Dems Coddle Sen. Harry Reid After “Negro” Comment by Former Author | Jan 10, 2010 | Uncategorized | 88 comments Posted by Former Author on 10 January, 2010 at 5:34 pm. 88 comments already! [DELETED BY AUTHOR] 88 Comments BarbaraS on January 10, 2010 at 7:16 pm 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. Reply chrisfromneenah on January 11, 2010 at 3:07 am 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. Reply DrKeithCurrie on January 11, 2010 at 3:23 am Yeah, perfect said dear, we are our own enemy!!!! If we can control our mind and words we can have a better life. Reply Sid on January 11, 2010 at 5:59 am 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? Reply Luis González on January 11, 2010 at 1:54 pm 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? Reply jd on January 11, 2010 at 3:22 pm VERY GOOD ARTICLE WELL WRITTEN AN PUT TOGETHER FOR MORE LIKE THIS http://bloggnet.co.cc/ Reply B-Rob on January 11, 2010 at 3:43 pm 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! Reply chrisfromneenah on January 11, 2010 at 4:10 pm @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. Reply B-Rob on January 11, 2010 at 4:20 pm 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? Reply Aye on January 11, 2010 at 4:29 pm @B-Rob: Are you trying to claim that looks no longer play a role in US society? Reply chrisfromneenah on January 11, 2010 at 4:48 pm 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. Reply MataHarley on January 11, 2010 at 6:01 pm I have to say that sometimes the depth of your personal racism astounds me, billy bob. Whoops… maybe not. Reply Patvann on January 11, 2010 at 6:15 pm @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!!!!! Reply Aye on January 11, 2010 at 6:25 pm @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. Reply Patvann on January 11, 2010 at 6:27 pm 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. Reply Hard Right on January 11, 2010 at 6:33 pm 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. Reply URI on January 11, 2010 at 8:06 pm 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. Reply MataHarley on January 11, 2010 at 9:23 pm 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 on January 11, 2010 at 8:41 pm 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. Reply B-Rob on January 11, 2010 at 8:50 pm 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. Reply B-Rob on January 11, 2010 at 9:01 pm 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. Reply B-Rob on January 11, 2010 at 9:10 pm 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! Reply Patvann on January 11, 2010 at 10:02 pm I agree 100%, Mata. Reid’s word-use is far less “bad”, than the hypocrisy of those around him. Reply MataHarley on January 11, 2010 at 10:07 pm 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. Reply Skookum on January 11, 2010 at 10:22 pm 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. Reply Aye on January 12, 2010 at 4:08 am 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. Reply Missy on January 12, 2010 at 5:15 am @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. Reply B-Rob on January 12, 2010 at 5:33 am @ 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. Reply B-Rob on January 12, 2010 at 5:45 am — 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. Reply B-Rob on January 12, 2010 at 5:52 am 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. Reply Donald Bly on January 12, 2010 at 6:40 am 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. Reply Aye on January 12, 2010 at 6:52 am @B-Rob: As I always tell my lady friend, “I am right about 85% of the time.” 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. And Trent Lott was a riot leader at Oxford. No, not quite. In fact, not at all: 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.” Here’s more: 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. Reply Aye on January 12, 2010 at 7:19 am @B-Rob: 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. Reply chrisfromneenah on January 12, 2010 at 7:24 am 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 Reply URI on January 12, 2010 at 9:18 am 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. Reply Aye on January 12, 2010 at 9:19 am 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. Reply MataHarley on January 12, 2010 at 10:06 am @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. Reply B-Rob on January 12, 2010 at 12:25 pm 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. Reply B-Rob on January 12, 2010 at 12:35 pm 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.” Reply Mike's America on January 12, 2010 at 12:58 pm @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. Reply MataHarley on January 12, 2010 at 1:05 pm @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. Reply B-Rob on January 12, 2010 at 1:13 pm 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? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bKUovpF9LWU&feature=related Nah . . . there’s no racism in America . . . . http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bKUovpF9LWU&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c-q4MDQ0cDI&feature=related Reply B-Rob on January 12, 2010 at 1:35 pm 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? Reply B-Rob on January 12, 2010 at 1:40 pm 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. Reply Mike's America on January 12, 2010 at 1:45 pm @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! Reply Flyovercountry on January 12, 2010 at 1:48 pm 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 Reply MataHarley on January 12, 2010 at 1:49 pm billy bob: Mata, this is what YOU WROTE: “They [Black voters] just look at your party…. 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. Reply Patvann on January 12, 2010 at 1:50 pm “soon-to-be ex wife….” Hmmm. Says volumes. I guess it isn’t just us! Reply B-Rob on January 12, 2010 at 1:55 pm 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 . . . . Reply B-Rob on January 12, 2010 at 2:04 pm 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. Reply Flyovercountry on January 12, 2010 at 2:07 pm 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…….. Reply B-Rob on January 12, 2010 at 2:13 pm Er yeah . . . a Pulitzer Prize winner weighs in “Harry Reid’s comments were crudely put, but true” http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/11/AR2010011103066.html?wpisrc=nl_pmheadline Money quote: “Skin color among African Americans is not to be discussed in polite company, so Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s newly disclosed remark about President Obama — that voters are more comfortable with him because he’s light-skinned — offended decorum. But it was surely true. * * * “Color bias has always existed in this country. We don’t talk about it because we think of color as subordinate to racial identification. There are African Americans with skin so light-hued that only contextual clues speak to the question of race. I remember once looking up some distant cousins on my father’s side. They were so fair of hair and ruddy of cheek that I thought I’d gone to the wrong house, until one of them greeted me in what I guess Reid would call ‘Negro dialect.’ * * * “The Brazilian system minimized racial friction on an interpersonal level. The American system fostered such friction, through formal and informal codes that enforced racial segregation. But our “one-drop” paradigm also created great racial solidarity among African Americans, while maximizing our numbers. We fought, marched, sat in, struggled and eventually made tremendous strides toward equality. The most recent, of course, was Obama’s election, which is difficult to imagine happening in Brazil — or, for that matter, in any other country where there is a large, historically oppressed minority group. “Brazil has now begun addressing long-standing racial disparities through affirmative action initiatives. But the upper reaches of that society — the financial district in Sao Paulo, say, or the government ministries in Brasilia — are still so exclusively white that they look like bits and pieces of Portugal that somehow ended up on the wrong side of the ocean. “American society’s focus on race instead of color explains why what Harry Reid said was so rude. But I don’t think it can be a coincidence that so many pioneers — Edward Brooke, the first black senator since Reconstruction; Thurgood Marshall, the first black Supreme Court justice; Colin Powell, the first black secretary of state — have been lighter-skinned. Reid’s analysis was probably good sociology, even if it was bad politics.” Reply B-Rob on January 12, 2010 at 2:25 pm Flyover, the question I raised was why minorities cast THEIR VOTES. Mata offered the “they all care about welfare” theory. I asked Mike to weigh in, but he is in some kind of cone of silence. I woudl love to hear your theory. You can gleen my theory from what I have posted above: minorities vote Dem because anti-minority racists are in the GOP. Not out of love of the Dem Party, or even total agreement with what the Dems believe (take abortion or gun control). Nope, why they vote Dem can best be shown by three things that have happened in the last three years: Macaca, Palin rallies and “Sonia Sotomayor is not qualified” If you can’t understand how those three incidents, and the GOPs response to them, doomed the GOP to another generation of non-parity among minority voters, then I don’t know what to say. And save your “Bob Byrd was in the KKK” blasts. Given that his party just nominated and elected a Black president, it’s a little, shall we say, tired . . . . Reply MataHarley on January 12, 2010 at 2:27 pm Dem Party Platform, 2008 We will start by renewing the American Dream for a new era – with the same new hope and new ideas that propelled Franklin Delano Roosevelt towards the New Deal and John F. Kennedy to the New Frontier. We will provide immediate relief to working people who have lost their jobs, families who are in danger of losing their homes, and those who – no matter how hard they work – are seeing prices go up more than their income. We will invest in America again –in world-class public education, in our infrastructure, and in green technology –so that our economy can generate the good, high-paying jobs of the future. We will end the outrage of unaffordable, unavailable health care, protect Social Security, and help Americans save for retirement. And we will harness American ingenuity to free this nation from the tyranny of oil. What is this “we” but at the expense of the taxpayer? How is this accomplished but by increased social welfare programs? As I pointed out in my post INRE Obama’s mistaken notion for job creation actually being an instrument of economic destruction, the Spain alternative energy projects that have been completed went under research scrutiny, to which the conclusion was that it was “terribly counterproductive economically”. When annual productivity, rising taxes, more expensive energy and robbery of private sector funds were factored in, the $37 bil costs to sustain 50,200 jobs at $737K per green job was the equivalent of destroying 5.28 private sector jobs to sustain one green job. Now there’s some math that is bound to slide over the head of a guy who looks at a studio filled with 150-200 attendees, and counts 5-15. It’s not only a job killer, but also in direct conflict with aiding those having a problem heating their homes by favoring more expensive alternatives and replacing affordable energy that could be had with shale gas/oil development here on our shores. Here’s another social welfare program projection, but with doublespeak. For decades, Americans have been told to act for ourselves, by ourselves, on our own. Democrats reject this recipe for division and failure. Today, we commit to renewing our American community by recognizing that solutions to our greatest challenges can only be rooted in common ground and the strength of our civic life. The American people do not want government to solve all our problems; we know that personal responsibility, character, imagination, diligence, hard work and faith ultimately determine individual achievement. But we also know that at every turning point in our nation’s history, we have demonstrated our love of country by uniting to overcome our challenges—whether ending slavery, fighting two world wars for the cause of freedom or sending a man to the moon. Today, America must unite again – to help our most vulnerable residents get back on their feet and to restore the vitality of both urban centers and family farms –because the success of each depends on the success of the other. And America must challenge us again –to serve our country and to meet our responsibilities –whether in our families or local governments; our civic organizations or places of worship. That’s rich…. they “know” American’s *don’t* want government solutions (most especially expensive ones…), BUT…… In essence they say, “sure… BUT this is an exception”. See pg 11 of their platform PDF for that social welfare “jump start” to the economy of $50 billion…. only about $737 bil shy of reality, eh? But then, as billy bob aptly demonstrates, math isn’t the strong suit of Dems. Naw…. Dem’s don’t vote for social welfare and social justice. That just couldn’t be what they stand for, eh? This one makes me roar… Today, we pledge to renew American democracy by promoting the use of new technologies to make it easier for Americans to participate in their government. [Except C SPAN] We will shine a light on government spending and Washington lobbying [except those constructed in the dark of night in the WH basement] –so that every American is empowered to be a watchdog and a whistle blower. We are the party of inclusion and respect differences of perspective and belief. And so, even when we disagree, we will work together [Dems only… no GOP allowed] to move this country forward. There can be no Republican or Democratic ideas, only policies that are [we, the Dem leadership consider are] smart and right and fair and good for America –and those that aren’t. [Mata Musing: italic content added via Mata, per billy bob’s “Blog Editing for Dummies” 2010 release] How is it in blog-speak? Oh yes… BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Tell ya what, billy bob. Why don’t you ask *your* friends if they vote Democrat because of the party platform of spreading the wealth. Reply B-Rob on January 12, 2010 at 2:35 pm Patvann — One of these days when you have a relationship with an actual person, and not just your right hand, you will come to understand that some times people are not meant to be together. Until then, you will have to take my word on it . . . . Reply MataHarley on January 12, 2010 at 2:47 pm Oh yes, billy bob… wanna know where I got the “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” bit? Your party platform Pg 11: We will provide an immediate energy rebate to American families struggling with the record price of gasoline and the skyrocketing cost of other necessities – to spend on those basic needs and energy efficient measures. Pg 7: Gas and home heating costs are squeezing seniors and working families alike. Pg 7: We believe that every American, whatever their background or station in life, should have the chance to get a good education, to work at a good job with good wages, to raise and provide for a family, to live in safe surroundings, and to retire with dignity and security. Pg 7: A great nation now demands that its leaders abandon the politics of partisan division and find creative solutions to promote the common good. A people that prizes candor, accountability, and fairness insists that a government of the people must level with them and champion the interests of all American families. Pg 54: We support affirmative action, including in federal contracting and higher education, to make sure that those locked out of the doors of opportunity will be able to walk through those doors in the future Uh… how is it Aye puts it? DAYUM! Reply MataHarley on January 12, 2010 at 2:51 pm Hey, this ought to give you all a laugh… anyone remember this Dem Party Platform gem? We will lift the veil of secret deals in Washington by publishing searchable, online information about federal grants, contracts, earmarks, loans, and lobbyist contacts with government officials. We will make government data available online and will have an online video archive of significant agency meetings. We will put all non-emergency bills that Congress has passed online for five days, to allow the American public to review and comment on them before they are signed into law. We will require Cabinet officials to have periodic national online town hall meetings to discuss issues before their agencies. I repeat… BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA Reply MataHarley on January 12, 2010 at 2:53 pm @Flyovercountry: and billy bob wonders why I consider him racist…. Reply B-Rob on January 12, 2010 at 2:58 pm Mata — Not sure how to break it to you, but that platform and that candidate got more than 350 electoral votes. They won by close to 10 million heads, got more votes than any candidate in history, and turned the likes of Virginia, North Carolina, Indiana, Iowa, and Colorado blue. Those are NOT Dem states and they are NOT majority minority states. Whatever he was sellin’, the voters were buyin’. You may not like the Dem platform, but a whole siht-load more people liked that then the flummory the other crew was offering. Or is it that they thought the Dem candidate was superior? Probably a little of both. Flyover — Good thing you don’t mind being in the poweless minority. Because from the looks of the posts here, you cons have not learned a damn thing from that election. Mata and Fly — I am now reading “Ayn Rand and the World that She Made” by Anne Heller. You and Mata kind of remind me Ayn, what with the whole self-reverential and self-referential focus. But reading between the lines, Rand’s pronouncements of her own high selfworth strike me as signifying one of the Cluster B. personality disorders in the DSM IV. Alas, Fly and Mata, methinks you two, too, are on that end of the chart. Gotta go folks! it’s been fun! Reply MataHarley on January 12, 2010 at 3:11 pm billy bob: Not sure how to break it to you, but that platform and that candidate got more than 350 electoral votes. They won by close to 10 million heads, got more votes than any candidate in history, and turned the likes of Virginia, North Carolina, Indiana, Iowa, and Colorado blue. Those are NOT Dem states and they are NOT majority minority states. Thank you for confirming what I said. That minorities are voting Dim for the stated Dem social welfare platform. I didn’t say anything about others who are not minorities, but also vote for the same social welfare. Afterall, it was you who only decided to address minorities… er, no, only the blacks-with-a-capital-A… as the prime focus. But social welfare is a Dim thing…. based on their stated, printed, distributed platform. Then, of course, if polls are to be believed, about 6-7% of those voters are now figuring out that the promised gravy train isn’t free afterall, and too expensive a load for the nation at large to carry. This also, of course, blows out your theory that it’s merely a racist GOP party that commanded their votes… except for your chosen friends, of course who feel “unwelcome” for their color. Reply Old Trooper on January 12, 2010 at 3:22 pm Flashback January 21, 2007: The Washington Times Collapsing Venezuela ( The USA) Flashback January 21, 2007: The Washington Times nails it with Collapsing Venezuela. “If Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez (President Obama) deliberately intended to sabotage his nation’s economy, he would be hard-pressed to do anything different from what he is now doing to his country. It has been widely reported that Mr. Chavez (President Obama) has been increasingly taking control of the oil, telecommunications and energy, housing, banking, auto, and insurance sectors, as well as the media. What has not been reported is the full extent of the corruption in Venezuela (the United States) and how this ultimately will destroy the economy. The financial scandal taking place is far bigger than Enron, and may ultimately even exceed the U.N. “oil-for-food” scandal, the biggest financial disgrace of all time. Since 2004, the Venezuelan Central Bank (Fed) has transferred about $22.5 billion untold $billions to accounts abroad by the Chavez government held by foreign governments, and about $12 billion all of that remains unaccounted for. It has also been reported that the gold reserves have been removed from the Central Bank. While the rest of the world has been moving away from socialism for the last quarter-century for good reason, Venezuela (the United States) is becoming socialist. We know governmental use of central banks to basically print money to cover expenditures results in rising inflation and eventually monetary meltdown. And, finally, we know that when a state becomes totally corrupt an economic collapse always follows. Mr. Chavez (President Obama) and his cronies had already been spending far more than they were taking in and you can bet the blood from the innocent Venezuelan people (United States citizens) will be drained long before those on the take from Mr. Chavez (President Obama) agree to have their looting stopped. The original Washington Times article was extremely good, but a few minor changes would have made it the most prophetically accurate post the world had ever seen.” Reply B-Rob on January 12, 2010 at 3:26 pm Mata — you are straying farther and farther and farther from the subject matter of the top post. I though we were talking about Harry Reid noticing Obama was beige and talked pretty, and Trent Lott’s endorsement of child rapist/segregationist Strom Thurmond. You are now doing a line by line critique of the WINNING platform . . . of the party that won that notoriously Communistic demographic “White suburban females with college education”. yeah, that’ll work. And Mata — before you go calling someone else “racist” you might want to cogitate on the underlying racism of your whole “minorities vote for welfare” theory. In fact . . . why not read this? “It’s My Party, But I Don’t Feel Part of It” http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/20/AR2008112002959.html?hpid=opinionsbox1 Money quote: “I can vouch that being a moderate black Republican isn’t easy. My black GOP colleagues and I endure endless ridicule and questioning from other African Americans, including close friends and family members who wonder how we can belong to a political party that is so overwhelmingly white, male, Southern, conservative and seemingly closed to ethnic minorities. “And truth be told, it’s sometimes an ill fit. Consider the comments of Shannon Reeves, an African American who started a college Republican chapter at Grambling State University in 1988. In 2003, he wrote an open letter to the party after it was disclosed that in 1999, a newsletter published by the then-vice chairman of the California Republican Party had carried an essay suggesting that the country would have been better off if the South had won the Civil War. “‘I am tired of being embarrassed by elected Republican officials who have no sensitivity for issues that alienate whole segments of our population,’ Reeves wrote. ‘This embarrassment is different for a black Republican. Not only do we have to sit in rooms and behave professionally towards Republicans who share this ideology, we have to go home to a hostile environment where we are called Uncle Tom and maligned as a sell-out to the community because of our membership in the Republican Party.’ “With those words Reeves expressed what many of us have felt over the years — and felt again during the recent campaign as we listened to racially coded Republican ads and speeches aimed at scaring working-class and rural white voters about Obama. Reeves expressed why so many of us, including me, ended up, after struggling with our consciences, supporting and voting for the Illinois senator.” * * * * * This is from two people who SUPPORT the GOP and note the flat out racists in your midst. Why the GOP does nothing to address this, is beyond me. But all I can say is — Keep it up! Keep doing what you are doing! It’s working so well in diversifying the party! HA HA HA HA! Reply B-Rob on January 12, 2010 at 3:31 pm Mata — Post 64 is unintelligible. Lost of sentence fragments that make no sense. Reply Patvann on January 12, 2010 at 3:33 pm Been married to the same woman for 22 years, Robbie. http://i635.photobucket.com/albums/uu80/Patvann/WeddingPictureSmall.jpg Reply MataHarley on January 12, 2010 at 3:50 pm Dang… back already, billy bob? We hardly missed ya! LOL Sorry you don’t find the content intelligible. Don’t think removing your shoes will help for that one, guy. Let’s see if I can help: 1: You wanted only to discuss why minorities… no, make that blacks… don’t vote GOP. You, of course, suggest it’s because the GOP is filled with racists and has a racist history. Rather absurd in itself since racism transcends party lines. But hey… your argument. 2: I responded that minorities (including blacks as a minority) vote Dim (not a typo) because of the social welfare platform. Then I provided your party’s platform language to prove my bullet points of promised aid for gas, heating oil, affirmative action etal. 3: You then decided to abandon the original focus on minorities… er blacks… and point out many voted for the social welfare package that were not minorities. huh? 4: I then reminded you that it was YOU who choose to focus only on minorities… er, blacks… and not the Dim voter (again, not a typo) of all stripes. Had we started out discussing why *all* Dems vote Dem, I would have said exactly the same. It’s because of the social welfare thrust…. a platform that caters to a free loading mentality. Government please give me gas for the car, give me heating oil, give me affirmative action. 6: After providing my bullet points in your party platform, you then decided to tout the electorate win. A skip-trod moment of your own. I thought it only fair to update your news that YOURE POTUS is losing the support of the moderates and indy’s who aided his launch to the Oval Office. ta ta now Reply B-Rob on January 12, 2010 at 3:57 pm And Mata — That was actually a nice effort trying to clean up your initial offensive comment about welfare being what motivates minorities to vote Dem. Looping back a couple paragraphs of a hundred page platform — as if that is what you were REALLY referring to. Pretty good try, lady! Alas, there are too many of your fellow travelers who say it with such gusto as to undercut your more delicate spin job: http://thenewrepublicans.net/2008/12/18/the-gop%E2%80%99s-inability-to-court-the-minority-vote/ http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2207404/posts Like I said — if you ask minority professionals why they vote Dem, their supposed love of welfare ain’t gonna be on the list. But like I said before — keep pushing that welfare theory anyway! You are doing great with it! Just DON’T follow this column’s advice: http://www.ordinary-gentlemen.com/2009/11/two-quick-responses/ “The other piece is that E.D. is definitely underestimating the extent to which respect has a significant impact on minority voting. Simply put, even if Democratic policies had a negligible effect on the material well-being of minority voters, I still think that you would see large-scale minority support for the Democratic Party, if only because Democrats are the party that takes minority concerns seriously. More often than not, Republicans are either dismissive of or actively hostile to minority interests. With that kind of record – and a relatively friendly Democratic Party – it really shouldn’t come as any surprise that minorities are reliable Democratic voters.” And there it is . . . the GOP doesn’t get minority votes anywhere near parity because they simply don’t act as if they want them! Reply B-Rob on January 12, 2010 at 4:02 pm Mata, as I said — you think my wife’s Black physician who makes $400,000 or so per year votes Dem because of welfare. But you don’t seem to grasp why that is patently offensive. But I just proved my broader point about Black in particular and minorities in general. Regardless of social class, they all vote Dem. Only cons actually believe its because of welfare. But, like I said! Keep at it! Keep thinking THATS the reason and that it has nothing to do with the actual people in, or the positions of, the GOP! Reply MataHarley on January 12, 2010 at 4:23 pm So your wealthy physican friend votes Dim because she opposes social welfare programs? Yeah… makes alot of sense. Oh wait… she’s one of your two sources that proclaim it’s all about GOP racism and not Dem party social welfare platforms. So she disagrees with government social welfare, but votes that way anyway because she feels “unwelcome” in the GOP. Got it. Yeah. I’m sure that’s a common reason shared by many. LOL Tell you what I find offensive… that all of us are to bow to mandated “charity”, the recipients to be chosen by your party. And for that, the red tape bureaucracy creams off excessive funds off the top for inefficient admin fees, and the pittance then filters down to the intended recipient. Good plan…. This little economic catch 22 manages to quash opportunity for all.. most especially for those who never really wanted the government hand out to begin with, but just the opportunity to stand on their feet without being robbed by the likes of Obama/Pelosi/Reid. Reply Mr. Irons on January 12, 2010 at 4:55 pm I am a little disturbed how little B-Rob has shown his understanding of basic United States History by trying to connect Republicans to Jim Crow Laws of which were penned and enforced by Democrats in the former Confederate States after losing the Civil War. It took Republican backing to pass The Civil Rights Act of 1964 because many Democrat Congressmen and Senators were filibustering President Johnson’s attempts to destroy Jim Crow Laws his own Party was embracing. Last I recall, Johnson was not a Republican. Reply Mr. Irons on January 12, 2010 at 4:59 pm Sorry for the double post: B-Rob when you quote someone such as Michael Steele such as: I can vouch that being a moderate black Republican isn’t easy. My black GOP colleagues and I endure endless ridicule and questioning from other African Americans, including close friends and family members who wonder how we can belong to a political party that is so overwhelmingly white, male, Southern, conservative and seemingly closed to ethnic minorities. Do you understand that this quote was not even reference to internal GOP situations and enviorment but by external Democrat harrassment due to not following a certain pattern line of behavior? Even Allen West of Florida has been slammed by Democrat opponets as being nothing but a drone of the GOP and not being a true Black and going Democrat. Your understanding of the context of dicussions is highly questionable. Reply Patvann on January 12, 2010 at 5:01 pm “I’ll have those n*ggers voting Democratic for the next 200 years.” — Lyndon B. Johnson nuff said. Reply MataHarley on January 12, 2010 at 5:05 pm Sorry billy bob… had to bail your comment #71 out of spam. BTW, the filter is color blind, and very PC. It snags us all from time to time. That was actually a nice effort trying to clean up your initial offensive comment about welfare being what motivates minorities to vote Dem. Looping back a couple paragraphs of a hundred page platform — as if that is what you were REALLY referring to. Pretty good try, lady! I read your official party platform, tho it was unnecessary. Rather a repeat of previous with new “hope and change” stuff, and more emphasis why we have to expand the social welfare projects in these economic times. Altho what I find most amusing is your attempt to fill in the blanks as to what I “REALLY” meant. Guess that deity complex doesn’t leave easily, eh? You are a racist, billy bob, because you continually try to paint me as one simply because I don’t share your suggested cures for opportunity for all, and solutions to our economic crunch. You assume that’s all because of a racial prejudice. That you make this call without reading my volume of posts of the year or so I’ve been here, or on my previous blog, is your research flaw. First rule… know your rabbit. All I can say is, since you are predictable in your prosecution, I certainly hope you have great paralegals at your fingertips thru your firm.’ Like I said — if you ask minority professionals why they vote Dem, their supposed love of welfare ain’t gonna be on the list. Not “first” on the list… can I assume and portend (as you constantly do about me) that means it IS on “the list”??? I will agree that if you ask the average Dem if they vote that way because they want social welfare programs at the expense of all, most would say no. But that’s merely parsing words, and chosing careful wording, isn’t it? If I ask any US citizen, regardless of party, “do you want everyone to never experience need and have opportunities to be wealthy?”, I guarantee you everyone would say YES without question. If I ask“do you want everyone to never experience need, and are willing to give the government the power to limit your own income and opportunities in order for all to be wealthy or, at least, minimally cared for”, is the answer the same? Absolutely not. It’s all in the way you word the questions. Welcome to Alinsky and community organizing. Truth is expendable in order to achieve the end goal. However the majority don’t realize the economics and repercussions of socialized programs. Yet the more they learn of the costs of “free” social justice, the more that turn away. The question is, can they turn away in time to save an economy that hangs by a thread with such decisions? And let’s address this particular statement, which lies at the heart of your class racism/warfare: Alas, there are too many of your fellow travelers who say it with such gusto as to undercut your more delicate spin job: I am not “my fellow travelers”. Nor are my fellow travelers clones. We are all individuals with varying degrees of differing opinions. We support concepts, and candidates who reflect those concepts. You speak, think, and act in class warfare. There is no individualism to you… only classes that need your sage advice. Therein lies your problem, not only as a presenter of your political theories, but as a human being. Reply Mr. Irons on January 12, 2010 at 5:32 pm And while I don’t like Wiki that much: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964 “We will resist to the bitter end any measure or any movement which would have a tendency to bring about social equality and intermingling and amalgamation of the races in our (Southern) states.” – Richard Russell (D-GA) Reply MataHarley on January 12, 2010 at 5:41 pm @Mr. Irons: Just to expand some links and content on your Steele quote… you can find more at a blog from billy bob’s back yard: It is also where I picked up Steele’s complaint about being treated like an “Uncle Tom”… a charge of racism which billy bob tries to lay at my feet. But then, he lives in Chicago,… er, Cleveland…. must be quite busy with his court docket, and evidently doesn’t get all the news. So he can’t possibly know it was a comment that originated from those who are receiving peer pressure from fellow socialist blacks-with-a-capital-A – ahem – like billy bob. “I am tired of being embarrassed by elected Republican officials who have no sensitivity for issues that alienate whole segments of our population,” Reeves wrote. “This embarrassment is different for a black Republican. Not only do we have to sit in rooms and behave professionally towards Republicans who share this ideology, we have to go home to a hostile environment where we are called Uncle Tom and maligned as a sell-out to the community because of our membership in the Republican Party.” I really like Steele. His complaints are valid. But unlike billy bob, who insists the GOP is pretty much a bunch of racists, the problem lies more in ramping up a counter “Alinsky community organization” that can effectively challenge the constant onslaught of the socialist welfare Dims who paint the GOP with lies they are racists. Fact vs communicated message. A nuance that whizzes by shoeless billy bob. I’m a conservative. Were I to see that Steele could actually swing the GOP back into a more effective message system using new technology, I might even call myself a Republican one day. But I don’t base my support for concepts based on who has the most effective messaging system via technology. Reply Mike's America on January 12, 2010 at 5:42 pm @MataHarley said “billy bob, had to bail your comment #71 out of spam. ” I wouldn’t have bothered. BLOB has yet to make an original or interesting comment. If I wanted to know what George Soros thinks I could go to half a dozen web sites that present that view much better. Reply Mr. Irons on January 12, 2010 at 6:10 pm I don’t know Mike, bailing out his comment from the spam filter is embracing the Freedom of Speech. It isn’t fair to censor his comments, even if they’re factualy incorrect. I wish Martian Luther King, Jr. was still alive today as he would have greatly made Presidental matieral for his Political Party… Oh wait, he was a Republican who lead a non-violent march to free Americans from Democratic discrimination in the south… Reply Flyovercountry on January 12, 2010 at 6:50 pm B-Rob from Clevecago, Here is a partial list of Famous Black Conservatives who vote the Republican ticket most of the time. A Akindele Akinyemi, CEO of One Network and Conservative Educator Claude Allen, former White House Domestic Policy Advisor Renee Amoore, health care advocate & founder and president of The Amoore Group, Inc.; former candidate for RNC Co-Chairwoman  B Pearl Bailey, singer and actress Martin D Baker, Republican Candidate for US Congress in Missouri’s First(2010) and Fifth Districts(2008) J. Kenneth Blackwell, former Secretary of State of Ohio, former gubernatorial candidate Lynette Boggs, former Las Vegas City Councilwoman, former Clark County, NV commissioner, former candidate for the U.S. House of Representatives Peter Boulware, former NFL linebacker and Republican candidate for the Florida House of Representatives, District 9. Jennette Bradley, former Treasurer of the State of Ohio Edward Brooke, former U.S. Senator from Massachusetts, first African American elected by popular vote to the U.S. Senate Janice Rogers Brown, a federal judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals Blanche Bruce, former U.S. Senator from Mississippi, first African American to serve a full term in the U.S. Senate Victoria Buckley, former Colorado Secretary of State  Pearl Burris-Floyd, North Carolina House of Representatives, 110th District Keith Butler, Republican national committeeman from Michigan, former councilman for Detroit, minister and former U.S. Senatorial candidate Wendell N. Butler, Jr., mayor of Chester, Pennsylvania   C Herman Cain, businessman and media personality Jennifer Carroll, Florida State Representative  Clarence H. Carter, Director of the District of Columbia’s Department of Human Services, former administration official under President George W. Bush  Octavius Valentine Catto, civil rights activist and African American baseball pioneer Henry P. Cheatham, former U.S. Representative from North Carolina Eldridge Cleaver, author and civil rights leader William Thaddeus Coleman, Jr., fourth United States Secretary of Transportation, first African American Supreme Court Clerk    Ward Connerly, political activist, businessman, and former University of California Regent Stanley Crouch, American music and cultural critic, syndicated columnist, and novelist Frank G. Cousins, Jr., Sheriff, Essex County, Ma.  D Oscar Stanton de Priest, former U.S. Representative from Illinois Frederick Douglass, abolitionist, editor, orator, author, and statesman Clyde Drexler, former professional basketball player  E Larry Elder, talk radio host and commentator Robert Brown Elliott, former U.S. Representative from South Carolina Melvin H. Evans, former U.S. Representative from, and former Governor of, the U.S. Virgin Islands Charles Evers, civil-rights leader in Mississippi, brother of Medgar Evers  F James L. Farmer, Jr., civil rights leader Arthur Fletcher, official in the administrations of Presidents Nixon, Ford, Reagan, and George H.W. Bush; considered the “father of affirmative action” Gary Franks, former U.S. Representative from Connecticut Ryan Frazier, Aurora City Councilman, Candidate for United States Senate elections in Colorado, 2010 Samuel B. Fuller, founder and president of the Fuller Products Company, publisher of the New York Age and Pittsburgh Courier, head of the South Side Chicago NAACP, president of the National Negro Business League, and a prominent black Republican  G Paul R. Green, Jr., retired Senior Master Sergeant, U.S. Air Force, Businessman, former candidate California State Senate  H Jeremiah Haralson, former U.S. Representative from Alabama Erika Harold, Miss America 2003 James T Harris, radio talk-show host from Milwaukee, Wisc. Ted Hayes, activist for the homeless Jean Howard-Hill, national chair, NRAAC, National Republican African American Caucus John Adams Hyman, former U.S. Representative from North Carolina  I Niger Innis, commentator and activist  J Alphonso Jackson, Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Raynard Jackson, political consultant and political analyst for WUSA*9 TV (CBS affiliate) in Washington, DC Shawn James, businessman, real estate investor and developer, Republican Georgia House of Representative candidate Dr. Mildred Fay Jefferson, first African-American woman to graduate from Harvard Medical School; pro-life movement leader; Republican candidate for U.S. House and U.S. Senate  Wallace B. Jefferson, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Texas Timothy F. Johnson, Ph.D., Vice Chairman, North Carolina Republican Party and founder of the Frederick Douglass Foundation Justin Jordan, President of Texas College Republicans, Conservative activist  K Alan Keyes, former member of the Republican party and nominee for the U.S. Senate. Alveda King, former member of the Georgia House of Representatives. Niece of Martin Luther King, Jr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Baptist minister, political activist, and prominent leader in the African-American Civil Rights Movement Don King, boxing promoter Yaphet Kotto, actor  L John Mercer Langston, former U.S. Representative from Virginia Jefferson Franklin Long, former U.S. Representative from Georgia John Roy Lynch, former U.S. Representative from Mississippi  M Karl Malone, former professional basketball player Lenny McAllister, political analyst, community activist, and author Angela McGlowan, political analyst Henry E. McKoy, former North Carolina State Senator, former Peace Corps Africa Director, 2002-2009 Donald K. McLaurin, mayor of Trotwood, Ohio  James Meredith, civil rights leader Thomas Ezekiel Miller, former U.S. Representative from South Carolina George Washington Murray, former U.S. Representative from South Carolina Steven Mullins, Connecticut politician, First African American nominee for State Comptroller in state history. West Haven Commissioner.  N Charles Edmund Nash, former U.S Representative from Louisiana Constance Berry Newman, U.S. diplomat; former Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs; member of International Republican Institute Dr. Belinda Noah, attorney, law professor, and 2006 candidate for the Florida United States Senate  O  P Rod Paige, seventh U.S. Secretary of Education Gregory Parker, Comal County Commissioner, Commissioner Texas State Commission on Emergency Communications Sherman Parker, Missouri state representative, running for U.S. House of Representatives Star Parker, author, activist, and founder of CURE Edward J. Perkins, first African-American U.S. ambassador to South Africa Jesse Lee Peterson, civil rights activist, founder of Brotherhood of New Destiny Joseph C. Phillips, actor and commentator Samuel Pierce, former HUD Secretary P. B. S. Pinchback, twenty-fourth governor of Louisiana; first African-American governor of a U.S. state Homer Plessy, plaintiff in Plessy v. Ferguson Colin Powell, 65th United States Secretary of State Pierre-Richard Prosper, former Bush Administration war crimes official  Q Kristal C. Quarker, Health and Education Policy Advisor to Representative Thaddeus McCotter (R-MI-11), 2008 Chairwoman of the Black Republican Congressional Staff Association  R Chris Rock, American Comedian/ Actor. Joseph H. Rainey, former U.S. Representative from South Carolina, first African American to serve in the U.S. House of Representatives James T. Rapier, former U.S. Representative from Alabama Hiram Rhodes Revels, former U.S. Senator from Mississippi, first African American to serve in the U.S. Senate Condoleezza Rice, sixty-sixth U.S. Secretary of State Frances Rice, Chairman of National Black Republican Association Jackie Robinson, first African-American Major League Baseball player of the modern era Jack E. Robinson II, Boston-area businessman, civil rights activist Jack E. Robinson III, former U.S. Senate, Secretary of State, and U.S. House nominee from Massachusetts Vernon Robinson, former candidate for U.S. House of Representatives from North Carolina Angel Joy Rocker, former candidate for President  Joe Rogers, former Lieutenant Governor of Colorado, youngest Lieutenant Governor in Colorado history Carson Ross Mayor of Blue Springs, MO, Fmr. Missouri State Rep.  S Robert Smalls, South Carolina Joshua I. Smith, appointed commissioner of Minority Business Development by President George H. W. Bush DeForest “Buster” Soaries, former New Jersey Secretary of State Thomas Sowell, economist, writer and commentator Michael S. Steele, political commentator, former Lieutenant Governor of Maryland, former candidate for the U.S. Senate and elected chairman of the Republican National Committee. Sage Steele, television sports anchor Lynn Swann, former NFL player, former Pennsylvania gubernatorial candidate  T Noel C. Taylor – Mayor of Roanoke, Virginia from 1975 to 1992. Clarence Thomas, associate justice of the United States Supreme Court Sojourner Truth, abolitionist speaker and suffrage advocate  U Sheryl Underwood, comedienne and entertainer James L. Usry, former mayor of Atlantic City, New Jersey  V William T. Vernon, Registrar of the Treasury under President Theodore Roosevelt   W Dale Wainwright, Associate Justice of the Texas Supreme Court Jimmie Walker, actor and comedian Eric M. Wallace, Publisher of Freedom’s Journal Magazine  Zachary Ward, economist Booker T. Washington, educator and activist Maurice Washington, Nevada State Senator J. C. Watts, former U.S. Representative from Oklahoma Ida B. Wells, civil rights advocate, co-founder of the NAACP Allen West, candidate for U.S. House of Representatives from Florida J. Ernest Wilkins, Sr., Assistant Secretary of Labor under President Eisenhower  Armstrong Williams, radio and television commentator Michael L. Williams, Texas Railroad Commissioner Jeffrey L. Williams, President of Virginia Commonwealth University Chapter of Republicans for Black Empowerment Walter E. Williams, author, commentator, economist Vern Williams, member of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel Anthony Keith Womack , Minister, Educator and Philanthropist  Y  Z Reply Mike's America on January 12, 2010 at 6:51 pm @Mr. Irons: At some point we just have to say ENOUGH is ENOUGH! Allowing BLOB to filibuster and constantly move the goalposts of any discussion just encourages his intellectual dishonesty. I like what Bill Clinton said: a few years ago, a guy like BLOB would be fetching us coffee! Reply Mr. Irons on January 12, 2010 at 7:43 pm I understand what you are saying Mike, yet put in mind that the menality to censor and sqelch opposing voices is exactly what the neo-Liberal Left groups are wanting Conservatives groups to adopt so Conservative groups can be painted as facist. B-Rob’s posting mannerisms is baiting material mainly to encourage people to insult and name call him and to call for his censorship, and once that censorship happens he’ll play the victim card on various Liberal forums to demean the opposition (in this case this blog and you and me). I will not treat B-Rob as a professional, but an amature, due to his claims of being an Attorney due to the very childish mannerisms to namecall and demean his opposing views do not reflect someone within such a legal profession, but I refuse to name call him in the same way he has us. He has foolishly re-written history in an attempt to paint Republicans as the Confederate Party and has taken facts and taken them out of context badly, and for that it is in the rightful case for people such as us to question his “facts” and respond in kind with true facts and leave it up to others to chose what they believe. I will point out I have personaly handled forum moderation in the past, mostly video game community forums, which have users who visit who have vastly different views and opinions. The only time I have personaly had to ban or tempban people was those who violated the basic terms of service of the forums which basicly had the outlined rules of do not harrass other users, post racist materials, or create a violent enviorment (violent in terms of encouraging hacking/cracking attempts). Video Game Communities are very… aggressive in nature where religon and politics can boil down to smears between forum goers, and those who end up with even temporary bans have quickly fell behind the victim card from admin/moderator abuse and how unjust the ban was by claiming the moderator who placed the ban didn’t subscribe to the same mindset as the troublemaker. B-Rob’s comments and attempts to devaule his opposition is remotely on par with the groups of people I have had to issue tempbans/permabans on who posted grossly disturbing racist comments and images following the comments. Also as part of the Freedom of Speech, we are also given the ablity of Freedom to Ignore and as such while he should be free to type his mind we should enact our ablity to ignore his comments. Basicly, “Don’t feed the trolls.” 4Chan is a moderator’s nightmare. Reply MataHarley on January 12, 2010 at 7:58 pm @Mr. Irons, I had to laugh at this: I will not treat B-Rob as a professional, but an amature, due to his claims of being an Attorney due to the very childish mannerisms to namecall and demean his opposing views do not reflect someone within such a legal profession, but I refuse to name call him in the same way he has us. By gosh… more generous towards lawyers than I’d be. Kudos to your high road. But I will say this. The GOP has no more moral high ground than Dems for past behavior towards slavery and/or racism. While one may argue the nuances as to who bears more responsibility in their attitudes and actions five decades ago, I will also state that shoeless billy bob wasn’t even in – or barely at best – diapers at that time. He has no personal grounds for his whining, and every reason to be gracious and appreciative of those who fought to ensure he had his chance… as an American… for the success he enjoys today. This is the problem with shoeless billy bob… fighting battles that have been legally resolved via federal law before he began singing “itsy bitsy spider”. Instead he revels in the past for his talking points when he should be looking around at his, and HIS President’s catapult to success via American opportunity. An opportunity I will say, once again, that he and HIS President are predisposed to deny to his children and grandchildren in order to gain social justice power. And that achievement of power will be the economic ruin of this nation… and well as the opportunity offered to the average man in the street of any color. Reply Mr. Irons on January 12, 2010 at 8:18 pm MataHarley, I have seen extremely disturbing debates over simple matters such as which game system is better than another turn into highly disturbing “You’re a *insert insult here*” flame wars and have had to do damage control for the forums/ game servers. Hence my, “highground” due to years of community moderation. I have been chewed out by users on both sides of the political prisim over the years and have come to this mindset to dealing with forum, “trolls.” I’ve stepped out of that community last year due to how much venom floats both in forums and in onlilne games. Also, I have been an instructor of self defense and combat styles. While I may have never served in the United States Military such as Old Trooper;my instructors (and Masters) was a former United States Marine, a former Russian Spetznaz, and a former South Korean Special Ops member and have been introduced to various different ideologies with how to deal with oppositions ranging from direct force to subtle solutions which include hammering forth the facts now matter how much distraction the opposition tries. The Russian, of whom I won’t name, was surprisingly grateful to be living in Kansas once the Wall fell and was quick to hammer into my head that I should be quick to question my Government at all times even if it’s people I would politicaly support so I agree fully with your statement of the GOP and the Democrat parties in terms of moral grounds. The encumbent Republicans in Congress and Senate that represent Kansas are exteremly out of touch of issues at hand for my State and the former Governor Seblius was just as distant to her fellow citizen’s true problems and expanded spending into many programs that has proven fiscally fatal for the State of Kansas and the Commerical sector. Reply Old Trooper on January 12, 2010 at 9:30 pm A Booker T. Washington quote that pretty much sums up his thoughts: “There is a class of colored people who make a business of keeping the troubles, the wrongs, and the hardships of the Negro race before the public. Having learned that they are able to make a living out of their troubles, they have grown into the settled habit of advertising their wrongs-partly because they want sympathy and partly because it pays. Some of these people do not want the Negro to lose his grievances, because they do not want to lose their jobs.” There is also a class of people that are career politicians that give lip service to “Civil Rights”, promote Affirmative Action by lowering the bar in exchange for votes and feed at the Public Trough. The Founding Fathers never envisioned Career Politicians as a superior class of folks. There is No Reference made in the Bill of Rights or the Constitution of Social or Economic Justice either. Although I can legitimately claim Minority Status, I never have. I have Native American kinfolk that live on reservations in North Dakota that were treated more harshly than any Southern Slaves. Some still reside there. Over the years I have grown to despise hyphenated Americans because as Booker T. stated, overcoming hardships through diligent hard work is the measuring stick, not the tint of your skin or who your Great Grandparents were. The Military offered me the opportunity to do that hard work and I have earned two advanced degrees from schools that accepted me on merit not race. The Military promoted me based upon performance, not on any quota. My current responsibilities came from getting results in places like Somalia, the Balkans, Iraq and Afghanistan with limited resources. Regarding Mr. B-Rob’s comments, he comes off like a punk with a chip on his shoulder regardless of what he claims to be. Lawyers are a dime a dozen and so are folks that try to play the schoolyard bully past the age of 12 on internet forums. Now if you will excuse me, I am tasked with my part on winning Mr. Obama’s War. He owns the damn thing now. Oh and by the way, I have no political party affiliation nor will I ever. I despise racists, career politicians and folks past the age of 12 that suffer from arrested adolescence and offer personal insults instead of logic. Take Care! Reply Skookum on January 12, 2010 at 10:17 pm PV, nice wedding pic, do you still wear a cumberbund? Reply Patvann on January 12, 2010 at 10:57 pm Skooks Only for B-Rob, and only when he wears the wig. Reply Tom Degan on January 13, 2010 at 3:17 am For the Republicans to now claim a newly-found racial sensitivity is quite amusing to say the least. If that is the case, why the hell did they choose the dumbest black guy they could possibly find to chair the RNC? Racial sensitivity? Please. Harry Reid will survive this little snafu he’s gotten into – but just barely. As the numbers stand, he is not likely to be reelected this November. He should step aside with dignity and allow his party to nominate someone with a better chance of winning on Election Day. Maybe he will do the right thing – who knows?. In spite of everything he strikes me as essentially a decent guy. He should just go back to Nevada to a dignified retirement and bask in the glow of his career as a public servant – or go to work as a lobbyist for the gambling industry – anything. He just needs to realize that his number is up. Reid’s comments, while inarticulate, hardly constitute the fuss that is currently being made. All it really amounts to is the GOP’s Kvetch Du Jour. They have so little credibility left that it really is quite touching watching them stoop to these non-issues. It is total desperation on their part. Today it is Harry Reid’s harmless gaffe; tomorrow it will be something equally stupid and irrelevant. Just you wait and see. http://www.tomdegan.blogspot.com Tom Degan Goshen, NY Reply Larry on January 13, 2010 at 5:40 am Cheese and rice you people are so full of crap. What a group of pathetic douchebags. Reply Patvann on January 13, 2010 at 5:42 am Yeah Tom…This ONE item is the ONLY thing us “cons” have been yelling about this past year. Pffft. Reply Aye on January 13, 2010 at 10:23 am Not only does our flyby troll have two personalities, it seems that they both enjoy a preoccupation with douchebags. Is that like a fetish or something? Larry Jeebus View at EasyCaptures.com Reply Trackbacks/Pingbacks Right Pundits - Harry Reid, Obama: ‘Light-Skinned’ with ‘No Negro Dialect’ Comment (Video)... There is another scandal involving the Senate Majority Leader Harry…Click to Edit – SaveCancelDelete Submit a Comment Cancel replyYour email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *Comment * Name * Email * Website Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment. Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.