of those around him.
Your racism is not found in a specific sentence or comment, b-rob. But if you want one example, you can check out the first paragraph in a comment I made to you on another thread.
I occasionally wonder if I had you in a room, one on one, would you deliver your opinions with such resentment and anger. You reveal a consistency of lumping conservatives with white supremecist mentality as an underlying current in your collective dissertations. As one with a wide diverse group of friends and working cohorts (race, cultures and politically), your mentality is that which I find the most difficult to accept quietly. You aren’t old enough to experience first hand the segregation/desegregation years as a young adult, and merely rely upon racial past injustices via history and stories. Your less than subtle anger is truly baffling. Just as it is with a POTUS who is determined to “remake” the same America that provided him with a plethora of opportunity, and has catapulted him to historic legacy … good or bad.
Yet, for your posterity, you seek safe, level mediocrity… and feel morally superior and protective in doing so.
I have patience with those who were the generations before me, who experienced the injustice first hand. Oddly enough, it is never those who are whining and complaining about the past. As for those my age, we were the ones who were thrown together by mandates by cautious parents and grandparents, but didn’t necessarily harbor the fears and hatred of elders. We were those who started the genuine social desegration. Not because of a mandate, but by our common interests and exposure during school hours first, and today by neighborhood proximity.
And I’m here to tell you, everyone was, at first, thrown by a tizzy. Desegregation was not popular amongst my black high school friends. It was an inconvenience, an insult, and… in the end… a forced social experiment that perhaps increased understanding in both sides over time. We all found ourselves coveting some aspect of the other’s former school life. But perhaps you are unaware that no one wanted to be uprooted from their friends and neighborhood merely to fulfill some political racially mixed quota to emulate “fairness”.
This is not a defense of segregation, nor a proponent of desegregation. Quite frankly, most of us felt it wasn’t the government’s business to rip our lives apart for political fodder. But we lived with it, made the best of it, and grew from it all. You are part of the result of our growth… not a mover and shaker in that growth.
Today, segregation – and even desegregation – is but a historic adventure and/or nightmare to be regurgitated by those who never lived it, but still hold a grudge. But such disdain between humans was never isolated to the color of your skin… just as schoolyard bullies will be around as long as there are schoolyards.
So perhaps I should expand that while I believe you to be a racist… well, let’s rephrase that and call you a “black renditionist” (the opposite of a white supremecist in my mind)… you also present yourself as a political snob and one who engages in class warfare. None are particularly flattering to your cyber personality. (and I certainly hope the personal one is more engaging…)
But the last time I looked, we were a nation of individualists, with a potpourri of experiences and beliefs. Something you choose to forget in your campaign to influence others.
Why should we assume that Reid would chance to damage the reliance of the Black vote except through stupidity or overconfidence? Keeping the Black Voter at peace with the Democrat Party and its 21st Century Plantation system of Black slavery is paramount to survival. Keeping the Democrat Voter mired in stupidity and the willingness to follow blindly requires careful programing of the Victim Syndrome rather than the typical American ideal that you can succeed if you put forth an effort. Of course this reinforces the Socialist System with its all knowing and all caring Elites and their anointed right and duty to lead the downtrodden to dependency and failure. Thus the Democrat Politician has vital importance to those who fear failure and to those who are too mentally enfeebled to even try.
Er…that’s not true.
From the 1964 GOP platform:
Dayum!
Other than being woefully and completely wrong on the facts…again…you weave a pretty good tale.
PS…Before you dash off on a different bunny trail, Goldwater opposed the Civil Rights Act based on his belief that it was an unconstitutional encroachment of the Fed Gov’t on the States and their rights, not based on any racial bias.
@MataHarley:
WOW Mata, that was so good I had to go back and read it again. A trip down memory lane, only thing missing was the fear and turmoil we watched on the nightly news.
The little girls dying in the church bombing, cross burnings, the loss/murders of civil rights workers, the violence at the marches, then the assasination of MLK. Also can’t forget George Wallace and his ignorant escapades. It wasn’t until later that I became aware of the other democrats, Fulbright, Gore, etc. that were doing their best to throw a monkey wrench into Civil Rights legislation.
Then, when we were stationed at Ft. Bragg in the late 60s, AA civilians were still using their own drinking fountains in downtown Fayetteville, moving off the sidewalks, just humbly moved out of the way, eyes down.
My sister-in-law and I also saw a billboard of klansmen on horses that said, “you are entering KKK country” when we drove down to NC to join my husband after he finished jump school at Ft. Benning. We had a neighbor family that would scream “damn yankees” at us because they were angry that we had my husband’s black friends come to our home.
Having grown up in northern IL, that kind of thing never happened, it was a shock, sad, shameful and so backward. When I was in school we went to neighborhood schools, later the various ethnic groups gravitated to their own sections of the city, it wasn’t until my children started school that we began to have what a few decided were, deseg issues.
Still no black against white or vice versa, just forced busing the children and families suffered through so the grand poobahs could pat themselves on the back thinking they had all the answers. Yet not wanting to face the facts that they were wasting money that would be better spent on education, instead of desegregation. Years of a big mess that failed.
But, a couple of good things came of it, similar to you and your friends, not enough to make up for the turmoil everyone faced imo, we also made some good friends we never would have met had it not been for the busing we all hated.
@ Mata —
If I had actually said anything remotely close to being “racist” you could quote it verbatim. But, no, you did not because you cannot.
I like your self-reverential dissertation about how open minded you are and how “all” your Black friends” didn’t like desegregation when they were teenagers — as if the feelings of a bunch of 16 year olds is a sensible way for the United States to set public policy.
You skip trip trop all over the place, think you are insulting me, but avoid the central point of my post. In case you didn’t “get” it, here it is:
The GOP should tend to its own sordid racial history (foisted on the party of Lincoln by its conservatives) before trying to make hay out of an INTERESTING comment made by a SUPPORTER of the country’s first Black president.
You cons LOVE to post about how the Dems are the racist party. Your hero Glen Beck called our president a racist on Fox News, then when challenged to explain what the fcuk he meant by the phrase “White culture” (a phrase right out of Stormfront.org — sorry about the .com link). A number of your leaders called an Ivy League educated federal judge with close to 20 years experience on the bench a “racist” based on her calling herself a “wise Latina” — but the charge against her was led by Jeff Sessions, a guy disqualified from the federal bench because he referred to Black men as “boy” and chastised a Black lawyer for the way he talked to “White folks”. A GOP congressman called the President “uppity” during the campaign — a word that many Black writers noted is usually followed by the “n word.” Tom Tancredo. Pat Buchanan . . . need I even say more?
There is a reason that minorities of all backgrounds — South Asian, Korean, Chinese, Mexican, Honduran, Jamaican, Black . . . you name it — avoid the GOP like the plague. It is because of the racist and racially insensitive history of the modern GOP and its leadership. If you guys tossed the racists out of your party with half the gusto that you toss moderates overboard, you could remake yourself into something that the SOCIALLY CONSERVATiVE pro-gun, anti-abortion, anti-welfare middle and upper class minorities might want to associate with. Instead, you look at the McCain/Palin rallies (check YouTube’s link of the rally in Strongsville, Ohio, my old hometown) and the tea bagger rallies. The racists signs get applauded, not shunned. THAT is why the GOP gets very few Hispanics and Asians, even though the rhetoric is anti-Black — because if you are so racist against Blacks in public, what would those Asians and Hispanics think you say about them when they are not around? That is why no Black people run as Republicans ANYWHERE, especially the South — because the GOP has become the last haven for the White racist. And everyone knows it. It is time for the GOP to tend to its own garden and stop worrying about the supposed weeds in the Dems camp.
— Chihuahua
As I always tell my lady friend, “I am right about 85% of the time.” You are right about the 1964 GOP platform. It DID state some support for the civil rights acts. mea culpe
But Barry Goldwater, the lead candidate, opposed it. And so did the National Review. The Klan and the White Citizens Council (later called the Conservative Citizens Council) agreed with them. And Trent Lott was a riot leader at Oxford. And Strom Thurmond, the man Lott lionized, was pro-segregation and against any mixing of the racists . . . unless it involved a 15 year old virgin who worked in his house, that is. Then he was all about the mixing.
http://www.floppingaces.net/wp-content/themes/FA-aspire/images/send.gif
But my bigger point, of course, cannot be disputed — it was conservatives who threw their lot in with the pro-segregation side. The GOP, for its own reasons, to this day refuses to cut the cords with the unreconstructed elements of the party. And that is why, to a large extent, the word “conservative” is equated with “white” in this country — just like the White Citizens Council implied when it changed its name. It is why you champion the flag of racists traitors, the stars and bars. It is why GOP Congressmen tacitly support the whole birther nonsense. You guys just can’t seem to “quit” those dad gum White racist elements. And your minority voting percentage quickly slides toward 25%, and the percentage of young Whites voting R. is starting to cluster around the same dismal number, too.
But you guys simply don’t want to deal with that, do you? It explains the weak attempt to make hay with the Reid remark. But why you wanted to remind us of Trent Lott . . . that escapes me.
Missy —
Those terrorist acts were perpetrated by conservatives, Dems and GOPers alike. Liberal and moderate Dems and GOers were the ones doing the sit ins, risking and losing their lives ti FINALLY free the slaves. Conservatives, alas, sided with the Klan. That is the history that you cannot obfuscate by calling them “Dems” — as if those were NY Dems and Cali. Dems perpetrating the Klan murders and bombings in the name of “states rights.”
And nothing says “racially insensitive” better than Ronald Reagan praising states rights in Philadelphia, Mississippi, practically on top of the burial site of Goodman, Cheney and Schwerner. Reagan . . . the man you cons lionize as “what a president should be.” Wonder how many generations of Black voters the GOP lost with the symbolism of that speech . . . but I digress.
B-Rob wastes so much of my time. It’s like a drug, addicting to read his ramblings knowing that no good can come of it yet I have to read on to see how he will counter each truth spoken of him. Mata says that it is the body of his blog posts that is indicative of his racsim and B-Rob comes back asking for a specific quote… so typical.
Just say NO! Maybe if there were a way to administer a high voltage shock each time a reader starts on a B-Rob post we could break the weak willed, like myself, from this destructive addiction.
@B-Rob:
Your “being right” average in real life may be 85%.
In your cyber-life, not so much.
In fact, your 9.25% or so average here is continuing to take a merciless pummeling.
No, not quite. In fact, not at all:
Here’s more:
This reminds me of something I learned long ago:
A good attorney always knows what answer to expect prior to asking to the question.
@B-Rob:
Yep, you’re right.
I sure wish that the GOP would purge that guy Byrd…you know, the guy who held the title of KKK Kleagle and Exalted Cyclops…..
Oh wait….that would be Senator Robert Byrd (D-WV)
Yeah….and you want to try and give gardening advice to the GOP.
Pummeled with the truth again.
Fish. Barrel. Some assembly required.
Aye Chihuahua you are one of the few that make sense here. All this talk about DEMS being conservative and all conservatives are racist is ridiculous. I am very conservative but I don’t believe in all of what the Republicans are doing and what they did back in the 60s or before. I know a lot of my friends who are conservative think the same way. The south is where you had more of the slavery because that was their upbringing and they got sucked into the lies. Now Democrats are sucked into the lie that they are pro-minority. That is so hogwash. If you talk to any self made minority and I mean someone who was on their own and made it mostly because of their hard work, they will tell you that Democrats only coddle to the minorities by promising them all these handouts and advantages over others. So really who is the racist here. I believe we need to stop looking at color across the board no white, no african american, no hispanic, no native american. It is those that point out those differences that are racist. Now if the differences are pointed out before hand by someones comments or rude actions yes I agree then to speak out against racism. However, to insight racism just because one is a minority and there is disagreement is ridiculous. I am glad that we haven’t gotten to that YET with Obama. There is a lot I disagree with for what he is doing but if anyone calls me a racist for doing it then they are the biggest racist yet and is the reason why racism is so strong. That is causing more desegregation these days than anything. And to the person who said that African Americans don’t run for the Republican Party, I just googled it and took one of the first links and found over a hundred Republican African Americans. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_African-American_Republicans . Oh it is easy to type out supposed facts, it is another to bring them out accurately
B-Rob
How about the Fugitive Slave Laws of 1793 and 1854? Democrats supported and passed them into law!
The Missouri Compromise was another Democrat beauty as well as The Kansas Nebraska Act; the Dred Scott and the Jim Crow Laws. The amendments to end slavery, make black slaves citizens and to give blacks the right to vote were opposed by Democrats. Democrats also rejected the Civil Rights Act of 1866/ 1875 and 1964!
I call that a pattern and and is sad to see that the Blacks in America have not been able to free themselves from crap who call themselves Democrats or Commies these days.
The Commie intellects of the USSR wanted to dominate the masses and I am telling you, I am not going to let a commie drive the United States to the ground like you are trying to do.
You are such a looser, you talk like one and act like too!
Go to Cuba or Venezuela! I hear that Commies there love looser like yourself. Sorry you cannot make it to China, they are too smart for your pissed brain.
For the record, let me state my position regarding the vile mass of human flesh that is Harry Reid.
I don’t really have a problem with his use of the word “negro”. As Mata so eloquently put it, Reid is a piece of a different time period.
Heck, during the last census there were over 56,000 people who self-identified themselves as “negro,” so if it’s good enough for someone to self-identify that way then it’s good enough for me.
My problem with Reid is this. By raising the issue of Obama’s skin tone and the lack of a “negro dialect” as positives for his electability Reid is aiming is gnarled, bony finger at We the People of America and saying, without saying it out loud, that we’re racist. He’s saying that if Obama had dark skin and spoke differently then he would be unelectable….
That’s absolutely outrageous and insulting.
That’s a slap in the face to all Americans. His words are an insult to all of the previous black candidates that have run for elective office as well unless, of course, they fit into Harry’s narrow version of what color and sound constitutes candidate electability.
Harry Reid is saying that the only reason Obama was electable was because his appearance and sound fit the right mold….hello Jim Crow and miscegenation laws which are based on…wait for it…a person’s looks, and as Harry was so kind to include, his/her sound as well.
I’ve always been a “content of character” kind of person. I don’t care about the color of a person’s skin. That’s irrelevant to me. I oppose Obama based on the content of his character in a myriad of different areas.
Harry’s character is dark and that darkness has not just suddenly manifest itself with these comments regarding Obama. He has proven over and over again that the content of his character is sorely lacking. Nevadans are showing that they disapprove of him as well…they were showing their disapproval before his words came back to haunt him.
No, Harry shouldn’t resign his position….let him stay there to serve as the poster child for everything that is wrong with liberalism in general, and the Democrat party specifically.
Let him stay there and serve as the ground zero pinpoint focus for the ire of the voters.
If Reid decides to tough this one out, he’s going to get shellacked in November and rightfully so.
Not just for his comments regarding Obama, but for so very many other things as well.
voila… racist statement. Followed more by all the “you cons” crap you generalize. Or perhaps for your supersensitive self, I should have added that my white and Cubano high school friends also didn’t like being bussed away from their friends and neighborhood. But no. You seize upon that as a racial comment, as if I hold my friends as tokens to appease you.
Revelation, billy bob, racism crosses party lines because it’s a human flaw, driven by those… such as you… fomenting disdain and hate. To suggest no one may question the racism of a Democrat merely because they are not a party member is indeed the heart of your comments. Your sense of self superiority may give you a sense of peace at night, but while *you* skip-trod all around, you still never answer why you.. and YOUR POTUS… who enjoy fruitful benefits of opportunity want so desperately to condemn your posterity to a life of mediocrity and limitations.
You come here, spouting a veritable cascade of bizarre accusations… ie “The racists signs get applauded, not shunned.”. I’ve seen not once instance of this save in Pelosi’s mind. The tea party movement is one comprised of all political stripes who abhor the fiscal irreponsibility.
Are there neo nazis in the extreme right? And would I like them as far away from me as possible? You betcha. In fact, I’d prefer they no longer walked the planet. Just as your Black Panthers, “guarding” voting booths with walking sticks, should disappear right along with them. Yes… the Democrat party is the last stronghold of radical black renditionists. Funny how that works, eh? And while you’re at it, take your radical eco-terrorists as well. May they all perish in the depths of their own hell, away from the rest of us.
There are fringes that the majority of us deplore. You, however, are blind to your own.
Speaking of Glenn Beck… of which I never said he was my “hero”, BTW… you never did mention just how he managed to find an audience filled with nothing but black conservatives that don’t exist.
But I don’t wonder why minorities “avoid” the GOP like “the plague”… which they don’t, save in your mind. They just look at your party, which promises them gas in their car, heating oil, affirmative action reverse discrimination, and all their needs that will be provided by the neighboring rich guy who has more than they do. Social justice, you promise. You cater to a freeloader mentality, and promise they have no need for responsibility of self because government will be there in event they trip. Sounds like sheer nirvana to most.
Mediocrity and limits to achievement is what is really is. You are a destroyer of pride and ambition… all under a “protective” banner. But this they do not realize until it’s too late. For you see, if a few do manage to become the rich neighbor next door, you show up at their door to seize their personal rewards to give it to someone else.
There’s a reason that those that have lived under your vision of America in other countries reside in the GOP as it’s the closest thing to conservatism and individual freedom and opportunity going. It’s far from a perfect party, and filled with flawed humans, yes. But I identify with concepts, not people or political parties. And the concepts espoused by you and your ilk is a “remaking” of America that I will not willingly accept as long as I draw breath.
MataHarley, my soon to be ex-wife’s physician is a Black woman. Drives a Saab, son in private school, lives in a $400,000 brick house, attends church regularly and sings in the choir. She should be a GOPer by any measure. Want to know why she isn’t? Here is what you wrote:
“They [Black voters] just look at your party, which promises them gas in their car, heating oil, affirmative action reverse discrimination, and all their needs that will be provided by the neighboring rich guy who has more than they do. Social justice, you promise. You cater to a freeloader mentality, and promise they have no need for responsibility of self because government will be there in event they trip. Sounds like sheer nirvana to most.”
You took in idiotic video of like five poor Black people and you just judged the voting habits of 35 million Black people — lawyers, doctors, and accountants alike — by what you saw on that video.
That is what YOU THINK is the reason middle class and upper class Black people don’t vote GOP? You think it is because they have “a freeloader mentality” and enjoy having “no need for responsibility of self because government will be there in event they trip”? You think that is what Black people call “nirvana”? Please explain yourself. Who planted this “theory” in your brain? And have you ever actually TALKED TO any upper middle class Black people and asked them why they would rather be boiled in olive oil than give money to a GOP candidate?
Mata, it is because of people like you that Black people, Hispanics and Asians stay away from the GOP — in droves. You think any Hispanic people reading your remarks would not wonder what you think about THEM? You pejoratively judged people who worked their a$$es off to get through college and grad school — you judged them by a video of a few losers in one city? This is no different than the screeds we heard from the likes of Rush Limbaugh (college drop out), Glen Beck (no college), Karl Rove (college drop out) and Pat Buchanan (mediocre student) about Phi Beta Kappa Princeton grad, Yale Law Review editor and federal appellate court judge Sonia Sotomayor being “a racists” and not being “smart enough” in their judgment, to sit of the court next to White males who had half her credentials when they were elevated to the court. What do you think Black professionals thought when they heard that nonsense? Indeed, what do you think college educated White voters thought?
I was at a Thanksgiving dinner in 2002, chatting with a Black professional. I explained to him that, socioeconomically speaking, all Black professionals should be GOPers. But as I said at the time, the reason they aren’t is “Trent Lott and the unreconstructed racists in the party.” Then less that two weeks later, Trent made his statement praising the child rapist/segregationist Strom Thurmond. And my point was proved again. Alas, you just proved my point, too. Until the GOP rids itself of people like Trent Lott and, apparently, you, it wil continue to look like a meeting of a Alabama klavern instead of a viable political party.
Aye Chihuahua —
You say it is an “insult” to America to claim that Obama would not have been elected if he was darker and spoke differently. I have a suggestion for you:
call up some Black professionals you might know — friends, relatives, acquantances, vendors, whatever — and ask them what they think about Reid’s comments. My guess: 95% of them will agree with what Reid said. If you don’t think that Obama’s speaking abilities DIDN’T make him electable, I think you are naive.
I leave you with this from Ramesh Ponnuru:
“Lott’s comment implied that the country would have been better off keeping segregation and enforced white supremacy. What Reid said isn’t within a lightyear of that.”
@Donald Bly: One way BLOB keeps us from being more effective in reaching the Indepedents and other less well informed potential voters is by wasting our time in response to his moonbattery.
While I commend my fellow F.A. commenters and contributors for their efforts to respond to this Soros puppet, I really do feel our time would be better spent posting new information that would reach thousands and not waste our time responding to one lone loon.
Having said that, I’ll take just a few seconds to dredge up once again the real face of the Democrat Party: Robert Byrd, elected Exalted Cyclops of the KKK (an arm of the Democrat Party):
No doubt BLOB forgives Robert Byrd for wanting to treat BLOB’s relatives like slaves, but If find it hard to do so.
@B-Rob, you are indeed pathetically hilarious. It’s you, and your party, who cater to the freeloader mentality. A vast margin of Dem voters do so because of the party’s social welfare policies. The vast majority of those who vote GOP do so because they want the party’s fiscal responsibility (which I agree they have unbelievably FUBAR’ed for a decade plus) and minimal government intervention into our private lives. In other words, people vote policy platforms.
Social welfare caters to the freeloader mentality, and destroys incentive and pride. It is the hallmark of the Dem platform…. that the average American is incapable of making wise economic decisions for themselves, and a vast net of safety nets must be put into place, funded by that rich guy down the road.
Some of the more affluent mistakenly confuse Dem government mandates to spread the wealth as charity and have good intent. That’s a philosophical education problem. Charity is not obtained by the point of an IRS gun, or threats of jail time for not paying mandated taxes. And the charities that actually pass on most of the funds collected to the intended recipients are not, I assure you, government run. If there was ever a behemoth that siphoned off administrative funds for ineffciency, the federal government is the quintessential model for a losing business proposition. As in all socialist/communist models throughout history, the chosen few at the top live in opulence, and the population becomes equalized in a level just above what that government considers “poverty”. The idea is not to tear down those enjoying success in order to “spread” economic conditions. The idea is to encourage others to rise to a higher level, and not hinder their way by sucking their wallets dry for social welfare nets that are exploited by govt administrators and many abusers alike.
Now I have no idea what “video” you are discussing, because it’s obviously not the studio audience filled with black conservatives of all income classes on Glenn Beck. Or perhaps your ability to count is as challenged as your socio-perspectives on capitalism and free market. But I didn’t link to any videos other than the Beck series.
But to point out your absurdity of prosecution, you accuse me of characterizing “35 million” professional blacks using some unknown video of “five poor black people”, then turn around and characterize all black professionals by some guy you chatted up at a Thanksgiving day soiree 7-8 years ago. Then you discuss your lucky-she’s-soon-to-be-your-ex-wife (assuming your face to face personality has the same charm of your internet presence) as a prime example that you believe yourself to be ominpotently correct in how and why any and every minority votes the way it does.
Who the heck made you omnipotent today?
Again you prove the mud you sling comes from the mud you wiped off your own face.
So now it’s “people like me” that drives those away from the GOP. Even more absurd. I’ll have to forward this to my multicultural friends, as they could use a laugh. They don’t want government aid and your nanny party handouts. They want what I do… stay out of our way so we can make it on our own. And stop taking what we earn to redistribute it to your selective classes of Americans.
I am not Republican. I am conservative, and officially a political waif. Frankly my disdain for both sides of the aisles has risen to unmeasurable lengths (as Mike’s A can attest…) But I will point out that since YOUR POTUS has been elected, the conservative mindset of “leave me the hell alone and stop robbing my wallet at federal/state gunpoint” has been increasing… across party lines. It’s not a migration to the GOP – and I’ve personally never suggested it was – but it’s very distinctly to conservative fiscal values and the demand we maintain control over our own destinies and earnings.
People end up having to register as some party member eventually, but who they vote for comes down to the candidate. I mentioned to you that I miss JC Watts, and look forward to he only candidate I’ve seen that gives me reason for excitement, LTC Allen West. I then asked you just why your party, and people like you, demonize your own race when they attempt to serve in a party you don’t approve of.
Instead you hurdle the Uncle Tom spittle…. you, against your own. I might correct your accusation that “people like me” are the reason minorities stay away in droves. In fact, you might just look at the abuse and punishment you heap upon your peers as one darn good reason instead. Intimidate is, afterall, the centerpiece of Alinsky community organizing success… coupled with making sure the masses feel cheated, miserable, and envious.
Congratulations for plotting the oppression of your own, billy bob. Hope you sleep well at night for doing so when those chickens land at your roost.
Chihuahua —
You said the following:
“By raising the issue of Obama’s skin tone and the lack of a ‘negro dialect’ as positives for his electability Reid is aiming is gnarled, bony finger at We the People of America and saying, without saying it out loud, that we’re racist. He’s saying that if Obama had dark skin and spoke differently then he would be unelectable….
“That’s absolutely outrageous and insulting.”
THAT is what you find outrageous and insulting? Er, yeah. Do me a favor: ask a bunch of Black professionals you might know — friends, collegues, relatives, whatever — whether they were “insulted” by Reid noting the OBVIOUS — that Obama’s looks and his manner of speech DID make him more electable. I think your “insult” from Reid recognizing that RACE MATTERS is quite misplaced.
Were you as “outraged” and “insulted” by this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6rTps4Iau1E
Or how about this?
Nah . . . there’s no racism in America . . . .
Mata, this is what YOU WROTE:
“They [Black voters] just look at your party, which promises them gas in their car, heating oil, affirmative action reverse discrimination, and all their needs that will be provided by the neighboring rich guy who has more than they do. Social justice, you promise. You cater to a because government will be there in event they trip. Sounds like sheer nirvana to most.”
* * * * *
Why not just admit your post was insulting and move on?
See, I did not write that. No one put words in your mouth. You basically said that the reason my wife’s doctor, and Black people like her, and Black people in general, vote Dem is because of . . . welfare? How does that make any sense to you?
W.t.f. is wrong with you people?
And don’t try to twist it, either. I was talking about Black people in general and you went all “welfare queen” on me.
Nope, the reason she votes Dem, Mata, is because of people like you. Both the past forty years history of the party and the current make up makes her not welcome. Just look at your phrasing when you are explaining why Black people vote Dem — you mentioned “freeloader mentality” and “no need for responsibility of self.” You think that applies to the Black middle class and professional class as well as the riff raff! Welfare!
That, Mata, is why Glen Beck’s ability to round up 15 Black conservatives are, shall we say, not impressive. See if you can get them elected to any position of authority in a GOP town and then I will be impressed by the magnanimous attitudes of conservative Whites. Until then, count me in the “underwhelmed” catagory.
Another thing — why did YOU start referring to Black conservatives as “Uncle Tom”? I certainly didn’t. I fact, I was talking about why there are so few Blacks willing to align themselves with the GOP. I said NOTHING AT ALL about Black conservatives, or Black GOPers in general. So to the extent you mention Uncle Toms and Black GOPers in a sentence together, that is you projecting your own “issues” with those Black folk; it has nothing to do with moi.
Lastly, Mata, I never said I was Black. What made you think I was?
Mike’s America —
Nice try at changing the subject to Bob Byrd, former Klansman and Obama mentor. Kind of an interesting side point about his sordid but redeemed past.
But back to the subject: we know why Mata thinks Black people don’t vote GOPer, even when they are in the professional and upper middle classes. So what is your theory?
Mata — here is a hint: before you go developing any more theories about why minorities vote the way they do, why don’t you try to . . . oh, I don’t know . . . ASK SOME?! Try it . . . you might learn something. Because you will never understand minority voters sitting with an all white grouping of conservatives. All you will learn there is what you white cons THINK is the reason.
@B-Rob: Nice to know you have a soft spot for former Klansmen. It’s just Republicans that you damn to hell for all eternity.
What an ASS!
B-Rob has tipped his hand. He is a Saudi funded sock puppet or lackey. Al Jazeera is his credible source on Sarah Palin’s core principals. Ha!
Black Professionals who openly supported John McCain:
Larry Elder
Thomas Sowell
Alan Keyes
Walter Williams
Roy Innes
J.C. Watts
Steven F. Smith
Charles Evers
Edward W. Brooke III.
Lynn Swan
Kevin Fobbs
Deroy Murdock
Shannon Reeves
Sherman Parker
Ken Blackwell
Keith Butler
Wayne Perryman
Otto Banks
Michael Steele
Alan West
Vern Williams
Maurice Washington
Zachary Ward
Claude Allen
Renee Amoore
Lynette Boggs
Jeanette Bradley
Janice Rogers Brown
No, billy bob. That is what YOU wrote… taking the privilege of inserting “black-with-a-capital-A voters” into my words. My paragraph said “minorities”, and did not single out any race or income class. That you and your racist/renditionist attitude. Only “black” is important? Pompous as well as unendearing. Oh my….
And as a reminder, here is my paragraph in full, unaltered by your intervention and implications:
That is why people vote one party’s candidate or another… because they align with a party’s platform/concept. For the Dems, your platform is social welfare and justice…. affirmative action, federal and state subsidies up the yin yang.
If you believe that’s insulting, then I suggest you contact your DNC chair and complain about your party’s social welfare platform. The heart and foundation of your entire membership concept.
My my… the current make up makes her “not welcome”? LOL I’m not even Republican, for heavens sake! Well, there’s enough fringe racists on the right within the GOP without them adding your hypersensitive fringe racists on the left to it as well. But if you are missing exactly how offensive that statement is all by yourself, then you’ve confirmed you are doomed with your prejudice to the grave. So be it. I shall shed no tears.
I see you upped the Glenn Beck audience to 15. It seems your math and counting ability hasn’t improved. Two suggestions… watch the series, and take off your shoes for some help with the math.
“soon-to-be ex wife….”
Hmmm. Says volumes. I guess it isn’t just us!
So here is the thought construct here:
Conservatives say they are not racists, but liberals are. (See, for example, Rush Limbaugh re Sonia Sotomayor and Glen Beck re Obama).
Posters here say the Dems are the racist party.
So how do they explain why 70% of the minority voters, regardless of geography or educational background, cast their lot with the “racist” liberals and the “racist” Dem Party?
Why, those minorities are all concerned about welfare and afraid of being called an Uncle Tom, that’s why!
Cons, unless you figure out that some BIG part of your argument is based on a falacy, you are condemned to be a regional, aging lily white party in a time when the country is getting more diverse. Think about it . . . .
Mata —
I was wrong . . . again. I stand corrected. You did NOT say that Blacks voted Dem because of welfare. You actually said:
“But I don’t wonder why minorities ‘avoid’ the GOP like ‘the plague’… which they don’t, save in your mind. They just look at your party, which promises them gas in their car, heating oil, affirmative action reverse discrimination, and all their needs that will be provided by the neighboring rich guy who has more than they do. Social justice, you promise. You cater to a freeloader mentality, and promise they have no need for responsibility of self because government will be there in event they trip. Sounds like sheer nirvana to most.”
I stand corrected — it not just Blacks who you believe have the “freeloader mentality” and are looking for government cheese. No, you think it is all the minorities that are so motivated. And that is why you think they vote Dem.
Glad we got that cleared up.
B-Rob,
Cons, unless you figure out that some BIG part of your argument is based on a falacy, you are condemned to be a regional, aging lily white party in a time when the country is getting more diverse. Think about it . . . .
Your above statement speaks volumes about you. I don’t cast my vote based on who else is casting their ballot like me. I am casting my vote based on core principles and values. The majority is not always right. Several instances in history should remind you of this, (flat earth, belief that our planet is the center of the universe, sickness caused by demons in the bloodstream…) Your statement is made even sillier when you consider that noone in our Nation could possibly win an election without the votes of a lot of lilly white folks voting for them, and that includes the Zero who got elected President. I see nothing wrong with being lilly white. I was born that way, it is not how I define myself. Apparently though, it would seem that you are incapable of defining anybody in any other manner other than skin color. Think about it……..