Meta-Blog

SEARCH QandO

Email:
Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock
MichaelW

BLOGROLL QandO

 
 
Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
 
 
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News
Politics
Business
Science
Technology
Health
Entertainment
Sports
Opinion/Editorial

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict

Blogging

Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links

Regional

Regional News

Publications

News Publications

 
Ted Rall wins "most obnoxious quote" of 2007
Posted by: McQ on Wednesday, January 02, 2008

That per John Hawkins of RightWingNews who lists his top 40.

The Rall quote?
"Over time, however, the endless war in Iraq began to play a role in natural selection. Only idiots signed up; only idiots died. Back home, the average I.Q. soared." — Ted Rall
Part of that "honest debate" back home we hear so much about, I suppose.

My favorite for most idiotic of the year goes to Joy Behar who demonstrates for all her cluelessness and advanced case of BDS:
"I don’t know what it’s going to take for people to really wake up and understand that they [the Bush administration] are liars and they are murderers." — Joy Behar from The View
I'm sure we'll be told over and over and over again, even in the face of those two quotes, how it is the right who has the hate machine, not the left.

Of course, in that regard, the left always has certain righties it can point to in order to illustrate their claim and you can always count on Ann Coulter to come through for them in the clutch:
"I'd say something about John Edwards, but if you use the word 'f*ggot', you have to go to rehab." — Ann Coulter
Wonder if she'll be invited to CPAC this year?
 
TrackBacks
Return to Main Blog Page
 
 

Previous Comments to this Post 

Comments
For pure idiocy , #33 came to mind before I looked at the list:
...miraculously, for the first time in history, steel was melted by fire. It is physically impossible.
 
Written By: Ted
URL: http://
I’m sure we’ll be told over and over and over again, even in the face of those two quotes, how it is the right who has the hate machine, not the left.
It’s not mutually exclusive - both sides are doing it. I think both sides see their sides’ claims as either funny or accurate, if a bit exaggerated, while they see the other sides’ claims as angry, dishonest, and extreme. And, I’m convinced, both sides really can’t comprehend how it is the other side can see things differently. People are increasingly so caught up in their own perspective that it’s become difficult to step outside and "walk a mile" in anothers’ shoes, and ask why it is that smart people on the other side are persuaded to think differently. Instead people on both sides too often just find a way to dismiss the other side (usually through personal insult or ridicule), note the stupid quotes or missteps of the otherside, and forgive those from their side.

Is the old SLN Churchlady would say "Isn’t that convenient!"
 
Written By: Scott Erb
URL: http://faculty.umf.maine.edu/~erb/blog.htm
note the stupid quotes or missteps of the otherside, and forgive those from their side
Erb on Kerry:
Those who attack Kerry over this are the real a******s.
and
Kerry, smart enough to realize that in the gotcha game an apology is precisely the wrong thing to do, fired back...

So why not apologize? In an ideal world, Kerry could say, “gee, I didn’t mean to insult anyone and I apologize for any offense.” But the gotcha game is perverse in how it plays itself out. Once you apologize, you are admitting that the charge is true, at least in the world of modern American political discourse. The opponents will take the apology and parade it as proof that you meant what you said.
But then came Erb on Limbaugh:
Limbaugh would have the moral high ground, and isn’t it more important to do the right thing rather than worry what others are going to say? ... the way Rush responded — going on the attack — suggests he is, deep down, an insecure person. That’s OK, and it explains a lot, but somehow it causes me to feel a little sorry for him.

Isn’t that convenient!

Please, Erb, educate us some more about "people [who] are increasingly so caught up in their own perspective."
 
Written By: JWG
URL: http://
JWG, you make the charmingly naive mistake of not understanding "gude fax" versus "ungude fax" and instead rely upon the outmoded and unfaddish concept of "truth", "Reason", "consistency" and the like, all artifacts of the Dead White European Phallocracy that dominates so much of the world today, to our great detriment. The use of gude fax and ungude fax, or their especially vile "doubleplusungude fax" counter-part, have a libratory effect on discourse. Now any statement can be true, and valid, or a vile falsehood, depending on whether it meets the criteria of a gude fact, i.e., it supports my opinion, of that moment or is an ungude fact, i.e, does NOT support my opinion of that moment. Therefore, John Kerry’s statements or Limbaugh’s can be both gude or ungude, depending on whether I support their opinion, AT THAT MOMENT. So, John Kerry is right, i.e. his statement is a gude fact, when it is used to defeat Warmongering, Theo-cratic, Neo-cons, in love with American Power and determined upon a course of hubris, that will only lead, inevitably to a terminal decline in US power, OR it can be a ungude fact, as in when YOU, a Warmongering, Theo-cratic, ...US power (Alternatively a Right Wing Death Beast-or RWDB) use that very same quote.

Obviously you attended a VERY inferior public institution of learning, some time ago as you seem wedded to the aforementioned outmoded concepts, and are seemingly ignorant of the new, quite useful concepts of "gude" and "ungude" fax. Please try to attend my popular on-line lecture series, "The Maine Perspective on the New Disputative Paradigms, ’Gude’ and ’Ungude Fax.’ Wonder Tools for the Defeat of the RWDB or Merely Academic Gee-Gaws Designed to Increase Our Apparent Erudition and Word Count for Journals and Tenure?"
 
Written By: Joe
URL: http://
Both sides do it...
Let’s all jump off this bridge shall we.

The difference I see a lot of times when it comes from the ’left’ it’s people like, oh, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi.

When it comes from the ’right’ it seems to be people like Ann Coulter.

Extra points will be awarded to the students who can discern the difference in why it’s sometimes more important when one person says something than when another one does, even when their stupid, asshat comments are equally vile.

 
Written By: looker
URL: http://
Looker said:
The difference I see a lot of times when it comes from the ’left’ it’s people like, oh, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi.

When it comes from the ’right’ it seems to be people like Ann Coulter.

Extra points will be awarded to the students who can discern the difference in why it’s sometimes more important when one person says something than when another one does, even when their stupid, asshat comments are equally vile.
Mike Huckabee is poised to win the Iowa Caucus. This is the same man who has compared gay people to necrophiliacs, and suggested that those with the AIDS virus should be quarantined, long after it was determined that the HIV virus cannot be transmitted through casual contact.

Again, this coming not from some obscure right wing blog, but from the man who is about to win the Iowa Caucus.

Imagine for one moment that Hillary compared blacks to rapists, or if Edwards compared Jewish people to child molesters. It is hard to imagine, of course. But that is effectively what Huckabee did in comparing gay people to persons who enjoy having sex with corpses.

We’re not talking about Ann Coulter here. We are talking about a leading candidate for POTUS. And it appears that a plurality of voters on the right in Iowa are prepared to vote for someone who spews this hate against a minority group. A group identified by an immutable characteristic.

The right wing in this country simply refuses to come to terms with the hate and bigotry that is a key component of its ideology.
 
Written By: mkultra
URL: http://
Is it wrong that I actually hope for the esteemed Maine Prof to show up because I know that the accurate satires are not far behind?

"(D)oubleplusungude fax" is a new favourite, sounding like something from the Bayeux tapestry. Thank you Joe.
 
Written By: Uncle Pinky
URL: http://
Actually I think some of the higher numbered quotes as not even particularly offensive and are included to give a pretense of balance. Calling Edwards a fagg*t and wishing people dead aren’t really the same.
 
Written By: Bandit
URL: http://
Is it wrong that I actually hope for the esteemed Maine Prof to show up because I know that the accurate satires are not far behind?

Why want HIM, when you can have us?! I mean what you like REAL pearls over cultured ones, though the difference is infinitesimal? With us you get all the good clunky pseudo-intellectual verbiage, without having to really worry about what we think...
 
Written By: Joe
URL: http://
And it appears that a plurality of voters on the right in Iowa are prepared to vote for someone who spews this hate against a minority group. A group identified by an immutable characteristic.
And when he actually gets elected, it will matter. Till then, he’s the problem of the same state that previously awarded us the rights to Bill & Hillary Clinton.

I wasn’t aware that winning the Iowa caucus made one President of the United States these days. I thought all these little pseudo voter choice caucus elections are just part of the smoke that wafts from under the door of that cigar smoke filled back room where choices are actually being made.

Just because he’s a candidate doesn’t mean he’s going to be elected. And I’ll go out on a limb for 2008 predictions and say he will be neither the Republican candidate for President in 2008, or the President in 2009.

You weren’t reading far enough -
Extra points will be awarded to the students who can discern the difference in why it’s sometimes more important when one person says something than when another one does, even when their stupid, asshat comments are equally vile
.

Hillary is a UNITED STATES SENATOR - see, I put that in caps so you would understand that it’s important. She votes on matters of national consequence and can influence government at the Federal level.
Mike Huckalung is FORMER Governor of Arkansas - see I put the word ’former’ in caps so you would understand that’s as important a point as UNITED STATES SENATOR.

Now, FORMER governor might be important if you currently live in Arkansas, but possibly not, but not so important at all if you live in one of the other 49 States.
If you want to talk about Mike Beebe he’s the current governor of Arkansas, and that’s probably actually reasonably important, but not for the purposes of worrying about private citizen, FORMER Mike Huckabee’s comments.

My book says when the election is over Mike Huckabee won’t be President, or Governor of Arkansas.
Hillary Clinton on the other hand will either be US President, or US Senator from New York.

You get no extra points.
 
Written By: looker
URL: http://
When it comes from the ’right’ it seems to be people like Ann Coulter.
Or McQ. But I think you see similar things from politicians on both sides, as well as pundits, talk radio, etc. Maybe people would be well advised to stop seeing this as some kind of political jihad, and actually listen to the other side and be self-critical as well as other-critical.
 
Written By: Scott Erb
URL: http://faculty.umf.maine.edu/~erb/blog.htm
Sheesh, just the other day, mkultra was claiming the conservatives hate Huckabee. Now he’s claiming conservatives love Huckabee.

Anyone wondering just when mkultra’s head will explode?
 
Written By: Steverino
URL: http://
Or McQ.
Huh?
You’re comparing McQ to Coulter? The bombthrowing Bitch of New Canaan Conn? McQ????

I don’t recall him going off on anything like ’prefected Jews’ (the right) or "reminiscent of the armies of Jhengis Khan’ (the left).

And not to ding McQ, but you don’t get any extra points either.

 
Written By: looker
URL: http://
Hillary is a UNITED STATES SENATOR - see, I put that in caps so you would understand that it’s important. She votes on matters of national consequence and can influence government at the Federal level.
Mike Huckalung is FORMER Governor of Arkansas - see I put the word ’former’ in caps so you would understand that’s as important a point as UNITED STATES SENATOR.
A distincition without a difference. Moreover, the point is moot: Hillary has not expressed hatred toward a minority group in the way that Huckabee has. Has she criticized her political opponents? Sure. What politican doesn’t. But she has never done so using an immutable characteristic of the candidate.

Someone’s importance is not measured simply by the title of the office that person holds. Indeed, many important people hold no office whatsoever. Bill Clinton, for example, is a very important person, yet he holds no office.

Contrary to your position, being a leading candidate for POTUS makes a person important. You may not think that such a person is important. I do. The fact that you latch onto such a facile distintion between Hillary and Huck speaks volumes.

But more to the point, my point is that it appears there are many, many voters who are prepared to support Huck in spite of, or perhaps because of, his expressed bigotry. And again, I think that says something about the state of politics in America today, and about the right wing.

There is no equivalent left leaning politician. There is no politician on the left of any signifigance who has made explicitly bigoted remarks about a minority group or person based on an immutable characteristic of the group or person.

It reminds one "Macaca." George Allen was another possible right wing candidate for POTUS. But then he went and used an epithet to refer to a person of color. And he was roundly and rightly criticized for the remark. My guess is that many on the right had no problem with the remark.
 
Written By: mkultra
URL: http://
Sheesh, just the other day, mkultra was claiming the conservatives hate Huckabee. Now he’s claiming conservatives love Huckabee.

Anyone wondering just when mkultra’s head will explode?
Some love him, some hate him. But none in the latter category seem to do so because of his bigotry.

I said, above, that a "plurality" on the right was prepared to vote for him. I would explain what plurality means, Steverino, but somehow I think the effort would be lost on you.
 
Written By: mkultra
URL: http://
Imagine for one moment that Hillary compared blacks to rapists, or if Edwards compared Jewish people to child molesters. It is hard to imagine, of course.
Well, in fairness, it’s only hard to imagine because both blacks and rapists make up a large part of Hillary’s constituency and Edwards thinks all Jews are neocons, which is actually worse than a child molester.
The right wing in this country simply refuses to come to terms with the hate and bigotry that is a key component of its ideology.
But the Left is hate- and bigotry-free. Yep.
Hillary has not expressed hatred toward a minority group in the way that Huckabee has
...except for the rightwing noise machine, who are people too, dontchaknow. And is she speaking truth to power when, as Big Nanny, she threatens my parental rights?
But more to the point, my point is that it appears there are many, many voters who are prepared to support Huck in spite of, or perhaps because of, his expressed bigotry. And again, I think that says something about the state of politics in America today, and about the right wing.
Aha, but you see, it says something about the Left as well. That a large swath of the country is so petrified of a Hillary Clinton or an Al Gore or a John Kerry in the Oval Office that they would rather pick a Republican (gasp) who can’t speak English (ironically) but who seems to be more closely aligned with their values. OK, seemed to. Looking back on it, Bush voters to a large extent still do not regret their vote because the alternative was much, much worse.
 
Written By: Rob
URL: http://
You are very small mind, mk. No wonder you became a lawyer.

I know what "plurality" means. Apparently you don’t realize that (a) if it’s only a plurality that supports him, then a majority does not, (b) not all Republicans are conservative, and (c) the winner of the Iowa caucus rarely becomes President. Only one non-incumbent to win the caucus has won the general election. So Huckabee leading in Iowa is about as meaningful as Britney Spears giving parenting tips.

 
Written By: Steverino
URL: http://
"Why want HIM, when you can have us?!"

True. In this case the simulation is better than the reality; not only more amusing, but more logical and with consistent word definitions.


JWG;

Your arguments carry no weight; not only do you have no letters after your name (prima facia evidence of lack of intellectual worth) but you are not a recognized radio/tv expert.
 
Written By: timactual
URL: http://
OOps! prima facia should be prima facie.
 
Written By: timactual
URL: http://
I don’t have letters after my name either.
 
Written By: timactual
URL: http://
Maybe you ought to check a couple entries back from this one - you know, the one titled INCREDIBLE - about Mike Huckabee.
The title wasn’t an indication he was a good thing.
He will be consigned to the dust-bin of politics soon enough.

Meanwhile it’s interesting, you’re kinda busy over here making inferential bigoted remarks about people who don’t vote on the ’left’ of the spectrum, even when we specifically say we don’t find favor with people making stupid ass racial, ethnic, etc statements & remarks.
Which speaks volumes about you too.

As if we’re all defending Huckabee and other idiots on the right (Coulter) when, posted and commented as evidence every day, things could hardly be further from the truth.
Of course, in that regard, the left always has certain righties it can point to in order to illustrate their claim and you can always count on Ann Coulter to come through for them in the clutch:
"I’d say something about John Edwards, but if you use the word ’f*ggot’, you have to go to rehab." — Ann Coulter
Wonder if she’ll be invited to CPAC this year?
So the evidence is right there before you that people on the right don’t like that crap any more than you do.
I try to find it on the left, but my random samples of it suck, so maybe you can find some examples on the left that will restore my faith in humanity’s left of center children.
 
Written By: looker
URL: http://
"Calling Edwards a fagg*t and wishing people dead aren’t really the same."

Very true.

Coulter was, of course, making a joke to illustrate just exactly what happened when she made it. You can’t call someone a fagg*t because you get sent to therapy. I think she certainly understands that "fagg*t" is offensive but so is the idea that offensive speech ought to result in therapy. It turned out to be a pretty bad way to illustrate that because no one *cares* that we have a class of thought and speech crime that gets people sent to re-education in this country.

I didn’t think Kathy Griffith was anywhere near as offensive as people made out that she was. *She* was making a joke poking fun at all the people who thanked Jesus for their award and making a show, most likely put on, of doing so.

Behar and Rosie are simply psychotic Truthers. They aren’t offensive, they are clinically disconnected with reality.

Rall is sub-human.
 
Written By: Synova
URL: http://synova.blogspot.com
Course, as offensive as Coulter is (and she is, on purpose) I don’t think that anything she’s ever done quite compares to that conversation quoted about raping Condi Rice.
 
Written By: Synova
URL: http://synova.blogspot.com
Most of these lefty quotes fall into a few common categories: Either Bush/Republicans are criminal nazis, or they hope for death/arrest/misfortune for republicans.

Ann Coulter’s inanity surely doesn’t measure up to Bill Maher wishing Cheney dead on TV, or Joy Behar’s "murderers" comment.

But it is all good, in the end hate gets repaid with hate.....in spades.

 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
Well, in fairness, it’s only hard to imagine because both blacks and rapists make up a large part of Hillary’s constituency and Edwards thinks all Jews are neocons, which is actually worse than a child molester.
Really. Edwards said all Jewish people are Neocons? When did he say that?
But the Left is hate- and bigotry-free. Yep.
Not sure what "the left" is. Most likely some people who are left of center in their politics harbor bigoted feelings.

But that’s not the issue here, is it? The issue here is that no leading national politican on the left makes negative, categorical statements about minority groups based on the very thing that places them in the minority.
...except for the rightwing noise machine, who are people too, dontchaknow. And is she speaking truth to power when, as Big Nanny, she threatens my parental rights?
This is classic, right wing propaganda. There is an ongoing attempt on the right to equate criticism of ones political opponents as being the same thing as bigotry toward a minority group. It’s not. But that’s the effort.

So when Huckabee equates gay people with necrophiliacs that’s ok because, well, because Hillary criticizes the right wing noise machine.
Aha, but you see, it says something about the Left as well. That a large swath of the country is so petrified of a Hillary Clinton or an Al Gore or a John Kerry in the Oval Office that they would rather pick a Republican (gasp) who can’t speak English (ironically) but who seems to be more closely aligned with their values. OK, seemed to. Looking back on it, Bush voters to a large extent still do not regret their vote because the alternative was much, much worse.


I suspect most on the right would support Bush no matter what he did. One might call them "dead-enders."
I know what "plurality" means. Apparently you don’t realize that (a) if it’s only a plurality that supports him, then a majority does not, (b) not all Republicans are conservative, and (c) the winner of the Iowa caucus rarely becomes President. Only one non-incumbent to win the caucus has won the general election. So Huckabee leading in Iowa is about as meaningful as Britney Spears giving parenting tips.
Steverino, I used the term plurality precisely because I knew that he is not going to win a majority. If I thought that he would win a majority, I would have used "majority." See how simple that is?

You are really descending to new levels of silliness.

Actually, in 1996 Dole won the Iowa Caucus, and Bush won it in 2000. In fact, of the last 8 caucuses, only twice has the eventual GOP nominee not won it. And one of those contests, in 1980, Reagan lost by only two percentage points.

For the GOP, doing well in the Iowa Caucus is practically necessary to win the nomination. Which makes the Iowa Caucus important. Which makes Huckabee important. An important bigot.


 
Written By: mkultra
URL: http://
Meanwhile it’s interesting, you’re kinda busy over here making inferential bigoted remarks about people who don’t vote on the ’left’ of the spectrum, even when we specifically say we don’t find favor with people making stupid ass racial, ethnic, etc statements & remarks.
Which speaks volumes about you too.
But that’s just it: I haven’t seen any evidence that those on the right who oppose Huckabee do so because of his bigoted remarks.

Now, if John Edwards started comparing blacks to rapists, or Hillary started comparing Jewish people to child molesters, I imagine there would be a concerted effort on the left to drive him or her out of the primary and the party for that very reason. I certainly can’t imagine that either would gain any actual, significant support, particularly if neither backed away or apologized for the remark.

But Huckabee says these things about gay people, and compares them to necrophiliacs, and there is silence on the right about the remark. Not a peep. Moreover, Huckabee does have significant support on the right, even in the national polls.

It’s a pretty stark contrast. And I believe that it is fair to draw inferences based on it.
 
Written By: mkultra
URL: http://
This is classic, right wing propaganda. There is an ongoing attempt on the right to equate criticism of ones political opponents as being the same thing as bigotry toward a minority group. It’s not. But that’s the effort.
...and yet all who oppose Hillary and Gore from the Right are "haters". Ask Eleanor Clift, et al...
I suspect most on the right would support Bush no matter what he did. One might call them "dead-enders."
Well, you don’t paint with a broad brush, now do you?
Not sure what "the left" is.
...although you’re absolutely sure what the Right is...
But that’s just it: I haven’t seen any evidence that those on the right who oppose Huckabee do so because of his bigoted remarks.
I didn’t have to get that far. I wrote him off for his closet liberalism. The latest news just reinforces my opinion.
 
Written By: Rob
URL: http://
mkultra : "But that’s just it: I haven’t seen any evidence that those on the right who oppose Huckabee do so because of his bigoted remarks."

Mostly because "bigoted remarks" are made out to be far more important that actual bigotry. No one on the right listens to accusations of bigotry anymore because the people making those accusations blew their wad a long time ago and now it’s just random noise. Like the boy who cried wolf over and over. "Wolf! Wolf!" and you run out and look and it’s a fuzzy tree-stump... has a passing resemblance to bigotry and can be spun that way but closer examination and it turns out the person is demonstrably not a bigot no matter the infelicitous choice of words.

And these days, you don’t even have to *say* anything wrong to get in trouble. It’s all *code words* for racism and bigotry and everything else.

So who listens to it anymore? Can’t win so why try? Watch your language and you just get accused of using code words or some other super secret way of being a bigot that no one notices.

Huckabee is a evangelical preacher. Ding! Ding! This means he most certainly thinks that Mormons aren’t Christian and homosexuality, like *many* other things, is a sin.

OH MY DOG.

I never knew!

So no, I don’t oppose Huckabee because of his supposed bigoted remarks.

He’s a big government nanny-stater socialist, more Democrat than the Democrats, and utterly addicted to letting criminals out of jail. At least... that’s first impressions.
 
Written By: Synova
URL: http://synova.blogspot.com
"Coulter was, of course, making a joke to illustrate just exactly what happened when she made it. "

And it was a twofer; she got to hit both Edwards and political correctness with the same joke. I think of her as a political and intentionally provocative Don Rickles, but Rickles is funnier.
 
Written By: timactual
URL: http://
As for Ted Rall, if his IQ hit room temperature it’d be a large increase.
 
Written By: JorgXMcKie
URL: http://
mkultra’s intellectual dishonesty knows no bounds.

He is here excoriating Republicans because about 25% of those in the Iowa caucus support Huckabee. He conveniently neglects the following:

1. The quotes from Huckabee are over 15 years old, and mkultra doesn’t bother to check whether Huckabee ever changed his mind or apologized for his statements.

2. Huckabee’s polling at about 5% in New Hampshire, so it’s clear his numbers in Iowa aren’t reflected in the party at large.

3. If he can get his panties in a twist about Huckabee’s tepid support, then he’ll have to explain why his party keeps electing former KKK member Robert Byrd to the Senate.


mkultra wouldn’t know an honest argument if it bit him on his coccyx.
 
Written By: Steverino
URL: http://
I would only add to this pretty funny discussion a defense of Coulter. I’ve had occasion to take her to task (second letter), but the woman has bushwacked her way through a half century of liberal lies and is entitled to let the machete fall mercilessly when she feels like it. There’s a tendency on the right to throw overboard anyone the Left villifies and tries to force out of bounds. I wouldn’t trade Ann Coulter for 200 George Wills, or Bill Kristols, for that matter. She knows how to fight liberals: first cut their intellectual achilles tendons.
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
And Mk - where’s your cite? I’d like to read what Huckaboob said, not what MKUltra, faceless entity on the internet, says he said.

Then I’ll decide if what he said closely approximates what your claim asserts.

And it won’t change my opinion of Huck one bit...read my typing -
I don’t like him, I don’t trust him, I won’t vote for him.

Hmmmm, who knew, I must be a lefty.
 
Written By: looker
URL: http://
mkultra has forgotten that the Democrats shiny new addition to the campaign this year (Barack Obama) has rascism as one of his core beliefs. It became obvious enough that his church has taken down the page that listed its’ "Black Value System", and instead runs an essay trying to defend that system without listing the values themselves. Where is the condemnation from the left? Has he been driven out from the primaries?

BTW:The last time a high-profile candidate ran for a Presidential nomination with a "value" system based primarily on race was David Duke. (Al Sharpton uses his race-abiting to get money and publicity) In Louisiana he got about 12,000 votes in 1992; when he ran for the Dems in ’88 he got 23,000. Neither National Committee ever endorsed him for any position.
Jessie Jackson was so damaged by his "hymietown" remarks in the 1984 primaries that he ran again in 1988 and got twice as much support.
 
Written By: Ted
URL: http://

 
Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
Name:
Email:
URL:
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Comment:
   
 
Vicious Capitalism

Divider

Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks

Divider

Divider