# Now We Know The Truth About Accusing the Right of Being Racists



## boedicca

The Daily Caller's "JournoList" expose has finally resolved the matter:

Based on Spencer Ackerman's tactic:

_*&#8220;If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game they&#8217;ve put upon us,&#8221; Ackerman wrote on the Journolist listserv in April 2008. &#8220;Instead, take one of them &#8212; Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares &#8212; and call them racists.&#8221;*_

Conservatives Karl Rove and Fred Barnes respond to Journolist &#8216;racist&#8217; post | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment


It's out in the open now.  The Left uses the racist accusation against the Right, the Tea Party, Conservatives, the GOP...  Anyone who critiques prominent lefties or their programs will be falsely attacked as a racist as a diversionary tactic.

More evidence is Sherrod's hateful comment regarding the GOP to Media Matters.

So here's the thing you lefties should understand:  we're not falling for it.


----------



## Jarhead

boedicca said:


> The Daily Caller's "JournoList" expose has finally resolved the matter:
> 
> Based on Spencer Ackerman's tactic:
> 
> _*If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game theyve put upon us, Ackerman wrote on the Journolist listserv in April 2008. Instead, take one of them  Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares  and call them racists.*_
> 
> Conservatives Karl Rove and Fred Barnes respond to Journolist racist post | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment
> 
> 
> It's out in the open now.  The Left uses the racist accusation against the Right, the Tea Party, Conservatives, the GOP...  Anyone who critiques prominent lefties or their programs will be falsely attacked as a racist as a diversionary tactic.
> 
> More evidence is Sherrod's hateful comment regarding the GOP to Media Matters.
> 
> *So here's the thing you lefties should understand:  we're not falling for it*.



No, we are not. But the lefties themselves are.


----------



## VaYank5150

Who the hell is Spencer Ackerman and WTF is "The Daily Caller's "JournoList""?


----------



## Truthmatters

The right will not be able to force the admin to react to these manufacctured stroies anymore.

This last case will make it impossible for them to FORCE immediate action from the WH.

You guys screwed your pooch of false outrage.

Now people will be required (even you righties) to examine these cases slowly and get all the imfo.


I think this is a sign that the right is desperate to negatively effect the midterms because they know they are not going to be able to claim they have a mandate with the few seats they gain.


----------



## Jarhead

Truthmatters said:


> The right will not be able to force the admin to react to these manufacctured stroies anymore.
> 
> This last case will make it impossible for them to FORCE immediate action from the WH.
> 
> You guys screwed your pooch of false outrage.
> 
> Now people will be required (even you righties) to examine these cases slowly and get all the imfo.
> 
> 
> I think this is a sign that the right is desperate to negatively effect the midterms because they know they are not going to be able to claim they have a mandate with the few seats they gain.



You babble too much. 

So the right forced immediate action from the WH?

Thats pretty sad. A blogger forced the White House to act without thinking. 

Seems to me the White House has a bigger issue. Maybe they should stop reading blogs as fact....you know....LIKE YOU DO!


----------



## masquerade

VaYank5150 said:


> Who the hell is Spencer Ackerman and WTF is "The Daily Caller's "JournoList""?


VaYank ... did you bother to read the article?


----------



## txlonghorn

Truthmatters said:


> The right will not be able to force the admin to react to these manufacctured stroies anymore.
> 
> This last case will make it impossible for them to FORCE immediate action from the WH.
> 
> You guys screwed your pooch of false outrage.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now people will be required (even you righties) to examine these cases slowly and get all the imfo.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Don't you think this administration should have done this all along?
> 
> I think this is a sign that the right is desperate to negatively effect the midterms because they know they are not going to be able to claim they have a mandate with the few seats they gain.
Click to expand...





> Now people will be required (even you righties) to examine these cases slowly and get all the imfo.



Don't you think this administration should have done this all along?


----------



## boedicca

It's also pretty clear that the reason the Left thinks there is a Vast Right Wing Conspiracy is because they have has their own Vast Leftwing version going on:

_When I'm talking to people from outside Washington, one question inevitably comes up: Why is the media so liberal? The question often reflects a suspicion that members of the press get together and decide on a story line that favors liberals and Democrats and denigrates conservatives and Republicans.

My response has usually been to say, yes, there's liberal bias in the media, but there's no conspiracy. The liberal tilt is an accident of nature. The media disproportionately attracts people from a liberal arts background who tend, quite innocently, to be politically liberal. If they came from West Point or engineering school, this wouldn't be the case.

Now, after learning I'd been targeted for a smear attack by a member of an online clique of liberal journalists, I'm inclined to amend my response. Not to say there's a media conspiracy, but at least to note that hundreds of journalists have gotten together, on an online listserv called JournoList, to promote liberalism and liberal politicians at the expense of traditional journalism.

My guess is that this and other revelations about JournoList will deepen the distrust of the national press. True, participants in the online clubhouse appear to hail chiefly from the media's self-identified left wing. But its founder, Ezra Klein, is a prominent writer for the Washington Post. Mr. Klein shut down JournoList last month&#8212;a wise decision...._

Fred Barnes: The Vast Left-Wing Media Conspiracy - WSJ.com


Now that JournoList is dead, there is no doubt a big flurry underway to find a new communication and coordination mechanism for their control and fabrication of the news.


----------



## Truthmatters

txlonghorn said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> The right will not be able to force the admin to react to these manufacctured stroies anymore.
> 
> This last case will make it impossible for them to FORCE immediate action from the WH.
> 
> You guys screwed your pooch of false outrage.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now people will be required (even you righties) to examine these cases slowly and get all the imfo.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Don't you think this administration should have done this all along?
> 
> I think this is a sign that the right is desperate to negatively effect the midterms because they know they are not going to be able to claim they have a mandate with the few seats they gain.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now people will be required (even you righties) to examine these cases slowly and get all the imfo.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Don't you think this administration should have done this all along?
Click to expand...


I have never liked how they had to dump people like Van Jones, it is the rights false outrage that made him think he had to or be beat over the head with then Town Hall style.

Now you have used up and killed your scream so loud no one can talk tactic and it is dead.

You will keep trying I know but then this ladies name will be mentioned and it will be the right who sees the polls crater.


----------



## NYcarbineer

VaYank5150 said:


> Who the hell is Spencer Ackerman and WTF is "The Daily Caller's "JournoList""?



He's someone you never heard of that you must now accept as your spiritual, philosophical, and political leader.  Because the right says so.

On the other hand, the dozens of examples of racists on the right?  

They're all isolated examples and exceptions to the rule.


----------



## Jarhead

NYcarbineer said:


> VaYank5150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who the hell is Spencer Ackerman and WTF is "The Daily Caller's "JournoList""?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He's someone you never heard of that you must now accept as your spiritual, philosophical, and political leader.  Because the right says so.
> 
> On the other hand, the dozens of examples of racists on the right?
> 
> They're all isolated examples and exceptions to the rule.
Click to expand...


Interesting response.

Typical. Discredit anyone who says anything that may compromise the progressive movement.

Pretty much in line with what the article is all about.

You guys jump all over the right for not looking into the validity of the Sherrod film, but then you guys are ready to discredit another story without looking into the validity of what was uncovered.

Quite hypocritical.


----------



## Jarhead

Truthmatters said:


> txlonghorn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> The right will not be able to force the admin to react to these manufacctured stroies anymore.
> 
> This last case will make it impossible for them to FORCE immediate action from the WH.
> 
> You guys screwed your pooch of false outrage.
> 
> 
> Don't you think this administration should have done this all along?
> 
> I think this is a sign that the right is desperate to negatively effect the midterms because they know they are not going to be able to claim they have a mandate with the few seats they gain.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now people will be required (even you righties) to examine these cases slowly and get all the imfo.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Don't you think this administration should have done this all along?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I have never liked how they had to dump people like Van Jones, it is the rights false outrage that made him think he had to or be beat over the head with then Town Hall style.
> 
> Now you have used up and killed your scream so loud no one can talk tactic and it is dead.
> 
> You will keep trying I know but then this ladies name will be mentioned and it will be the right who sees the polls crater.
Click to expand...


Van Jones was forced out becuase he was an admitted communist. 

Sadly, the WH did not vet him well enough to know this so some had to "scream" as you so eloquently put it.


----------



## NYcarbineer

Jarhead said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> The right will not be able to force the admin to react to these manufacctured stroies anymore.
> 
> This last case will make it impossible for them to FORCE immediate action from the WH.
> 
> You guys screwed your pooch of false outrage.
> 
> Now people will be required (even you righties) to examine these cases slowly and get all the imfo.
> 
> 
> I think this is a sign that the right is desperate to negatively effect the midterms because they know they are not going to be able to claim they have a mandate with the few seats they gain.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You babble too much.
> 
> So the right forced immediate action from the WH?
> 
> Thats pretty sad. A blogger forced the White House to act without thinking.
> 
> Seems to me the White House has a bigger issue. Maybe they should stop reading blogs as fact....you know....LIKE YOU DO!
Click to expand...


Foxnews reported and commented on the dishonestly edited tape as fact.  You agree then that Foxnews should not be accepted as a credible source of news?


----------



## Truthmatters

We will not longer give these right wing tools like Brietbart any respect.

They lie far to often to be trusted.

That is what America has learned


----------



## boedicca

Truthmatters said:


> I have never liked how they had to dump people like Van Jones,




Van Jones deserved to be held accountable for his words, philosophy, and policy advocacy.   He hoisted himself on his own petard.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMa3l23-rRc]Van Jones Montage[/ame]


----------



## NYcarbineer

Rachel Maddow explains it brilliantly:

Part one

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qgvBdlD7xUk]YouTube - Rachel Maddow: Fox News To White People: Be Very Afraid! Black People Are Coming To Get You! Part 1[/ame]

Part Two

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v6hCoj9Kg6E]YouTube - Rachel Maddow: Fox News To White People: Be Very Afraid! Black People Are Coming To Get You! Part 2[/ame]


----------



## hjmick

Jarhead said:


> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> VaYank5150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who the hell is Spencer Ackerman and WTF is "The Daily Caller's "JournoList""?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He's someone you never heard of that you must now accept as your spiritual, philosophical, and political leader.  Because the right says so.
> 
> On the other hand, the dozens of examples of racists on the right?
> 
> They're all isolated examples and exceptions to the rule.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> ...You guys jump all over the right for not looking into the validity of the Sherrod film, but then you guys are ready to discredit another story without looking into the validity of what was uncovered.
> 
> Quite hypocritical.
Click to expand...


Which is made all the more humorous when one stops to consider that this is exactly what the White House and the NAACP did. They threw Sherrod under the bus without looking into the validity of the accusations. And all before the story ever aired anywhere but Breitbart.

Even funnier, the NAACP had the ENTIRE tape, uncut.


----------



## VaYank5150

masquerade said:


> VaYank5150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who the hell is Spencer Ackerman and WTF is "The Daily Caller's "JournoList""?
> 
> 
> 
> VaYank ... did you bother to read the article?
Click to expand...


I did, and perhaps you missed my point.  UNTIL I read the article, I had never heard of Ackerman or this JournoList....


----------



## boedicca

Here's someo of the Who's Who of JournoList:

_The following 65 names are confirmed members of the now-defunct JournoList listserv.
1. Ezra Klein
2. Dave Weigel
3. Matthew Yglesias
4. David Dayen
5. Spencer Ackerman
6. Jeffrey Toobin
7. Eric Alterman
8. Paul Krugman
9. John Judis
10. Eve Fairbanks
11. Mike Allen
12. Ben Smith
13. Lisa Lerer
14. Joe Klein
15. Brad DeLong
16. Chris Hayes
17. Matt Duss
18. Jonathan Chait
19. Jesse Singal
20. Michael Cohen
21. Isaac Chotiner
22. Katha Pollitt
23. Alyssa Rosenberg
24. Rick Perlstein
25. Alex Rossmiller
26. Ed Kilgore
27. Walter Shapiro
28. Noam Scheiber
29. Michael Tomasky
30. Rich Yesels
31. Tim Fernholz
32. Dana Goldstein
33. Jonathan Cohn
34. Scott Winship
35. David Roberts
36. Luke Mitchell
37. John Blevins
38. Moira Whelan
39. Henry Farrell
40. Josh Bearman
41. Alec McGillis
42. Greg Anrig
43. Adele Stan
44. Steven Teles
45. Harold Pollack
46. Adam Serwer
47. Ryan Donmoyer
48. Seth Michaels
49. Kate Steadman
50. Matt Duss
51. Laura Rozen
52. Jesse Taylor
53. Michael Hirsh
54. Daniel Davies
55. Jonathan Zasloff
56. Richard Kim
57. Thomas Schaller
58. Jared Bernstein
59. Holly Yeager
60. Joe Conason
61. David Greenberg
62. Todd Gitlin
63. Mark Schmitt
64. Kevin Drum
65. Sarah Spitz..._

American Thinker Blog: Known Journolisters



And we weren't supposed to know about them.  This was a group which conspired to make, hide, and manipulate the news for a political agenda.  Of course they didn't want anyone to know of their existence.


----------



## Jarhead

NYcarbineer said:


> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> The right will not be able to force the admin to react to these manufacctured stroies anymore.
> 
> This last case will make it impossible for them to FORCE immediate action from the WH.
> 
> You guys screwed your pooch of false outrage.
> 
> Now people will be required (even you righties) to examine these cases slowly and get all the imfo.
> 
> 
> I think this is a sign that the right is desperate to negatively effect the midterms because they know they are not going to be able to claim they have a mandate with the few seats they gain.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You babble too much.
> 
> So the right forced immediate action from the WH?
> 
> Thats pretty sad. A blogger forced the White House to act without thinking.
> 
> Seems to me the White House has a bigger issue. Maybe they should stop reading blogs as fact....you know....LIKE YOU DO!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Foxnews reported and commented on the dishonestly edited tape as fact.  You agree then that Foxnews should not be accepted as a credible source of news?
Click to expand...


Nice spin and to be expected from you.

Fox News reported on the sudden and seemingly forced resignation of an FDA appointee; a resignation that apperared to be the product of a film put out by Breitbart that showed her making what appeareed to be racist comments.

The report was not on the film. The report was on the resignation. The film was reported as the reason for the resignation.

Should NBC News have first run an investigation to see if, in fact, OJ definately killed his wife before reporting that OJ Simpson was arrested under accusation of killing his wife?

Get with the program....know what you are criticizing before you cirtiicize.


----------



## Truthmatters

boedicca said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have never liked how they had to dump people like Van Jones,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Van Jones deserved to be held accountable for his words, philosophy, and policy advocacy.   He hoisted himself on his own petard.
> 
> [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMa3l23-rRc]Van Jones Montage[/ame]
Click to expand...


The story Van Jones tells about communism is the same thing Sherrod was saying about racism.

He at one point in his life as a young man thought it was the way.

He then later realised that caplitalistic endevor was the way.

Think about what his position was , he was teaching people how to start samll green businesses.

He is obviously NOW a capitalist.

You just never saw the whole tape.


----------



## Lonestar_logic

VaYank5150 said:


> Who the hell is Spencer Ackerman and WTF is "The Daily Caller's "JournoList""?



Don't worry about it, just keep your head buried in Obama's ass.


----------



## masquerade

VaYank5150 said:


> masquerade said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> VaYank5150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who the hell is Spencer Ackerman and WTF is "The Daily Caller's "JournoList""?
> 
> 
> 
> VaYank ... did you bother to read the article?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I did, and perhaps you missed my point.  UNTIL I read the article, I had never heard of Ackerman or this JournoList....
Click to expand...

What point?  You didn't make any point?  You questioned who was Ackerman and what was JournoList.


----------



## Lonestar_logic

Truthmatters said:


> *The right will not be able to force the admin to react to these manufacctured stroies anymore.*
> 
> This last case will make it impossible for them to FORCE immediate action from the WH.
> 
> You guys screwed your pooch of false outrage.
> 
> Now people will be required (even you righties) to examine these cases slowly and get all the imfo.
> 
> 
> I think this is a sign that the right is desperate to negatively effect the midterms because they know they are not going to be able to claim they have a mandate with the few seats they gain.



Wanna bet?


----------



## mudwhistle

masquerade said:


> VaYank5150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who the hell is Spencer Ackerman and WTF is "The Daily Caller's "JournoList""?
> 
> 
> 
> VaYank ... did you bother to read the article?
Click to expand...


I wasn't paying attention to what he said.....I was just looking at his avatar's ass.


----------



## VaYank5150

And this has what to do with what?  Do these people work for the LSM, as you like to call them?


----------



## Lonestar_logic

Truthmatters said:


> txlonghorn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> The right will not be able to force the admin to react to these manufacctured stroies anymore.
> 
> This last case will make it impossible for them to FORCE immediate action from the WH.
> 
> You guys screwed your pooch of false outrage.
> 
> 
> Don't you think this administration should have done this all along?
> 
> I think this is a sign that the right is desperate to negatively effect the midterms because they know they are not going to be able to claim they have a mandate with the few seats they gain.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now people will be required (even you righties) to examine these cases slowly and get all the imfo.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Don't you think this administration should have done this all along?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I have never liked how they had to dump people like Van Jones, it is the rights false outrage that made him think he had to or be beat over the head with then Town Hall style.
> 
> Now you have used up and killed your scream so loud no one can talk tactic and it is dead.
> 
> You will keep trying I know but then this ladies name will be mentioned and it will be the right who sees the polls crater.
Click to expand...


Van Jones was a 911 truther and an admitted communist. Obviously you had no problems with this, but the majority of Americans did.


----------



## blastoff

LOL...all this outrage because a totally inept administration forced the resignation of a USDA employee for no reason at all.  

Next time you clowns should look for a little more substance from a candidate than just hope and change.


----------



## MaggieMae

boedicca said:


> The Daily Caller's "JournoList" expose has finally resolved the matter:
> 
> Based on Spencer Ackerman's tactic:
> 
> _*If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game theyve put upon us, Ackerman wrote on the Journolist listserv in April 2008. Instead, take one of them  Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares  and call them racists.*_
> 
> Conservatives Karl Rove and Fred Barnes respond to Journolist racist post | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment
> 
> 
> It's out in the open now.  The Left uses the racist accusation against the Right, the Tea Party, Conservatives, the GOP...  Anyone who critiques prominent lefties or their programs will be falsely attacked as a racist as a diversionary tactic.
> 
> More evidence is Sherrod's hateful comment regarding the GOP to Media Matters.
> 
> So here's the thing you lefties should understand:  we're not falling for it.



So how many other "leftist journalists" joined in Akerman's assessment? 

Ironically, when I turned on Fox & Friends yesterday morning around 7AM to see if they were talking about the Shirley Sharrod situation, there was Dick Morris talking about the Reverend Wright coverup by journalists instead. (Look how fast that traveled already!) I've been around the block enough times to know that Fox (and friends) had realized they were all caught with their pants on fire regarding the edited tape and that they'd better come up with a "new" story to go viral _post-haste _so that the existing Sharrod story didn't grow more legs and backfire on them. Too late, boys.


----------



## masquerade

mudwhistle said:


> masquerade said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> VaYank5150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who the hell is Spencer Ackerman and WTF is "The Daily Caller's "JournoList""?
> 
> 
> 
> VaYank ... did you bother to read the article?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I wasn't paying attention to what he said.....I was just looking at his avatar's ass.
Click to expand...

LOL ~ Hey you!  Stop lookin' at that ass and get back to posting!


----------



## masquerade

VaYank5150 said:


> And this has what to do with what?  Do these people work for the LSM, as you like to call them?


They certainly don't work for the Tea Baggers as you like to call them.


----------



## Lonestar_logic

VaYank5150 said:


> And this has what to do with what?  Do these people work for the LSM, as you like to call them?



Yes they do and they are also journalism Professors in that mix as well.


----------



## NYcarbineer

Jarhead said:


> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> You babble too much.
> 
> So the right forced immediate action from the WH?
> 
> Thats pretty sad. A blogger forced the White House to act without thinking.
> 
> Seems to me the White House has a bigger issue. Maybe they should stop reading blogs as fact....you know....LIKE YOU DO!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Foxnews reported and commented on the dishonestly edited tape as fact.  You agree then that Foxnews should not be accepted as a credible source of news?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Nice spin and to be expected from you.
> 
> Fox News reported on the sudden and seemingly forced resignation of an FDA appointee; a resignation that apperared to be the product of a film put out by Breitbart that showed her making what appeareed to be racist comments.
> 
> The report was not on the film. The report was on the resignation. The film was reported as the reason for the resignation.
> 
> Should NBC News have first run an investigation to see if, in fact, OJ definately killed his wife before reporting that OJ Simpson was arrested under accusation of killing his wife?
> 
> Get with the program....know what you are criticizing before you cirtiicize.
Click to expand...


That is a hilarious LIE.  I 've HEARD the Fox news and commentary on this.


----------



## MaggieMae

VaYank5150 said:


> Who the hell is Spencer Ackerman and WTF is "The Daily Caller's "JournoList""?



Some group of journalists formed during the 08 campaign, yet we're supposed to believe this is shocking news. Oh the irony of the timing! Good grief conservatives are gullible. Karl Rove must feel so smug that he still has the ability to pull fast ones on them.


----------



## Truthmatters

Van Jones is not a communist.

It is a right wing lie


----------



## WillowTree

boedicca said:


> Here's someo of the Who's Who of JournoList:
> 
> _The following 65 names are confirmed members of the now-defunct JournoList listserv.
> 1. Ezra Klein
> 2. Dave Weigel
> 3. Matthew Yglesias
> 4. David Dayen
> 5. Spencer Ackerman
> 6. Jeffrey Toobin
> 7. Eric Alterman
> 8. Paul Krugman
> 9. John Judis
> 10. Eve Fairbanks
> 11. Mike Allen
> 12. Ben Smith
> 13. Lisa Lerer
> 14. Joe Klein
> 15. Brad DeLong
> 16. Chris Hayes
> 17. Matt Duss
> 18. Jonathan Chait
> 19. Jesse Singal
> 20. Michael Cohen
> 21. Isaac Chotiner
> 22. Katha Pollitt
> 23. Alyssa Rosenberg
> 24. Rick Perlstein
> 25. Alex Rossmiller
> 26. Ed Kilgore
> 27. Walter Shapiro
> 28. Noam Scheiber
> 29. Michael Tomasky
> 30. Rich Yesels
> 31. Tim Fernholz
> 32. Dana Goldstein
> 33. Jonathan Cohn
> 34. Scott Winship
> 35. David Roberts
> 36. Luke Mitchell
> 37. John Blevins
> 38. Moira Whelan
> 39. Henry Farrell
> 40. Josh Bearman
> 41. Alec McGillis
> 42. Greg Anrig
> 43. Adele Stan
> 44. Steven Teles
> 45. Harold Pollack
> 46. Adam Serwer
> 47. Ryan Donmoyer
> 48. Seth Michaels
> 49. Kate Steadman
> 50. Matt Duss
> 51. Laura Rozen
> 52. Jesse Taylor
> 53. Michael Hirsh
> 54. Daniel Davies
> 55. Jonathan Zasloff
> 56. Richard Kim
> 57. Thomas Schaller
> 58. Jared Bernstein
> 59. Holly Yeager
> 60. Joe Conason
> 61. David Greenberg
> 62. Todd Gitlin
> 63. Mark Schmitt
> 64. Kevin Drum
> 65. Sarah Spitz..._
> 
> American Thinker Blog: Known Journolisters
> 
> 
> 
> And we weren't supposed to know about them.  This was a group which conspired to make, hide, and manipulate the news for a political agenda.  Of course they didn't want anyone to know of their existence.



"If they say anything about Jeramiah Wright call them a racist."


----------



## MaggieMae

boedicca said:


> It's also pretty clear that the reason the Left thinks there is a Vast Right Wing Conspiracy is because they have has their own Vast Leftwing version going on:
> 
> _When I'm talking to people from outside Washington, one question inevitably comes up: Why is the media so liberal? The question often reflects a suspicion that members of the press get together and decide on a story line that favors liberals and Democrats and denigrates conservatives and Republicans.
> 
> My response has usually been to say, yes, there's liberal bias in the media, but there's no conspiracy. The liberal tilt is an accident of nature. The media disproportionately attracts people from a liberal arts background who tend, quite innocently, to be politically liberal. If they came from West Point or engineering school, this wouldn't be the case.
> 
> Now, after learning I'd been targeted for a smear attack by a member of an online clique of liberal journalists, I'm inclined to amend my response. Not to say there's a media conspiracy, but at least to note that hundreds of journalists have gotten together, on an online listserv called JournoList, to promote liberalism and liberal politicians at the expense of traditional journalism.
> 
> My guess is that this and other revelations about JournoList will deepen the distrust of the national press. True, participants in the online clubhouse appear to hail chiefly from the media's self-identified left wing. But its founder, Ezra Klein, is a prominent writer for the Washington Post. Mr. Klein shut down JournoList last montha wise decision...._
> 
> Fred Barnes: The Vast Left-Wing Media Conspiracy - WSJ.com
> 
> 
> Now that JournoList is dead, there is no doubt a big flurry underway to find a new communication and coordination mechanism for their control and fabrication of the news.



I always chuckle when I see Fred Barnes commenting on political bias. Hypocrisy is his middle name. 

Is there a left-wing "media" conspiracy? I don't really think so. It's just that we're left, but we're also right.


----------



## Truthmatters

Why do you people on the right keep saying Van Jones is a communist?

Its the same damned thing as saying Sherrrod is a racist.


----------



## boedicca

Truthmatters said:


> Van Jones is not a communist.
> 
> It is a right wing lie




This is yet more proof that TM lives in her own little looking glass world where everything is the opposite of reality.


----------



## MaggieMae

Jarhead said:


> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> VaYank5150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who the hell is Spencer Ackerman and WTF is "The Daily Caller's "JournoList""?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He's someone you never heard of that you must now accept as your spiritual, philosophical, and political leader.  Because the right says so.
> 
> On the other hand, the dozens of examples of racists on the right?
> 
> They're all isolated examples and exceptions to the rule.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Interesting response.
> 
> Typical. Discredit anyone who says anything that may compromise the progressive movement.
> 
> Pretty much in line with what the article is all about.
> 
> You guys jump all over the right for not looking into the validity of the Sherrod film, but then you guys are ready to discredit another story without looking into the validity of what was uncovered.
> 
> Quite hypocritical.
Click to expand...


The thing is, there's no doubt that some liberal journalists undoubtedly would have wanted to jump on board with that conspiracy, but why is this being brought to light NOW? Why not THEN? Also, obviously this Journalist group didn't have enough support to stay alive anyway. No harm, no foul.


----------



## WillowTree

boedicca said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> Van Jones is not a communist.
> 
> It is a right wing lie
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is yet more proof that TM lives in her own little looking glass world where everything is the opposite of reality.
Click to expand...


van jones is a communist.


to the core






[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=otM3pWOBWWk&feature=related]YouTube - Van Jones Communist[/ame]


----------



## boedicca

MaggieMae said:


> I always chuckle when I see Fred Barnes commenting on political bias. Hypocrisy is his middle name.
> 
> Is there a left-wing "media" conspiracy? I don't really think so. It's just that we're left, but we're also right.





I suggest you go to the Daily Caller site and read up on L'Affaire JournoList.

Journolist | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment


----------



## MaggieMae

Jarhead said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> txlonghorn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Don't you think this administration should have done this all along?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have never liked how they had to dump people like Van Jones, it is the rights false outrage that made him think he had to or be beat over the head with then Town Hall style.
> 
> Now you have used up and killed your scream so loud no one can talk tactic and it is dead.
> 
> You will keep trying I know but then this ladies name will be mentioned and it will be the right who sees the polls crater.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Van Jones was forced out becuase he was an admitted communist.
> 
> Sadly, the WH did not vet him well enough to know this so some had to "scream" as you so eloquently put it.
Click to expand...


He was not a card-carrying Communist. Even if he were, he had a mid-level job having to do with promotion of "green jobs." Ooohhhh, how dangerous...The Russians are coming, the Russians are coming...


----------



## Kat

Truthmatters said:


> The right will not be able to force the admin to react to these manufacctured stroies anymore.
> 
> This last case will make it impossible for them to FORCE immediate action from the WH.
> 
> You guys screwed your pooch of false outrage.
> 
> Now people will be required (even you righties) to examine these cases slowly and get all the imfo.
> 
> 
> *I think* this is a sign that the right is desperate to negatively effect the midterms because they know they are not going to be able to claim they have a mandate with the few seats they gain.




When did you start doing that?


----------



## MaggieMae

boedicca said:


> Here's someo of the Who's Who of JournoList:
> 
> _The following 65 names are confirmed members of the now-defunct JournoList listserv.
> 1. Ezra Klein
> 2. Dave Weigel
> 3. Matthew Yglesias
> 4. David Dayen
> 5. Spencer Ackerman
> 6. Jeffrey Toobin
> 7. Eric Alterman
> 8. Paul Krugman
> 9. John Judis
> 10. Eve Fairbanks
> 11. Mike Allen
> 12. Ben Smith
> 13. Lisa Lerer
> 14. Joe Klein
> 15. Brad DeLong
> 16. Chris Hayes
> 17. Matt Duss
> 18. Jonathan Chait
> 19. Jesse Singal
> 20. Michael Cohen
> 21. Isaac Chotiner
> 22. Katha Pollitt
> 23. Alyssa Rosenberg
> 24. Rick Perlstein
> 25. Alex Rossmiller
> 26. Ed Kilgore
> 27. Walter Shapiro
> 28. Noam Scheiber
> 29. Michael Tomasky
> 30. Rich Yesels
> 31. Tim Fernholz
> 32. Dana Goldstein
> 33. Jonathan Cohn
> 34. Scott Winship
> 35. David Roberts
> 36. Luke Mitchell
> 37. John Blevins
> 38. Moira Whelan
> 39. Henry Farrell
> 40. Josh Bearman
> 41. Alec McGillis
> 42. Greg Anrig
> 43. Adele Stan
> 44. Steven Teles
> 45. Harold Pollack
> 46. Adam Serwer
> 47. Ryan Donmoyer
> 48. Seth Michaels
> 49. Kate Steadman
> 50. Matt Duss
> 51. Laura Rozen
> 52. Jesse Taylor
> 53. Michael Hirsh
> 54. Daniel Davies
> 55. Jonathan Zasloff
> 56. Richard Kim
> 57. Thomas Schaller
> 58. Jared Bernstein
> 59. Holly Yeager
> 60. Joe Conason
> 61. David Greenberg
> 62. Todd Gitlin
> 63. Mark Schmitt
> 64. Kevin Drum
> 65. Sarah Spitz..._
> 
> American Thinker Blog: Known Journolisters
> 
> 
> 
> And we weren't supposed to know about them.  This was a group which conspired to make, hide, and manipulate the news for a political agenda.  Of course they didn't want anyone to know of their existence.



So since this is your bone of contention today, find some statements by those 65 that support Akerman's. Sorry, I can't wait for that, but I'll be baaaaack...


----------



## Immanuel

MaggieMae said:


> VaYank5150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who the hell is Spencer Ackerman and WTF is "The Daily Caller's "JournoList""?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some group of journalists formed during the 08 campaign, yet we're supposed to believe this is shocking news. Oh the irony of the timing! Good grief conservatives are gullible. Karl Rove must feel so smug that he still has the ability to pull fast ones on them.
Click to expand...


After what just happened with the Shirley Sherrod case, you are accusing the right of being gullible?  Please, Maggie.

Immie


----------



## boedicca

MaggieMae said:


> The thing is, there's no doubt that some liberal journalists undoubtedly would have wanted to jump on board with that conspiracy, but why is this being brought to light NOW? Why not THEN? Also, obviously this Journalist group didn't have enough support to stay alive anyway. No harm, no foul.





We didn't know about it back then.  Politico wrote about it last year, and there has been an effort underway to discover exactly what it is.   The Weigel affair brought it into the open.

If you think leftwing journalists conspiring to affect the outcome of a presidential election is No Harm No Foul, then you really are a corrupt puppy.


----------



## Immanuel

Kat said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> The right will not be able to force the admin to react to these manufacctured stroies anymore.
> 
> This last case will make it impossible for them to FORCE immediate action from the WH.
> 
> You guys screwed your pooch of false outrage.
> 
> Now people will be required (even you righties) to examine these cases slowly and get all the imfo.
> 
> 
> *I think* this is a sign that the right is desperate to negatively effect the midterms because they know they are not going to be able to claim they have a mandate with the few seats they gain.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When did you start doing that?
Click to expand...


She hasn't.  It is just a figure of speech.

Immie


----------



## Jarhead

Truthmatters said:


> Why do you people on the right keep saying Van Jones is a communist?
> 
> Its the same damned thing as saying Sherrrod is a racist.



Seeing as later in the film clip Sherrod refers to a white attorney as "one of his kind" I would say she IS a racist. She was NOT relaying how she said it back then...she was explaining the attorney TO THE PRESENT AUDIENCE as "one of his kind."

She may not abuse her power acting as a racist....but I have no doubt she still is a racist.

As for Van Jones. Seeing as you are referring to his communist thinkjing when he was a "young man" it is quite obvious that your left wing blogs and left wing media outlets have neglected to present to you more RECENT words of Van Jones.

They use people like you TM. They know yoiu will believe3 anything they say and do no researech on your own.

You, TM are a pathetic lonely woman with nothing to be proud of except your ability to regurgitate what you read on left wing blogs.


----------



## MaggieMae

blastoff said:


> LOL...all this outrage because a totally inept administration forced the resignation of a USDA employee for no reason at all.
> 
> Next time you clowns should look for a little more substance from a candidate than just hope and change.



Isn't that precisely what ANY candidate for president runs on? If not, why bother? 
_Idiot..._


----------



## NYcarbineer

Truthmatters said:


> Why do you people on the right keep saying Van Jones is a communist?
> 
> Its the same damned thing as saying Sherrrod is a racist.



Because in the Conservatopian dictionary, one of the definitions of 'truth' is

'lies we like.'


----------



## MaggieMae

WillowTree said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> Van Jones is not a communist.
> 
> It is a right wing lie
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is yet more proof that TM lives in her own little looking glass world where everything is the opposite of reality.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> van jones is a communist.
> 
> 
> to the core
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=otM3pWOBWWk&feature=related]YouTube - Van Jones Communist[/ame]
Click to expand...


OH WHO GIVES A FUCK?!!! 

Is minor shit like this that happened MONTHS AGO, all your tiny brains can handle?


----------



## NYcarbineer

What makes this thread most delightfully retarded is that President Obama himself repudiated Jeremiah Wright.


----------



## Immanuel

Jarhead said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do you people on the right keep saying Van Jones is a communist?
> 
> Its the same damned thing as saying Sherrrod is a racist.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seeing as later in the film clip Sherrod refers to a white attorney as "one of his kind" I would say she IS a racist. She was NOT relaying how she said it back then...she was explaining the attorney TO THE PRESENT AUDIENCE as "one of his kind."
> 
> She may not abuse her power acting as a racist....but I have no doubt she still is a racist.
> 
> As for Van Jones. Seeing as you are referring to his communist thinkjing when he was a "young man" it is quite obvious that your left wing blogs and left wing media outlets have neglected to present to you more RECENT words of Van Jones.
> 
> They use people like you TM. They know yoiu will believe3 anything they say and do no researech on your own.
> 
> You, TM are a pathetic lonely woman with nothing to be proud of except your ability to regurgitate what you read on left wing blogs.
Click to expand...


I had a completely different take on her speech than you.

When she said, "one of his kind", she said it with sort of a laugh in her voice, like you would say putting both hands about shoulder width apart and the index and middle finger up making quote marks in the air when she said it.

I did not get the feeling she was being racist in those comments at all.

I think she was the scapegoat in all of this and I feel sorry for her.  I think she made a mistake in 1986, but she came to realize that at some point later in life and I think she has attempted to correct that mistake.

Immie


----------



## Misty

Truthmatters said:


> We will not longer give these right wing tools like Brietbart any respect.
> 
> They lie far to often to be trusted.
> 
> That is what America has learned



America learned not to trust the media from Dan Rather a long time ago.


----------



## MaggieMae

Immanuel said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> VaYank5150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who the hell is Spencer Ackerman and WTF is "The Daily Caller's "JournoList""?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some group of journalists formed during the 08 campaign, yet we're supposed to believe this is shocking news. Oh the irony of the timing! Good grief conservatives are gullible. Karl Rove must feel so smug that he still has the ability to pull fast ones on them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> After what just happened with the Shirley Sherrod case, you are accusing the right of being gullible?  Please, Maggie.
> 
> Immie
Click to expand...


Yes, it _was_ gullible to believe the edited tape. But I'm talking about the Rove propaganda machine and how he can still brilliantly maneuver a conversation away from anything that might paint the right into a corner, and then they just jump right in without having a clue that they're being manipulated. I often wished in the past that the left had its own Karl Rove.


----------



## MaggieMae

boedicca said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> The thing is, there's no doubt that some liberal journalists undoubtedly would have wanted to jump on board with that conspiracy, but why is this being brought to light NOW? Why not THEN? Also, obviously this Journalist group didn't have enough support to stay alive anyway. No harm, no foul.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We didn't know about it back then.  Politico wrote about it last year, and there has been an effort underway to discover exactly what it is.   The Weigel affair brought it into the open.
> 
> If you think leftwing journalists conspiring to affect the outcome of a presidential election is No Harm No Foul, then you really are a corrupt puppy.
Click to expand...


Politico is often accused of being leftist also. In fact, any news outlet that doesn't strictly tow the conservative line is accused of liberal bias.


----------



## Misty

NYcarbineer said:


> What makes this thread most delightfully retarded is that President Obama himself repudiated Jeremiah Wright.



Don't you mean refudiated?


----------



## Jarhead

NYcarbineer said:


> What makes this thread most delightfully retarded is that President Obama himself repudiated Jeremiah Wright.



What makes me laugh is the fact that you did not see the fact that he called him his mentor for 20 years and only tossed him aside when it was necessary for poliotical expediency.

And you accepted his "If I had known" excuse.

Well, guess what. If he did not kow about Wright after 20 years, then he certainly is not qualified to be POTUS.

You need to be somewhat aware of what is going on around you to be qualified as President.

So either he lied for political expediency or he had his head up his ass.

Which one is it?


----------



## MaggieMae

Jarhead said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do you people on the right keep saying Van Jones is a communist?
> 
> Its the same damned thing as saying Sherrrod is a racist.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seeing as later in the film clip Sherrod refers to a white attorney as "one of his kind" I would say she IS a racist. She was NOT relaying how she said it back then...she was explaining the attorney TO THE PRESENT AUDIENCE as "one of his kind."
> 
> She may not abuse her power acting as a racist....but I have no doubt she still is a racist.
> 
> As for Van Jones. Seeing as you are referring to his communist thinkjing when he was a "young man" it is quite obvious that your left wing blogs and left wing media outlets have neglected to present to you more RECENT words of Van Jones.
> 
> They use people like you TM. They know yoiu will believe3 anything they say and do no researech on your own.
> 
> You, TM are a pathetic lonely woman with nothing to be proud of except your ability to regurgitate what you read on left wing blogs.
Click to expand...


Why is it the righties can never see the hypocrisy of such statements? You're doing the same damned thing, soldier.


----------



## MaggieMae

Misty said:


> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> What makes this thread most delightfully retarded is that President Obama himself repudiated Jeremiah Wright.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Don't you mean refudiated?
Click to expand...


Wasn't that a Palin faux pas?


----------



## VaYank5150

masquerade said:


> VaYank5150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> And this has what to do with what?  Do these people work for the LSM, as you like to call them?
> 
> 
> 
> They certainly don't work for the Tea Baggers as you like to call them.
Click to expand...


Which Tea Baggers?  The Express?  The Federation?  The Patriots?


----------



## Immanuel

MaggieMae said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> Some group of journalists formed during the 08 campaign, yet we're supposed to believe this is shocking news. Oh the irony of the timing! Good grief conservatives are gullible. Karl Rove must feel so smug that he still has the ability to pull fast ones on them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> After what just happened with the Shirley Sherrod case, you are accusing the right of being gullible?  Please, Maggie.
> 
> Immie
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes, it _was_ gullible to believe the edited tape. But I'm talking about the Rove propaganda machine and how he can still brilliantly maneuver a conversation away from anything that might paint the right into a corner, and then they just jump right in without having a clue that they're being manipulated. I often wished in the past that the left had its own Karl Rove.
Click to expand...


Karl Rove is still around?

I thought... hoped... he had sailed off into the sunset in shame with the rest of the Bush Admin.

Immie


----------



## Jarhead

MaggieMae said:


> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do you people on the right keep saying Van Jones is a communist?
> 
> Its the same damned thing as saying Sherrrod is a racist.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seeing as later in the film clip Sherrod refers to a white attorney as "one of his kind" I would say she IS a racist. She was NOT relaying how she said it back then...she was explaining the attorney TO THE PRESENT AUDIENCE as "one of his kind."
> 
> She may not abuse her power acting as a racist....but I have no doubt she still is a racist.
> 
> As for Van Jones. Seeing as you are referring to his communist thinkjing when he was a "young man" it is quite obvious that your left wing blogs and left wing media outlets have neglected to present to you more RECENT words of Van Jones.
> 
> They use people like you TM. They know yoiu will believe3 anything they say and do no researech on your own.
> 
> You, TM are a pathetic lonely woman with nothing to be proud of except your ability to regurgitate what you read on left wing blogs.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why is it the righties can never see the hypocrisy of such statements? You're doing the same damned thing, soldier.
Click to expand...


No ma'am. I am not. I am offering my own take on the film clip. I do not believe anyone else took it that way. Certainly no one reported it that way.
So please explain how I am regurgitating?


----------



## Misty

The fact that sherrod said it at all or thought like that is what is disturbing. 

I would never think that way. Wouldn't even enter my mind. 

I would never take race or wealth into consideration when divvying up money, if I were in her position.


----------



## txlonghorn

MaggieMae said:


> Misty said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> What makes this thread most delightfully retarded is that President Obama himself repudiated Jeremiah Wright.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Don't you mean refudiated?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wasn't that a Palin faux pas?
Click to expand...


Yep...can you believe she did that?  I've never made a mistake in my life.  Ok...maybe once but that was a long time ago.


----------



## Misty

MaggieMae said:


> Misty said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> What makes this thread most delightfully retarded is that President Obama himself repudiated Jeremiah Wright.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Don't you mean refudiated?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wasn't that a Palin faux pas?
Click to expand...


Lol yes, thank you for explaining my joke. 

Now even TM will get it. Lol


----------



## Immanuel

MaggieMae said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> The thing is, there's no doubt that some liberal journalists undoubtedly would have wanted to jump on board with that conspiracy, but why is this being brought to light NOW? Why not THEN? Also, obviously this Journalist group didn't have enough support to stay alive anyway. No harm, no foul.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We didn't know about it back then.  Politico wrote about it last year, and there has been an effort underway to discover exactly what it is.   The Weigel affair brought it into the open.
> 
> If you think leftwing journalists conspiring to affect the outcome of a presidential election is No Harm No Foul, then you really are a corrupt puppy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Politico is often accused of being leftist also. In fact, any news outlet that doesn't strictly tow the conservative line is accused of liberal bias.
Click to expand...


Is it really any different going left to right?

Granted there are not as many media outlets that don't strictly tow the liberal line, but those that don't are treated no differently by the left than you indicate conservatives treat Politico and the rest.

Immie


----------



## txlonghorn

Misty said:


> The fact that sherrod said it at all or thought like that is what is disturbing.
> 
> I would never think that way. Wouldn't even enter my mind.
> 
> I would never take race or wealth into consideration when divvying up money, if I were in her position.



You might if you were inside her skin...just sayin


----------



## VaYank5150

txlonghorn said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Misty said:
> 
> 
> 
> Don't you mean refudiated?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wasn't that a Palin faux pas?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yep...can you believe she did that?  I've never made a mistake in my life.  Ok...maybe once but that was a long time ago.
Click to expand...


Did you compare yourself to the likes of Shakepseare after you made your mistake, too?


----------



## Kat

Jarhead said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do you people on the right keep saying Van Jones is a communist?
> 
> Its the same damned thing as saying Sherrrod is a racist.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seeing as later in the film clip Sherrod refers to a white attorney as "one of his kind" I would say she IS a racist. She was NOT relaying how she said it back then...she was explaining the attorney TO THE PRESENT AUDIENCE as "one of his kind."
> 
> She may not abuse her power acting as a racist....but I have no doubt she still is a racist.
> 
> As for Van Jones. Seeing as you are referring to his communist thinkjing when he was a "young man" it is quite obvious that your left wing blogs and left wing media outlets have neglected to present to you more RECENT words of Van Jones.
> 
> They use people like you TM. They know yoiu will believe3 anything they say and do no researech on your own.
> 
> You, TM are a pathetic lonely woman with nothing to be proud of except your ability to regurgitate what you read on left wing blogs.
Click to expand...


I don't know if she is racist or not, but I did pick up on the ''one of his kind''. I can tell you this..that isn't something I say, or would say.
What does ''one of his kind'' mean? (rhetorical)


----------



## Truthmatters

The New Face of Environmentalism | Feature | East Bay Express

I know you will not likely read this about Van jones and his journey from angry black man truning to communism TO  Green envriomentalist capitalist but hey at least it is here for those willing to listen.

Im glad Sherrod got listened to.


----------



## txlonghorn

correct me if I'm wrong....but they forced her resignation because she made a racial comment that was later discovered to be taken out of context.  

If that's true, then did she, at the time of the actual incident involving the white farmer, truly feel this way and if so, was it racially motivated?  If the answer to that question is yes, then no matter how long ago it was, they did the right thing.  I only hold this opinion because it has been stated here very clearly on many occasions that a racist is always a racist.  

Do I think she should have been flagged like this...NO.  But now that it's out, the same standards should apply to one racist that applies to all others.


----------



## txlonghorn

VaYank5150 said:


> txlonghorn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wasn't that a Palin faux pas?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep...can you believe she did that?  I've never made a mistake in my life.  Ok...maybe once but that was a long time ago.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Did you compare yourself to the likes of Shakepseare after you made your mistake, too?
Click to expand...


Oh heaven's no...but then again, I wasn't making up words like Shakespeare was known to do.


----------



## Truthmatters

Did you read the van jones story?

will you not give it the time you gave Sherrod to find out what the truth is?


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

Watch and listen the entire 40 minute clip as I did last night.  The claim that this woman was explaining her "moment of clarity" is nonsense.  Listen to the audience as well.  Is this woman a racist?  I don't know.  Seems the Obama admin sure deemed her one!

Bottom line here is, Breitbart gave the NAACP a dose of what they and the left have been doing to the right for years; parsing snippits.  And they don't like it.  The same left who routinely dismissed a Klansman amongst their ranks, numerous truly racist comments by their own members, the trashing of minorities and the racial slurs used against same minorities who strayed from the Democrat plantation, their own support of policies that enslave minorities in lives of poverty, etc.

More feigned outrage and righteous indignation that means zip.


----------



## Jarhead

Truthmatters said:


> The New Face of Environmentalism | Feature | East Bay Express
> 
> I know you will not likely read this about Van jones and his journey from angry black man truning to communism TO  Green envriomentalist capitalist but hey at least it is here for those willing to listen.
> 
> Im glad Sherrod got listened to.



It is an interesting and compolimenting article on Van Jones. However, whjereas he spoke for a while, not all quotes were in the article. Of course, you cant put all quotes in. But I am curious as to what else he said during his time on the podium. Likewise, the East Bay Express. What type of publication is it? Is it strictly news or is it more of a commentary publication?


----------



## NYcarbineer

Jarhead said:


> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> What makes this thread most delightfully retarded is that President Obama himself repudiated Jeremiah Wright.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What makes me laugh is the fact that you did not see the fact that he called him his mentor for 20 years and only tossed him aside when it was necessary for poliotical expediency.
> 
> And you accepted his "If I had known" excuse.
> 
> Well, guess what. If he did not kow about Wright after 20 years, then he certainly is not qualified to be POTUS.
> 
> You need to be somewhat aware of what is going on around you to be qualified as President.
> 
> So either he lied for political expediency or he had his head up his ass.
> 
> Which one is it?
Click to expand...


Since he not actually done a single thing that would support a claim that he is acting out what he heard Wright say in the past makes your point, such as it is, moot.


----------



## mudwhistle

Jarhead said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> The New Face of Environmentalism | Feature | East Bay Express
> 
> I know you will not likely read this about Van jones and his journey from angry black man truning to communism TO  Green envriomentalist capitalist but hey at least it is here for those willing to listen.
> 
> Im glad Sherrod got listened to.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is an interesting and compolimenting article on Van Jones. However, whjereas he spoke for a while, not all quotes were in the article. Of course, you cant put all quotes in. But I am curious as to what else he said during his time on the podium. Likewise, the East Bay Express. What type of publication is it? Is it strictly news or is it more of a commentary publication?
Click to expand...


Van Jones is the example of a guy that started out saying "KILL WHITEY" and realized he couldn't get anywhere with that......so over time he changed to an environmental revolutionary.


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

Oh, and BTW left.... the $100,000 reward for providing evidence of racist teaparty activity still remains unclaimed.


----------



## Jarhead

NYcarbineer said:


> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> What makes this thread most delightfully retarded is that President Obama himself repudiated Jeremiah Wright.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What makes me laugh is the fact that you did not see the fact that he called him his mentor for 20 years and only tossed him aside when it was necessary for poliotical expediency.
> 
> And you accepted his "If I had known" excuse.
> 
> Well, guess what. If he did not kow about Wright after 20 years, then he certainly is not qualified to be POTUS.
> 
> You need to be somewhat aware of what is going on around you to be qualified as President.
> 
> So either he lied for political expediency or he had his head up his ass.
> 
> Which one is it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Since he not actually done a single thing that would support a claim that he is acting out what he heard Wright say in the past makes your point, such as it is, moot.
Click to expand...


I am sure you would say the same thing about a man who sat at KKK meetings for 20 years, ran for president and won and did not lynch a single black man while in office.

Oh yeah. And by the way. I disagree. 

*He did EXACTLY what Wright preaches the day he said:*

"The Police acted stupidly" without knowing the facts. 

He made a judgement call based on his own personal bias.

Sorry. You lose with that one.


----------



## fyrenza

NYcarbineer said:


> Foxnews reported and commented on the dishonestly edited tape as fact.  You agree then that Foxnews should not be accepted as a credible source of news?



*WHO* "dishonestly edited the tape"?!?

You want to keep blathering on about this, without EVER coming to grips with the FACT that the ONLY people that COULD have Edited it was the NAACP,

AS WELL AS completely ignoring the fact that Obama's WH should CERTAINLY have had access to the entire thing,

PRIOR to their actions.

That's a King-Sized Fail...


----------



## boedicca

Soggy in NOLA said:


> Watch and listen the entire 40 minute clip as I did last night.  The claim that this woman was explaining her "moment of clarity" is nonsense.  Listen to the audience as well.  Is this woman a racist?  I don't know.  Seems the Obama admin sure deemed her one!





The bigger message is that she is a Class Warfare-ist.    Her claim to have overcome her racism looks pretty disingenuous after her Racist accusations yesterday.


----------



## boedicca

fyrenza said:


> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Foxnews reported and commented on the dishonestly edited tape as fact.  You agree then that Foxnews should not be accepted as a credible source of news?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *WHO* "dishonestly edited the tape"?!?
> 
> You want to keep blathering on about this, without EVER coming to grips with the FACT that the ONLY people that COULD have Edited it was the NAACP,
> 
> AS WELL AS completely ignoring the fact that Obama's WH should CERTAINLY have had access to the entire thing,
> 
> PRIOR to their actions.
> 
> That's a King-Sized Fail...
Click to expand...




No news program ever shows an entire 40 minute speech - they always show clips.   If it's dishonest to show the bits of her racist past with the NAACP laughing and nodding approval, then showing clips of any speech is dishonest.


----------



## boedicca

Soggy in NOLA said:


> Oh, and BTW left.... the $100,000 reward for providing evidence of racist teaparty activity still remains unclaimed.




Quite interest, ain't it?

25% of the U.S. adult population self identifies as tea party sympathizers.  If racism were rampant, there would be plenty of evidence among the 70M or so "targets".   As it is, ThinkProgress had to cook up fake evidence consisting of four people, none of whom were proven to be both a Tea Partier and a racist.


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

boedicca said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, and BTW left.... the $100,000 reward for providing evidence of racist teaparty activity still remains unclaimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quite interest, ain't it?
> 
> 25% of the U.S. adult population self identifies as tea party sympathizers.  If racism were rampant, there would be plenty of evidence among the 70M or so "targets".   As it is, ThinkProgress had to cook up fake evidence consisting of four people, none of whom were proven to be both a Tea Partier and a racist.
Click to expand...


And you know damn well that if someone had offered info, and the reward was denied, you'd have heard about it ad nauseum.  Bottom line, it is all lies.


----------



## topspin

reems and reems of republiKlansman whining about the racism of blacks on whites, yet none about real racism. LOFL
  Ride this horse thru Nov till 12 righties please.


----------



## Jarhead

topspin said:


> reems and reems of republiKlansman whining about the racism of blacks on whites, yet none about real racism. LOFL
> Ride this horse thru Nov till 12 righties please.



and reems and reems of democrats whining about the racist tea partyers without any shred of evidence that shows there is a higher ratio of racists in that group than in any given group of people in the US.

Ride that horse until Nov. 2012 lefties please


----------



## Truthmatters

Jarhead said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do you people on the right keep saying Van Jones is a communist?
> 
> Its the same damned thing as saying Sherrrod is a racist.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seeing as later in the film clip Sherrod refers to a white attorney as "one of his kind" I would say she IS a racist. She was NOT relaying how she said it back then...she was explaining the attorney TO THE PRESENT AUDIENCE as "one of his kind."
> 
> She may not abuse her power acting as a racist....but I have no doubt she still is a racist.
> 
> As for Van Jones. Seeing as you are referring to his communist thinkjing when he was a "young man" it is quite obvious that your left wing blogs and left wing media outlets have neglected to present to you more RECENT words of Van Jones.
> 
> They use people like you TM. They know yoiu will believe3 anything they say and do no researech on your own.
> 
> You, TM are a pathetic lonely woman with nothing to be proud of except your ability to regurgitate what you read on left wing blogs.
Click to expand...


And you would be saying the same thing about Sherrod if she had not protested so loud to the media.


----------



## Truthmatters

Misty said:


> The fact that sherrod said it at all or thought like that is what is disturbing.
> 
> I would never think that way. Wouldn't even enter my mind.
> 
> I would never take race or wealth into consideration when divvying up money, if I were in her position.



She is 44 years old, how old was she 24 years ago?

Her father was killed by a KKK guy and then the KKK burned a cross on her lawn right in front of her family which consisted at the time of a mother, sisters and a 4 month old son who was born after her father was Murdered.

The woman overcame so much and you people continue to spew hate for her.


----------



## The Rabbi

boedicca said:


> It's also pretty clear that the reason the Left thinks there is a Vast Right Wing Conspiracy is because they have has their own Vast Leftwing version going on:
> 
> _When I'm talking to people from outside Washington, one question inevitably comes up: Why is the media so liberal? The question often reflects a suspicion that members of the press get together and decide on a story line that favors liberals and Democrats and denigrates conservatives and Republicans.
> 
> My response has usually been to say, yes, there's liberal bias in the media, but there's no conspiracy. The liberal tilt is an accident of nature. The media disproportionately attracts people from a liberal arts background who tend, quite innocently, to be politically liberal. If they came from West Point or engineering school, this wouldn't be the case.
> 
> Now, after learning I'd been targeted for a smear attack by a member of an online clique of liberal journalists, I'm inclined to amend my response. Not to say there's a media conspiracy, but at least to note that hundreds of journalists have gotten together, on an online listserv called JournoList, to promote liberalism and liberal politicians at the expense of traditional journalism.
> 
> My guess is that this and other revelations about JournoList will deepen the distrust of the national press. True, participants in the online clubhouse appear to hail chiefly from the media's self-identified left wing. But its founder, Ezra Klein, is a prominent writer for the Washington Post. Mr. Klein shut down JournoList last montha wise decision...._
> 
> Fred Barnes: The Vast Left-Wing Media Conspiracy - WSJ.com
> 
> 
> Now that JournoList is dead, there is no doubt a big flurry underway to find a new communication and coordination mechanism for their control and fabrication of the news.



Thanks for posting that.
Yes, the Left projects its own thoughts on to the Right.  So the Left is the party of racists.  They are the party of misogynists like Bill Clinton and Ted Kennedy.  They are the party of failed inner city schools and single parent households.
And above all, the Democrats are the Party of Fuck You.


----------



## fyrenza

Jarhead said:


> Seeing as later in the film clip Sherrod refers to a white attorney as "one of his kind" I would say she IS a racist. She was NOT relaying how she said it back then...she was explaining the attorney TO THE PRESENT AUDIENCE as "one of his kind."
> 
> She may not abuse her power acting as a racist....but I have no doubt she still is a racist.



Sorry to have to do this, but it was the times she grew up in, and in Georgia?  She knew she was black, every second of each and every day, and you don't get over that.

Is it racist?  I suppose it is, but she was talking about past times, and it's real hard not to let the feelings from those times shine through any anecdote a person is going to share.  This IS how she FELT, and does not necessarily reflect how she NOW feels.  In fact, her entire speech pretty much put paid to that, imho.


----------



## Kat

Truthmatters said:


> Misty said:
> 
> 
> 
> The fact that sherrod said it at all or thought like that is what is disturbing.
> 
> I would never think that way. Wouldn't even enter my mind.
> 
> I would never take race or wealth into consideration when divvying up money, if I were in her position.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She is 44 years old, how old was she 24 years ago?
> 
> Her father was killed by a KKK guy and then the KKK burned a cross on her lawn right in front of her family which consisted at the time of a mother, sisters and a 4 month old son who was born after her father was Murdered.
> 
> The woman overcame so much and you people continue to spew hate for her.
Click to expand...


How is discussing the whole situation, having opinions, spewing hate for her? You are discussing her also, so are you spewing hate for her?
Pretty strong accusation there.


----------



## Truthmatters

because this person says she would never think that way.

The woman had MANY reasons to think white people hated her.


----------



## Kat

Truthmatters said:


> because this person says she would never think that way.
> 
> The woman had MANY reasons to think white people hated her.





Is this reply to me and my questions to you? If so I don't get your reply and how it pertains to what I asked you.


----------



## topspin

Soggy in NOLA said:


> Oh, and BTW left.... the $100,000 reward for providing evidence of racist teaparty activity still remains unclaimed.



 they could stab reggie bush at a tea bag rally and you would say thier no proof that's a tea party member. You moron


----------



## Kat

topspin said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, and BTW left.... the $100,000 reward for providing evidence of racist teaparty activity still remains unclaimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> they could stab reggie bush at a tea bag rally and you would say thier no proof that's a tea party member. You moron
Click to expand...




Well that one made a lot of sense.


----------



## Truthmatters

You can pretend this person isnt saying Sherrod is flawed for THINKING this at 20 years old when her father had been murdered for race hate when she was 16 but it is pretty dishonest of you.


----------



## Jarhead

Truthmatters said:


> because this person says she would never think that way.
> 
> The woman had MANY reasons to think white people hated her.



Perhaps she did.
But that does not mean our discussing her means we hate her.

If she is a racist becuase white people had killed her father becuase he was black, then I would undersatand. I would hope she would learn to realize not all white people are monsters, but I certainly can understand her sentiments.

Hey, the way I see it, she and YOU should not be chastising Fox for reporting on the story of her suddenly resigning. It was newswoirthy as it would be with any appointee suddenly resigning....but becuase it was a Fox story, the truth about her came out and she got her job back (or one similar).

Querstion is, why did no other news source see it as newsworthy that an administeration appointee suddenly resigned under allegations of racism? Whether the allegations were true or not, the WH made it clear that they believed them toi be true...yet no one bothered to report the story.

Makes you wonder what else the MSM is hiding from the masses.


----------



## Avatar4321

Chris revealed the truth about accusing the right of being racists months ago (By the way, where is he? Miss seeing him around).

They call us racists because they've changed the definition of racist. Racist to them simply means Republican.  If you are a Republican, you are a racist by definition.

That's why they excuse the geniune and deep seeded racism on the left. Because they are Republicans and therefore cannot, by definition, be racists.

I think this redefinition has alot to do with Liberation Theology. The Republicans are the oppressors (Despite the Democrats having complete and total power). Therefore they are always wrong. Democrats are the liberators/oppressed/victims, so they can't be racist. They have no power. They can do no wrong, because any thing they do is to overthrow the opporessors.

The fact that this stuff has spread so far and wide is simply astounding. We need to keep shining the light on it though.


----------



## Truthmatters

Fox news was convicting her from early morning on their shows


----------



## Jarhead

topspin said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, and BTW left.... the $100,000 reward for providing evidence of racist teaparty activity still remains unclaimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> they could stab reggie bush at a tea bag rally and you would say thier no proof that's a tea party member. You moron
Click to expand...


So using your logic and sports....

A drunk man drops beer on the folks in the seats below, so therfore true sports fans should all be labelled as beer chucker animals.


----------



## Kat

Truthmatters said:


> You can pretend this person isnt saying Sherrod is flawed for THINKING this at 20 years old when her father had been murdered for race hate when she was 16 but it is pretty dishonest of you.




What person is ''this person''?

TM I think what she has had to endure in her life is horrific. No person should go through that.
That aside, I don't see what it has to do with you saying everyone is spewing hate for her.
No one is. Period. Discussing it? Yes.  Giving opinions? Yes. Spewing hate? Prove it.


----------



## mudwhistle

Truthmatters said:


> Misty said:
> 
> 
> 
> The fact that sherrod said it at all or thought like that is what is disturbing.
> 
> I would never think that way. Wouldn't even enter my mind.
> 
> I would never take race or wealth into consideration when divvying up money, if I were in her position.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She is 44 years old, how old was she 24 years ago?
> 
> Her father was killed by a KKK guy and then the KKK burned a cross on her lawn right in front of her family which consisted at the time of a mother, sisters and a 4 month old son who was born after her father was Murdered.
> 
> The woman overcame so much and you people continue to spew hate for her.
Click to expand...


If she's 44 then I'm Jon Stewart.

She looks a bit older then that.


----------



## Avatar4321

Truthmatters said:


> You can pretend this person isnt saying Sherrod is flawed for THINKING this at 20 years old when her father had been murdered for race hate when she was 16 but it is pretty dishonest of you.



But she is flawed. I'm flawed. You're flawed. We are all flawed. We are human.

I completely understand why she would have racist feelings and thoughts. Racism is a human problem. And I am happy to see that she had this turning point in her life where she realized race isn't the real issue.


----------



## Jarhead

Truthmatters said:


> Fox news was convicting her from early morning on their shows



Nope.

You are either making that up or regurgitating what you saw on a left wing blog.

Fox News reporters and anchors report the news. They do not offer their own commentaries.


----------



## Avatar4321

Truthmatters said:


> Fox news was convicting her from early morning on their shows



Which show? If it's true it's the first I've heard about it. Please let me know what show. I've been asking for a while. The First show I've seen is OReilly Monday night which was after her resignation.


----------



## Jarhead

Avatar4321 said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fox news was convicting her from early morning on their shows
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Which show? If it's true it's the first I've heard about it. Please let me know what show. I've been asking for a while. The First show I've seen is OReilly Monday night which was after her resignation.
Click to expand...


Watch this....she probably does not even realize that the news shows do not start until 9AM.
She likely believes Beck, Orielly, Hannity and Gretta are news reporters/anchors


----------



## mudwhistle

Jarhead said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fox news was convicting her from early morning on their shows
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nope.
> 
> You are either making that up or regurgitating what you saw on a left wing blog.
> 
> Fox News reporters and anchors report the news. They do not offer their own commentaries.
Click to expand...


Right now they're telling the whole story...how the woman was taken out of context.

Seems Obama has this silly habit of going for knee-jerk reactions. 

Pretty much his Presidency in a nut-shell.


----------



## Avatar4321

topspin said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, and BTW left.... the $100,000 reward for providing evidence of racist teaparty activity still remains unclaimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> they could stab reggie bush at a tea bag rally and you would say thier no proof that's a tea party member. You moron
Click to expand...


Reggie Bush is a Tea party member? didn't know that.

and no there would be no proof until the man who did the stabbing was caught and shown to be a Tea party member.


----------



## Avatar4321

Jarhead said:


> Avatar4321 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fox news was convicting her from early morning on their shows
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Which show? If it's true it's the first I've heard about it. Please let me know what show. I've been asking for a while. The First show I've seen is OReilly Monday night which was after her resignation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Watch this....she probably does not even realize that the news shows do not start until 9AM.
> She likely believes Beck, Orielly, Hannity and Gretta are news reporters/anchors
Click to expand...


I'd like to give her the benefit of the doubt. If she has information that I don't have, I'd lvoe to hear it.


----------



## Truthmatters

Go get the tapes of Fox being as fair to this woman on the first breaking of the story like you claim.


----------



## Truthmatters

Shepard Smith Unloads On Fox News, White House Over Shirley Sherrod Scandal


Shepard Smith of fox news agrees with me


----------



## Avatar4321

Truthmatters said:


> Go get the tapes of Fox being as fair to this woman on the first breaking of the story like you claim.



I'm not claiming that Fox was being fair to this woman with the story first broke. I am saying that Fox didn't play the video until after she resigned.

You claimed Fox was attacking her before she resigned. If you have some tape of that, I'd like to see it. But as far as I've seen they didn't report anything on it until after the resignation, where OReilly, who has since apologized, was a little harsh because he didnt have the full tape and admitted he didn't. But he wasn't playing the tape to attack her. He was playing the tape because the Administration fired her over it and he didn't have a full copy of it.

Like I said, I could be wrong. You could be right. There could be some clips of Fox playing the video at earlier times and going after her all out. I haven't seen them. I was hoping you had and were willing to show them, because with the evidence I have right now, I cannot honestly say that Fox is responsible for this smear. 

Now I know you care about the truth. You wouldn't like to me to lie and make assumptions I don't know about do you? What If, like the NCAAP, The President, OReilly, and Hannity, I am wrong?

If you have a tape, please let me see it.


----------



## Truthmatters

Fox smears Sherrod as racist, Sherrod cancels Fox interview | Media Matters for America

There are clips of the treatment by fox here


----------



## Kat

Truthmatters said:


> Shepard Smith Unloads On Fox News, White House Over Shirley Sherrod Scandal
> 
> 
> Shepard Smith of fox news agrees with me





Cool. I didn't know you thought the WH was obsessed with Beck..


----------



## Truthmatters

Fox used tape and story from an asshole who was KNOWN to promote false news.


----------



## Kat

Truthmatters said:


> Fox used tape and story from an asshole who was KNOWN to promote false news.





LOL. Okay. I see your MO. Evade, evade. You can't say Shep agrees with you..and then pick and choose...or at the least you need to say what part he agrees with.


----------



## Avatar4321

Truthmatters said:


> Shepard Smith Unloads On Fox News, White House Over Shirley Sherrod Scandal
> 
> 
> Shepard Smith of fox news agrees with me



I didn't see Shepard saying that they were playing the video all day. Nor that they were playing it before the resignation occured. The video posted didn't say that.

In fact, Shepard specifically said it wasn't played until Prime time (Think OReilly/Hannity). which is hours after she resigned. And who have since Apologized for spending so much time on it.

So please, tell me what morning shows played the tape. Like I said, I could be wrong. I am just not seeing it yet.


----------



## Avatar4321

Truthmatters said:


> Fox used tape and story from an asshole who was KNOWN to promote false news.



The story wasn't from Brietbart. The story was from the White House, who forced her to resign over the video.

Are you suggesting that Fox, having learned that the White House forced her to resign over this video has no obligation to report what happened, why, and to show the video responsible for it?


----------



## Truthmatters

Then why did some on Fox call for her resignation?


----------



## NYcarbineer

Avatar4321 said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fox used tape and story from an asshole who was KNOWN to promote false news.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The story wasn't from Brietbart. The story was from the White House, who forced her to resign over the video.
> 
> Are you suggesting that Fox, having learned that the White House forced her to resign over this video has no obligation to report what happened, why, and to show the video responsible for it?
Click to expand...


Amazingly, this has become the Right's new source of pride...

...We lied, but because some Democrats temporarily fell for it...

...We win!!!


----------



## Jarhead

NYcarbineer said:


> Avatar4321 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fox used tape and story from an asshole who was KNOWN to promote false news.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The story wasn't from Brietbart. The story was from the White House, who forced her to resign over the video.
> 
> Are you suggesting that Fox, having learned that the White House forced her to resign over this video has no obligation to report what happened, why, and to show the video responsible for it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Amazingly, this has become the Right's new source of pride...
> 
> ...We lied, but because some Democrats temporarily fell for it...
> 
> ...We win!!!
Click to expand...


Wow. I mean WOW.

You really know how to spin. Like a child.

You post like a child.


----------



## Kat

Truthmatters said:


> Then why did some on Fox call for her resignation?




You are confused. ''Fox'' did not call for her resignation.


----------



## Jarhead

NYcarbineer said:


> Avatar4321 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fox used tape and story from an asshole who was KNOWN to promote false news.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The story wasn't from Brietbart. The story was from the White House, who forced her to resign over the video.
> 
> Are you suggesting that Fox, having learned that the White House forced her to resign over this video has no obligation to report what happened, why, and to show the video responsible for it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Amazingly, this has become the Right's new source of pride...
> 
> ...We lied, but because some Democrats temporarily fell for it...
> 
> ...We win!!!
Click to expand...


And by the way. WE did not lie. Breitbart did not offer us the whole truth and did not tell us that.
We heard news and took it as factual. And so did the WH and so did the NAACP and so did the FDA.
You believed the Tea Partyers were racists without evidence.

Shit happens.


----------



## Avatar4321

Truthmatters said:


> Then why did some on Fox call for her resignation?



Who called for her resignation? The story wasnt aired until after she has resigned.


----------



## Avatar4321

NYcarbineer said:


> Avatar4321 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fox used tape and story from an asshole who was KNOWN to promote false news.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The story wasn't from Brietbart. The story was from the White House, who forced her to resign over the video.
> 
> Are you suggesting that Fox, having learned that the White House forced her to resign over this video has no obligation to report what happened, why, and to show the video responsible for it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Amazingly, this has become the Right's new source of pride...
> 
> ...We lied, but because some Democrats temporarily fell for it...
> 
> ...We win!!!
Click to expand...


How is reporting that the President forced a woman to resign over a video and showing the parts that were had a lie?


----------



## Jarhead

Truthmatters said:


> Then why did some on Fox call for her resignation?



Where do you get your information from? Breitbart?


----------



## WillowTree

Avatar4321 said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> Then why did some on Fox call for her resignation?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Who called for her resignation? The story wasnt aired until after she has resignegd.
Click to expand...


Let me know when they forecast snow in hell.


----------



## Kat

Jarhead said:


> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Avatar4321 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The story wasn't from Brietbart. The story was from the White House, who forced her to resign over the video.
> 
> Are you suggesting that Fox, having learned that the White House forced her to resign over this video has no obligation to report what happened, why, and to show the video responsible for it?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Amazingly, this has become the Right's new source of pride...
> 
> ...We lied, but because some Democrats temporarily fell for it...
> 
> ...We win!!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And by the way. WE did not lie. Breitbart did not offer us the whole truth and did not tell us that.
> We heard news and took it as factual. And so did the WH and so did the NAACP and so did the FDA.
> You believed the Tea Partyers were racists without evidence.
> 
> Shit happens.
Click to expand...


Breitbart said that was how the tape was delivered to him. Whether that is true or not, only he knows for sure. BUT the NAACP would have had full version, right?


----------



## boedicca

Truthmatters said:


> Then why did some on Fox call for her resignation?




So now the Obama White House takes orders from Fox?

That's great news.    When will the Obamanoids void ObamaCare, give back the Stimulus money, divest from GM....and make the tax cuts permanent?


----------



## Truthmatters

Those days are now over huh?

Fox jumped the shark and better be ready for an asswhipping next time they report lies as news.


----------



## boedicca

God you're dumb.

You don't even know what jumping the shark means.


----------



## mudwhistle

Truthmatters said:


> Then why did some on Fox call for her resignation?



Seems Bill O'Reilly did........sadly after she had already resigned.


----------



## NYcarbineer

Jarhead said:


> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Avatar4321 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The story wasn't from Brietbart. The story was from the White House, who forced her to resign over the video.
> 
> Are you suggesting that Fox, having learned that the White House forced her to resign over this video has no obligation to report what happened, why, and to show the video responsible for it?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Amazingly, this has become the Right's new source of pride...
> 
> ...We lied, but because some Democrats temporarily fell for it...
> 
> ...We win!!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And by the way. WE did not lie. *Breitbart did not offer us the whole truth and did not tell us that.
> We heard news and took it as factual.* And so did the WH and so did the NAACP and so did the FDA.
> You believed the Tea Partyers were racists without evidence.
> 
> Shit happens.
Click to expand...


Didn't you just ridicule a poster for believing blogs?


----------



## boedicca

mudwhistle said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> Then why did some on Fox call for her resignation?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seems Bill O'Reilly did........sadly after she had already resigned.
Click to expand...



Hmmmm...I need to invest in that time warp system in which Bill O'Reilly can influence events that occur before he says anything.


----------



## NYcarbineer

Jarhead said:


> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Avatar4321 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The story wasn't from Brietbart. The story was from the White House, who forced her to resign over the video.
> 
> Are you suggesting that Fox, having learned that the White House forced her to resign over this video has no obligation to report what happened, why, and to show the video responsible for it?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Amazingly, this has become the Right's new source of pride...
> 
> ...We lied, but because some Democrats temporarily fell for it...
> 
> ...We win!!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wow. I mean WOW.
> 
> You really know how to spin. Like a child.
> 
> You post like a child.
Click to expand...


Who on the right has apologized to Ms. Sherrod for either starting or promoting a lie?


----------



## Truthmatters

They just refuse to accept that they are the consumers of these lies.


----------



## boedicca

She never claimed she didn't say what was in the video clips.    Posting her verbatim quotes is not a lie.


----------



## Kat

mudwhistle said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> Then why did some on Fox call for her resignation?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seems Bill O'Reilly did........sadly after she had already resigned.
Click to expand...




Yes! Now that is true. He is not a newscaster. TM fail. (and it has been said ad nauseum that he did so AFTER she had already resigned). AND he owned up to it. He apologized, and said he had not done his homework.


----------



## Kat

Truthmatters said:


> They just refuse to accept that they are the consumers of these lies.



Hun, you are the one telling the falsehoods. But you know that already. Repeating them time and again won't change it. They still will be falsehoods.


----------



## Jarhead

NYcarbineer said:


> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Amazingly, this has become the Right's new source of pride...
> 
> ...We lied, but because some Democrats temporarily fell for it...
> 
> ...We win!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wow. I mean WOW.
> 
> You really know how to spin. Like a child.
> 
> You post like a child.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Who on the right has apologized to Ms. Sherrod for either starting or promoting a lie?
Click to expand...


It was not a lie.
She resigned based on a tape that appeared to show her as a racist.

The story was about her resignation.

Look at the clip you posted.

Maddow wqas the liar in that clip. Oreilly was the only one who said "racism has no place in politics" but that was after the WH had her resign.

Like it or not....the WH forcing someone to resign lends credibility to the story.


----------



## Truthmatters

boedicca said:


> She never claimed she didn't say what was in the video clips.    Posting her verbatim quotes is not a lie.



accepting or editing tapes to make the person appear to say the oppisite of what they mean is.

It is your right wing media that recut this tape.

You can try to avoid the truth all you want.

its what you always do.


----------



## Jarhead

Truthmatters said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> She never claimed she didn't say what was in the video clips.    Posting her verbatim quotes is not a lie.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> accepting or editing tapes to make the person appear to say the oppisite of what they mean is.
> 
> It is your right wing media that recut this tape.
> 
> You can try to avoid the truth all you want.
> 
> its what you always do.
Click to expand...


It was not edited and it was not re-cut.

Know the facts.


----------



## boedicca

Truthmattersnot:

He didn't.

The clip where she has her revelations that it's really about being poor not about race was posted.

So, you lose.

The germane part of all of this is the NAACP laughing and applauding her earlier bigotry.  They didn't recant that.


----------



## Truthmatters

You right wing media edits a tape to create an impression that was a lie and now its Obamas fault.

just like everything Bush did is Obamas fault to you guys.


----------



## boedicca

No we don't.

But it's not surprising that you think we do because the left always assumes others are as guilty as they are.


----------



## Jarhead

Truthmatters said:


> You right wing media edits a tape to create an impression that was a lie and now its Obamas fault.
> 
> just like everything Bush did is Obamas fault to you guys.



The tape was not edited.
Know the facts.


----------



## Kat

Truthmatters said:


> You right wing media edits a tape to create an impression that was a lie and now its Obamas fault.
> 
> just like everything Bush did is Obamas fault to you guys.





I know you love the attention. I get that is what you are about. But this is a bit a a stretch, even for you, ya think?


Obama doesn't need to be blamed for things Bush did. There is so much with Obama we can't even keep up with it all.


----------



## Truthmatters

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

you blame Obama  for everything


----------



## Truthmatters

Jarhead said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> You right wing media edits a tape to create an impression that was a lie and now its Obamas fault.
> 
> just like everything Bush did is Obamas fault to you guys.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The tape was not edited.
> Know the facts.
Click to expand...


Any time you cut a tape its called editing you fool


----------



## Avatar4321

Truthmatters said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> She never claimed she didn't say what was in the video clips.    Posting her verbatim quotes is not a lie.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> accepting or editing tapes to make the person appear to say the oppisite of what they mean is.
> 
> It is your right wing media that recut this tape.
> 
> You can try to avoid the truth all you want.
> 
> its what you always do.
Click to expand...


So you know who editted the tape?

Please tell us. I'd love to know. I didn't realize you did. You said that you Sephard Smith had aggreed with you and he specifically said that no one knows who editted the tape.

I really want to know who editted the tape. There is still more to the story and I am confident that the identity of the edittor is the real story here.


----------



## boedicca

No.  Just for breaking the promises he made, his policies, and actions as President.

That's more than enough.


----------



## Avatar4321

Truthmatters said:


> HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
> 
> you blame Obama  for everything



I blame him for firing a woman over a video tape he didn't bother to see without getting her side of the story or anyone else involved. Is there any reason he shouldn't be blamed for that?


----------



## Truthmatters

Im sure we will find out through the trials of these involved parties.

Why did they accept tape and pass it on if they did not KNOW it was valid?


----------



## boedicca

Truthmatters said:


> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> You right wing media edits a tape to create an impression that was a lie and now its Obamas fault.
> 
> just like everything Bush did is Obamas fault to you guys.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The tape was not edited.
> Know the facts.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Any time you cut a tape its called editing you fool
Click to expand...




Please cite a news program or news blog/website that shows all content in its entirety with no clips of certain segments being presented on their own.


----------



## The T

boedicca said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> The thing is, there's no doubt that some liberal journalists undoubtedly would have wanted to jump on board with that conspiracy, but why is this being brought to light NOW? Why not THEN? Also, obviously this Journalist group didn't have enough support to stay alive anyway. No harm, no foul.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We didn't know about it back then. Politico wrote about it last year, and there has been an effort underway to discover exactly what it is. The Weigel affair brought it into the open.
> 
> *If you think leftwing journalists conspiring to affect the outcome of a presidential election is No Harm No Foul*, then you really are a corrupt puppy.
Click to expand...

 
I don't want to hear another word from lefties that think the media is unbiased or impartial.

This is explosive to some...but not to most. We knew this all along. It was (is) easy to spot. [Any wonder why cirulation and viewership has dwindled for them? Suprised that they attack FOX, Talk Radio, And the Internet Blogs?] This whole thing just puts their feet in the concrete. They will sink with this even further into _irrelevance _IMHO.

There is no real _Journalism on the left._ There hasn't been for decades.


----------



## Truthmatters

Avatar4321 said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
> 
> you blame Obama  for everything
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I blame him for firing a woman over a video tape he didn't bother to see without getting her side of the story or anyone else involved. Is there any reason he shouldn't be blamed for that?
Click to expand...


I blame himm for that too, I also blame Brietbart and Fox fro acting like the republican party activists instead of journalists and causing this whole mess.


----------



## PLYMCO_PILGRIM

boedicca said:


> The Daily Caller's "JournoList" expose has finally resolved the matter:
> 
> Based on Spencer Ackerman's tactic:
> 
> _*If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game theyve put upon us, Ackerman wrote on the Journolist listserv in April 2008. Instead, take one of them  Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares  and call them racists.*_
> 
> Conservatives Karl Rove and Fred Barnes respond to Journolist racist post | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment
> 
> 
> It's out in the open now.  The Left uses the racist accusation against the Right, the Tea Party, Conservatives, the GOP...  Anyone who critiques prominent lefties or their programs will be falsely attacked as a racist as a diversionary tactic.
> 
> More evidence is Sherrod's hateful comment regarding the GOP to Media Matters.
> 
> So here's the thing you lefties should understand:  we're not falling for it.



Oh SNAP more evidence of the shenanigans.

I didn't even bother to read the attackers of this post responses.


----------



## 007

*Hello, I'm a Racist, Pleased to Meet You*

American Thinker: Hello, I'm a Racist, Pleased to Meet You


----------



## Avatar4321

Truthmatters said:


> Im sure we will find out through the trials of these involved parties.
> 
> Why did they accept tape and pass it on if they did not KNOW it was valid?



Because the White House fired her over it. Public has a right to know about that.

That would be why Hannity said "alleged" racist statements. He didn't know, but resignation is big news.


----------



## Immanuel

boedicca said:


> Truthmattersnot:
> 
> He didn't.
> 
> The clip where she has her revelations that it's really about being poor not about race was posted.
> 
> So, you lose.
> 
> *The germane part of all of this is the NAACP laughing and applauding her earlier bigotry.  They didn't recant that.*



I watched the entire 43 minute tape and I have to say, I did not see that from the NAACP.  There were some "amens" after she talked about her change of heart, but there were no "hallelujahs" nor laughing nor applauding what you call her earlier bigotry.  

She made a comment during the speech where she said that she wished the room had been filled with white and black people and the audience seemed to approve of that as well.  That would have been a good thing.  

Breitbart made the comment that this was about the hypocrisy of the NAACP and I have to say, the full video shows that to be a total failure, because it was not there. IMHO

Immie


----------



## Avatar4321

Truthmatters said:


> Avatar4321 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
> 
> you blame Obama  for everything
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I blame him for firing a woman over a video tape he didn't bother to see without getting her side of the story or anyone else involved. Is there any reason he shouldn't be blamed for that?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I blame himm for that too, I also blame Brietbart and Fox fro acting like the republican party activists instead of journalists and causing this whole mess.
Click to expand...


How did Fox cause this whole mess by telling the world the News that the White House forced her to resign?


----------



## Truthmatters

Go watch the tape you fool, they condem her as a racist


----------



## boedicca

Immanuel said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmattersnot:
> 
> He didn't.
> 
> The clip where she has her revelations that it's really about being poor not about race was posted.
> 
> So, you lose.
> 
> *The germane part of all of this is the NAACP laughing and applauding her earlier bigotry.  They didn't recant that.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I watched the entire 43 minute tape and I have to say, I did not see that from the NAACP.  There were some "amens" after she talked about her change of heart, but there were no "hallelujahs" nor laughing nor applauding what you call her earlier bigotry.
> 
> She made a comment during the speech where she said that she wished the room had been filled with white and black people and the audience seemed to approve of that as well.  That would have been a good thing.
> 
> Breitbart made the comment that this was about the hypocrisy of the NAACP and I have to say, the full video shows that to be a total failure, because it was not there. IMHO
> 
> Immie
Click to expand...




Interesting analysis.    I view it differently.    The crowd appears to approve of her racism towards the white farmer - and then further approves of her Class Warfarism.


----------



## fyrenza

NYcarbineer said:


> Amazingly, this has become the Right's new source of pride...
> 
> ...We lied, but because some Democrats temporarily fell for it...
> 
> ...We win!!!



Wow.  You just TRULY don't "Get It," do you?

It wasn't "some dems" ~ it was the White House, putting pressure on her boss, and forcing HIM to do something about it, which I would imagine they Oh! SO helpfully suggested the remedy for.

Why can't you see that?  ARE you that Partisan?

If you are?

You ain't gonna last long, pal.  Not here, at least.


----------



## Immanuel

boedicca said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmattersnot:
> 
> He didn't.
> 
> The clip where she has her revelations that it's really about being poor not about race was posted.
> 
> So, you lose.
> 
> *The germane part of all of this is the NAACP laughing and applauding her earlier bigotry.  They didn't recant that.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I watched the entire 43 minute tape and I have to say, I did not see that from the NAACP.  There were some "amens" after she talked about her change of heart, but there were no "hallelujahs" nor laughing nor applauding what you call her earlier bigotry.
> 
> She made a comment during the speech where she said that she wished the room had been filled with white and black people and the audience seemed to approve of that as well.  That would have been a good thing.
> 
> Breitbart made the comment that this was about the hypocrisy of the NAACP and I have to say, the full video shows that to be a total failure, because it was not there. IMHO
> 
> Immie
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting analysis.    I view it differently.    The crowd appears to approve of her racism towards the white farmer - and then further approves of her Class Warfarism.
Click to expand...


I respect that you have a different viewpoint of it, but I think you are completely wrong.  

Immie


----------



## Avatar4321

Truthmatters said:


> Go watch the tape you fool, they condem her as a racist



But she was a racist. She admits that. In fact, the whole point of the story was how she overcame her racial animosity.

You get a news story saying the White House just forced a woman to resign over the tape, all you have is the editted tape, you going to wait around to get the full tape before you air the story? 

Or are you going to going to tell the news that the White House demanded a resignation (Something they rarely do) and provide the clips of the tape that you have to show why they apparently forced her out?


----------



## boedicca

Immanuel said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> 
> I watched the entire 43 minute tape and I have to say, I did not see that from the NAACP.  There were some "amens" after she talked about her change of heart, but there were no "hallelujahs" nor laughing nor applauding what you call her earlier bigotry.
> 
> She made a comment during the speech where she said that she wished the room had been filled with white and black people and the audience seemed to approve of that as well.  That would have been a good thing.
> 
> Breitbart made the comment that this was about the hypocrisy of the NAACP and I have to say, the full video shows that to be a total failure, because it was not there. IMHO
> 
> Immie
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting analysis.    I view it differently.    The crowd appears to approve of her racism towards the white farmer - and then further approves of her Class Warfarism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I respect that you have a different viewpoint of it, but I think you are completely wrong.
> 
> Immie
Click to expand...



Isn't it grand to live in a free country where we are each at liberty to form our own judgments based upon our own perceptions?


----------



## The T

Avatar4321 said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> Im sure we will find out through the trials of these involved parties.
> 
> Why did they accept tape and pass it on if they did not KNOW it was valid?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because the White House fired her over it. Public has a right to know about that.
> 
> That would be why Hannity said "alleged" racist statements. He didn't know, but resignation is big news.
Click to expand...

 
Glenn Beck was also on top of it...and didn't fall for it.


----------



## MaggieMae

Immanuel said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> 
> After what just happened with the Shirley Sherrod case, you are accusing the right of being gullible?  Please, Maggie.
> 
> Immie
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, it _was_ gullible to believe the edited tape. But I'm talking about the Rove propaganda machine and how he can still brilliantly maneuver a conversation away from anything that might paint the right into a corner, and then they just jump right in without having a clue that they're being manipulated. I often wished in the past that the left had its own Karl Rove.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Karl Rove is still around?
> 
> I thought... hoped... he had sailed off into the sunset in shame with the rest of the Bush Admin.
> 
> Immie
Click to expand...


Oh yeah...

_Republican strategists Karl Rove and Ed Gillespie have launched a new group that allows U.S. Republicans to give anonymously to discredit Democrats._

New GOP group allows anonymous donations - UPI.com


----------



## MaggieMae

Jarhead said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> Seeing as later in the film clip Sherrod refers to a white attorney as "one of his kind" I would say she IS a racist. She was NOT relaying how she said it back then...she was explaining the attorney TO THE PRESENT AUDIENCE as "one of his kind."
> 
> She may not abuse her power acting as a racist....but I have no doubt she still is a racist.
> 
> As for Van Jones. Seeing as you are referring to his communist thinkjing when he was a "young man" it is quite obvious that your left wing blogs and left wing media outlets have neglected to present to you more RECENT words of Van Jones.
> 
> They use people like you TM. They know yoiu will believe3 anything they say and do no researech on your own.
> 
> You, TM are a pathetic lonely woman with nothing to be proud of except your ability to regurgitate what you read on left wing blogs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why is it the righties can never see the hypocrisy of such statements? You're doing the same damned thing, soldier.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No ma'am. I am not. I am offering my own take on the film clip. I do not believe anyone else took it that way. Certainly no one reported it that way.
> So please explain how I am regurgitating?
Click to expand...


Because that part is exactly how pundits defending the Breitbart presentation of the tape are regurgitating.


----------



## MaggieMae

txlonghorn said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Misty said:
> 
> 
> 
> Don't you mean refudiated?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wasn't that a Palin faux pas?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yep...can you believe she did that?  I've never made a mistake in my life.  Ok...maybe once but that was a long time ago.
Click to expand...


Can I remind you (or quote) your satire the next time some verbal _faux pas _by Obama gets spread all over the Internet? We're STILL seeing "reminders" of the 57-state slipup, which occurred during the campaign. In fact, Crusader Frank has it in his signature.


----------



## Truthmatters

Jarhead, you are needle dicked crackwhore with a pimplely face and a desire for skinflute in your mouth.

Now can you adress facts instread of thinking you are scaring old ladies with nasty talk.


----------



## boedicca

Truthmatters said:


> Jarhead, you are needle dicked crackwhore with a pimplely face and a desire for skinflute in your mouth.
> 
> Now can you adress facts instread of thinking you are scaring old ladies with nasty talk.




You are thoroughly disgusting.

Get help.


----------



## Immanuel

MaggieMae said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, it _was_ gullible to believe the edited tape. But I'm talking about the Rove propaganda machine and how he can still brilliantly maneuver a conversation away from anything that might paint the right into a corner, and then they just jump right in without having a clue that they're being manipulated. I often wished in the past that the left had its own Karl Rove.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Karl Rove is still around?
> 
> I thought... hoped... he had sailed off into the sunset in shame with the rest of the Bush Admin.
> 
> Immie
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh yeah...
> 
> _Republican strategists Karl Rove and Ed Gillespie have launched a new group that allows U.S. Republicans to give anonymously to discredit Democrats._
> 
> New GOP group allows anonymous donations - UPI.com
Click to expand...


Not that I would even consider giving to such a group, but do you have a problem with anonymous giving?

Immie


----------



## Jarhead

MaggieMae said:


> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why is it the righties can never see the hypocrisy of such statements? You're doing the same damned thing, soldier.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No ma'am. I am not. I am offering my own take on the film clip. I do not believe anyone else took it that way. Certainly no one reported it that way.
> So please explain how I am regurgitating?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because that part is exactly how pundits defending the Breitbart presentation of the tape are regurgitating.
Click to expand...


Interesting. I realize you wont believe this, but my wife does not let me watch the "pundit" shows. She allows me to watch Fox news at 6PM and then she takes over the TV.

In the morning while having coffee, we watch the local NBC affiliate news.

My wife hates Oreilly, Hannity (so do I by the way) and she despoises Fox and Friends in the morning. And I respect her wishes as I love her more than life.

Sorry if you dont believe me, But it was my personal take. I have my own opinion.


----------



## boedicca

Somehow I doubt that Rove and Gillespie are gathering up donations from Doodad Pro and Mickey Mouse.


----------



## MaggieMae

Immanuel said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> We didn't know about it back then.  Politico wrote about it last year, and there has been an effort underway to discover exactly what it is.   The Weigel affair brought it into the open.
> 
> If you think leftwing journalists conspiring to affect the outcome of a presidential election is No Harm No Foul, then you really are a corrupt puppy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Politico is often accused of being leftist also. In fact, any news outlet that doesn't strictly tow the conservative line is accused of liberal bias.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Is it really any different going left to right?
> 
> Granted there are not as many media outlets that don't strictly tow the liberal line, but those that don't are treated no differently by the left than you indicate conservatives treat Politico and the rest.
> 
> Immie
Click to expand...


There's no doubt the MSNBC's afternoon political lineup is left, with the exception of Dillon Radigan who seems to be MSNBC's own Lou Dobbs. I've said before that I watch CNN almost exclusively because I think they do try to be fair and balanced. The new 7PM hour with John King always includes someone from the right and someone from the left debating a specific news story (if it's debatable). One of CNN's recent contributors, and who appears on John King's America almost every day is Erick Erickson from redstate.com. His opinions mirror many conservatives, but he's able to present them in a sensible and articulate manner, and doesn't get all belligerent or sulky when he's proven wrong. I like the guy a lot.


----------



## Immanuel

MaggieMae said:


> txlonghorn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wasn't that a Palin faux pas?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep...can you believe she did that?  I've never made a mistake in my life.  Ok...maybe once but that was a long time ago.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Can I remind you (or quote) your satire the next time some verbal _faux pas _by Obama gets spread all over the Internet? We're STILL seeing "reminders" of the 57-state slipup, which occurred during the campaign. In fact, Crusader Frank has it in his signature.
Click to expand...


That is because the 57 state slip up is hilarious coming from a Presidential candidate.  I don't care who it is, that is down right hilarious.

Immie


----------



## The T

MaggieMae said:


> txlonghorn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wasn't that a Palin faux pas?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep...can you believe she did that? I've never made a mistake in my life. Ok...maybe once but that was a long time ago.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Can I remind you (or quote) your satire the next time some verbal _faux pas _by Obama gets spread all over the Internet? We're STILL seeing "reminders" of the 57-state slipup, which occurred during the campaign. In fact, Crusader Frank has it in his signature.
Click to expand...

 
And so what? Obama is full of faux-pas along with being full of himself being the malignant _narcissist_ himself...and notice the left circling the wagons to defend the idiocy exhibited by Barry.

Boo-Hoo. Cry us a river.


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

boedicca said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jarhead, you are needle dicked crackwhore with a pimplely face and a desire for skinflute in your mouth.
> 
> Now can you adress facts instread of thinking you are scaring old ladies with nasty talk.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are thoroughly disgusting.
> 
> Get help.
Click to expand...


Truthmatters is mentally disturbed, or at best, just a very immature nitwit.


----------



## Jarhead

Truthmatters said:


> Jarhead, you are needle dicked crackwhore with a pimplely face and a desire for skinflute in your mouth.
> 
> Now can you adress facts instread of thinking you are scaring old ladies with nasty talk.



I am impressed with your spunk.

I addressed the facts. You simply see the facts differently than I do.

As for being a needle dicked crackwhore....what I do on my spare time is none of your business!

As for the pimply face....at the age of 52, I hate to tell you that it cleared up over 35 years ago.

The skin flute in my mouth? My sex life has nothing to do with this.


----------



## fyrenza

More and more, I get to a point in these threads that I'm just, like,

WTF???  Oh.  AND STFU, you FUKTARD!!!

Some of y'all just CANNOT think critically.  You can't examine the EVIDENCE, and come to some sort of logical conclusion. 

What scares me the MOST about this?

You DUMBASSES are sitting on JURIES, and influencing judges AND our system of laws, 

and you couldn't call something WRONG, even if it cost your brother his life.

THAT's pretty sad, but it's folks like you that make me think that perhaps it WOULD be a Good Idea to LIMIT the ability of "just anyone" to vote.

Cripes!  Didn't you go to SKOOL?  

I went to a CATHOLIC university, and even THEY didn't do some crap like that to their students!!!


----------



## The T

MaggieMae said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, it _was_ gullible to believe the edited tape. But I'm talking about the Rove propaganda machine and how he can still brilliantly maneuver a conversation away from anything that might paint the right into a corner, and then they just jump right in without having a clue that they're being manipulated. I often wished in the past that the left had its own Karl Rove.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Karl Rove is still around?
> 
> I thought... hoped... he had sailed off into the sunset in shame with the rest of the Bush Admin.
> 
> Immie
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh yeah...
> 
> _Republican strategists Karl Rove and Ed Gillespie have launched a new group that allows U.S. Republicans to give anonymously to discredit Democrats._
> 
> New GOP group allows anonymous donations - UPI.com
Click to expand...

 
And you act like the Statist Left is sin-free?  Really?


----------



## Immanuel

Jarhead said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> No ma'am. I am not. I am offering my own take on the film clip. I do not believe anyone else took it that way. Certainly no one reported it that way.
> So please explain how I am regurgitating?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because that part is exactly how pundits defending the Breitbart presentation of the tape are regurgitating.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Interesting. I realize you wont believe this, but my wife does not let me watch the "pundit" shows. She allows me to watch Fox news at 6PM and then she takes over the TV.
> 
> In the morning while having coffee, we watch the local NBC affiliate news.
> 
> My wife hates Oreilly, Hannity (so do I by the way) and she despoises Fox and Friends in the morning. And I respect her wishes as I love her more than life.
> 
> Sorry if you dont believe me, But it was my personal take. I have my own opinion.
Click to expand...


You wimp!

You actually let her have the remote?  You have no idea how much respect I have just lost for you.  

And then you have the nerve to empower women to believe they can get away with that with the rest of us.  You should be ashamed!  

Immie


----------



## Truthmatters

me and My hubby kindly share the remote


----------



## Immanuel

MaggieMae said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> Politico is often accused of being leftist also. In fact, any news outlet that doesn't strictly tow the conservative line is accused of liberal bias.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is it really any different going left to right?
> 
> Granted there are not as many media outlets that don't strictly tow the liberal line, but those that don't are treated no differently by the left than you indicate conservatives treat Politico and the rest.
> 
> Immie
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There's no doubt the MSNBC's afternoon political lineup is left, with the exception of Dillon Radigan who seems to be MSNBC's own Lou Dobbs. I've said before that I watch CNN almost exclusively because I think they do try to be fair and balanced. The new 7PM hour with John King always includes someone from the right and someone from the left debating a specific news story (if it's debatable). One of CNN's recent contributors, and who appears on John King's America almost every day is Erick Erickson from redstate.com. His opinions mirror many conservatives, but he's able to present them in a sensible and articulate manner, and doesn't get all belligerent or sulky when he's proven wrong. I like the guy a lot.
Click to expand...


Many, many years ago, I used to enjoy Crossfire on CNN simply because it gave both sides of the story.  Hannity and Colmes never achieved that distinction when I started watching it, probably because Hannity was so over-bearing and Colmes was a mouse.

Immie


----------



## boedicca

Truthmatters said:


> me and My hubby kindly share the remote





Of course you do.  Between the two of you, you just might have the equivalent of one functioning lower brain stem.

Do you work the gas pedal while he works the brakes, too?


----------



## MaggieMae

Misty said:


> The fact that sherrod said it at all or thought like that is what is disturbing.
> 
> I would never think that way. Wouldn't even enter my mind.
> 
> I would never take race or wealth into consideration when divvying up money, if I were in her position.



At the time of the tape, she represented the Federation of Southern Cooperatives/Land Assistance Fund, the purpose of which was forming, aiding and developing co-ops for black farmers and landowners.  She was not working for the federal agency, USDA, at the time. The audience was there to hear her speak as a representative of that advocacy group.


----------



## MaggieMae

Soggy in NOLA said:


> Watch and listen the entire 40 minute clip as I did last night.  The claim that this woman was explaining her "moment of clarity" is nonsense.  Listen to the audience as well.  Is this woman a racist?  I don't know.  Seems the Obama admin sure deemed her one!
> 
> Bottom line here is, Breitbart gave the NAACP a dose of what they and the left have been doing to the right for years; parsing snippits.  And they don't like it.  The same left who routinely dismissed a Klansman amongst their ranks, numerous truly racist comments by their own members, the trashing of minorities and the racial slurs used against same minorities who strayed from the Democrat plantation, their own support of policies that enslave minorities in lives of poverty, etc.
> 
> More feigned outrage and righteous indignation that means zip.



Bullshit. *Elephant* shit. Then explain why the white farmers, the Spooners, rallied to her defense; explain that through that same advocacy group Sherrod went on to help many other WHITE farmers. 
_
Excerpts:

Despite admitting in the edited version of the taping that she once withheld help to the couple on the basis of race, Sherrod was defended Tuesday by the wife of a white Georgia farmer.

Sherrod, "kept us out of bankruptcy," said Eloise Spooner, 82, of Iron City in southwest Georgia. Spooner, in an interview with The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, added she considers Sherrod a "friend for life." She and her husband, Roger Spooner, approached Sherrod for help in 1986 when Sherrod worked for a nonprofit that assisted farmers.

Sherrod, who is African-American, was asked to resign Monday night by a USDA official after videotaped comments she made in March at a local NAACP banquet surfaced on the Web. 

Recounting her dealings with the Spooners, Sherrod said she didn't help them as much as she could because of their race.

"When I made that commitment (at age 17 years old to remain in Georgia and help people), I was making that commitment to black people, and to black people only," Sherrod said nearly 15 minutes into the recording, just seconds before the segment that brought her trouble. "But you know, God will ... put things in your path so that you realize that the struggle was really about poor people."

"[The white farmer] was trying to show me he was superior to me," she said, recalling the day some 24 years ago. "I knew what he was doing, but he had to come to me for help."

*Sherrod told the crowd that she discovered the white lawyer she had referred the Spooners to took their money for six months, but did nothing to help them.

"This lawyer told them, ya'll are getting old ... why don't you just let go of the farm,'" she said. "I could not believe he said that to them."*

Eloise Spooner said as far as she's concerned Sherrod worked tirelessly to help the couple hold onto their land as they faced bankruptcy. Spooner said she spoke to Sherrod by phone Tuesday morning after the story hit cable news.

"She's very sad about it," Spooner said. "She told me she was so glad we talked. I just can't believe this is happening to her."

The Sherrod video surfaced a week after the NAACP issued a resolution calling some elements of the National Tea Party racist for comments allegedly made against President Obama and African-American congressmen during the health care debate.

Sherrod said it wouldn't have made any sense for her to espouse racist comments before the NAACP audience.

"There were some white people there. The mayor [of Douglas] was there," Sherrod recalled. "Why would I do something racist if they were there?"

Find this article at: 
USDA reconsiders firing of Ga. official over speech on race | ajc.com_


----------



## NYcarbineer

fyrenza said:


> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Amazingly, this has become the Right's new source of pride...
> 
> ...We lied, but because some Democrats temporarily fell for it...
> 
> ...We win!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wow.  You just TRULY don't "Get It," do you?
> 
> It wasn't "some dems" ~ it was the White House, putting pressure on her boss, and forcing HIM to do something about it, which I would imagine they Oh! SO helpfully suggested the remedy for.
> 
> Why can't you see that?  ARE you that Partisan?
> 
> If you are?
> 
> You ain't gonna last long, pal.  Not here, at least.
Click to expand...



You're doing exactly what I described.  Cheering the fact that a CONSERVATIVE LIE was able to temporarily fool some Democrats.

That is what you people have sunk to.  Lies are new Truth in Conservatopia.


----------



## NYcarbineer

Avatar4321 said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Avatar4321 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I blame him for firing a woman over a video tape he didn't bother to see without getting her side of the story or anyone else involved. Is there any reason he shouldn't be blamed for that?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I blame himm for that too, I also blame Brietbart and Fox fro acting like the republican party activists instead of journalists and causing this whole mess.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How did Fox cause this whole mess by telling the world the News that the White House forced her to resign?
Click to expand...


Fox, an alleged 'news' organization, presented the edited tape as fact, then attacked the administration for temporarily interpreting the edited tape as the whole truth.


----------



## Truthmatters

Pretty sad huh?

They scambled to post this news and cackled about her being a racist and then blamed Obama because he was tricked just like they were by this right wing hack.


----------



## NYcarbineer

boedicca said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> The tape was not edited.
> Know the facts.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Any time you cut a tape its called editing you fool
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Please cite a news program or news blog/website that shows all content in its entirety with no clips of certain segments being presented on their own.
Click to expand...


To intentionally edit a tape to significantly alter its meaning is dishonesty.


----------



## NYcarbineer

Truthmatters said:


> Pretty sad huh?
> 
> They scambled to post this news and cackled about her being a racist and then blamed Obama because he was tricked just like they were by this right wing hack.



And now they are demented enough to think this translates as a glorious victory for conservative 'journalism'.


----------



## MaggieMae

Jarhead said:


> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> What makes me laugh is the fact that you did not see the fact that he called him his mentor for 20 years and only tossed him aside when it was necessary for poliotical expediency.
> 
> And you accepted his "If I had known" excuse.
> 
> Well, guess what. If he did not kow about Wright after 20 years, then he certainly is not qualified to be POTUS.
> 
> You need to be somewhat aware of what is going on around you to be qualified as President.
> 
> So either he lied for political expediency or he had his head up his ass.
> 
> Which one is it?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Since he not actually done a single thing that would support a claim that he is acting out what he heard Wright say in the past makes your point, such as it is, moot.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am sure you would say the same thing about a man who sat at KKK meetings for 20 years, ran for president and won and did not lynch a single black man while in office.
> 
> Oh yeah. And by the way. I disagree.
> 
> *He did EXACTLY what Wright preaches the day he said:*
> 
> "The Police acted stupidly" without knowing the facts.
> 
> He made a judgement call based on his own personal bias.
> 
> Sorry. You lose with that one.
Click to expand...


Oh gawd...now you're digging at the bottom of the barrel. The irony of your misperceived analogy is that the police DID act stupidly, but it was _politically incorrect _to say so. Therefore, the soft-pedaling and appeasement of the whining right began. 

Although Professor Gates totally overreated as well, acting "stupidly," it's up to uniformed officers to set the tone of an arrest, and as I recall Gates was first surprised by having police meet him on his porch first, then they all went inside the home, then back outside on the porch where the cuffs were slapped on him. I mean what the hell was THAT all about?


----------



## Truthmatters

NYcarbineer said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> Pretty sad huh?
> 
> They scambled to post this news and cackled about her being a racist and then blamed Obama because he was tricked just like they were by this right wing hack.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And now they are demented enough to think this translates as a glorious victory for conservative 'journalism'.
Click to expand...


Yes and while they blame Obama they defend the right wing hack "news" people who created this fraud.


----------



## fyrenza

NYcarbineer said:


> You're doing exactly what I described.  Cheering the fact that a CONSERVATIVE LIE was able to temporarily fool some Democrats.
> 
> That is what you people have sunk to.  Lies are new Truth in Conservatopia.



You can try to turn it around on me,

but YOU still smell like what you've been wallowing in.

LINK, fuktard, to the "conservative lie" that YOU <gasp> keep LYING about!


----------



## MaggieMae

fyrenza said:


> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Foxnews reported and commented on the dishonestly edited tape as fact.  You agree then that Foxnews should not be accepted as a credible source of news?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *WHO* "dishonestly edited the tape"?!?
> 
> You want to keep blathering on about this, without EVER coming to grips with the FACT that the ONLY people that COULD have Edited it was the NAACP,
> 
> AS WELL AS completely ignoring the fact that Obama's WH should CERTAINLY have had access to the entire thing,
> 
> PRIOR to their actions.
> 
> That's a King-Sized Fail...
Click to expand...


Surely you jest. So now you're proposing this whole thing was a conspiracy by the NAACP? And Andrew Brietbart fell for it?


----------



## MaggieMae

boedicca said:


> fyrenza said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Foxnews reported and commented on the dishonestly edited tape as fact.  You agree then that Foxnews should not be accepted as a credible source of news?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *WHO* "dishonestly edited the tape"?!?
> 
> You want to keep blathering on about this, without EVER coming to grips with the FACT that the ONLY people that COULD have Edited it was the NAACP,
> 
> AS WELL AS completely ignoring the fact that Obama's WH should CERTAINLY have had access to the entire thing,
> 
> PRIOR to their actions.
> 
> That's a King-Sized Fail...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No news program ever shows an entire 40 minute speech - they always show clips.   If it's dishonest to show the bits of her racist past with the NAACP laughing and nodding approval, then showing clips of any speech is dishonest.
Click to expand...


43 minutes is too long without commercial interruption. Since this started out on the Internet, it can be seen on the Internet. Duh...

Video: Watch the Shirley Sherrod Speech in Full | NAACP


----------



## fyrenza

Jarhead said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jarhead, you are needle dicked crackwhore with a pimplely face and a desire for skinflute in your mouth.
> 
> Now can you adress facts instread of thinking you are scaring old ladies with nasty talk.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am impressed with your spunk.
> 
> I addressed the facts. You simply see the facts differently than I do.
> 
> As for being a needle dicked crackwhore....what I do on my spare time is none of your business!
> 
> As for the pimply face....at the age of 52, I hate to tell you that it cleared up over 35 years ago.
> 
> The skin flute in my mouth? My sex life has nothing to do with this.
Click to expand...


YOU exhibit more restraint that I could ~ kudos!

How dare ANYONE say those things to you?

Really.

You speak your feelings, your opinion.  

Instead of trying to "skool you,"  you're met with immature personal insults.

Shit.

Well, perhaps the fact that your detractors haven't been SCHOOLED is the prob...

(Check out the sentence structure ~ 5th grade?  Maybe?)


----------



## boedicca

Truthmatters said:


> Pretty sad huh?
> 
> They scambled to post this news and cackled about her being a racist and then blamed Obama because he was tricked just like they were by this right wing hack.





Breitbart posting some video clips is not a mandate that Obama fire somebody.  

The Obamanoids overreacted.  Instead of getting the facts and following a proper due process, they went into arbitrary "off with her head", shoot first and ask questions later mode.

But what else should we expect from an Administration that has no respect for the Rule of Law and is the most thin-skinned in history?


----------



## MaggieMae

boedicca said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, and BTW left.... the $100,000 reward for providing evidence of racist teaparty activity still remains unclaimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quite interest, ain't it?
> 
> 25% of the U.S. adult population self identifies as tea party sympathizers.  If racism were rampant, there would be plenty of evidence among the 70M or so "targets".   As it is, ThinkProgress had to cook up fake evidence consisting of four people, none of whom were proven to be both a Tea Partier and a racist.
Click to expand...


Let's just put it this way: You'd be hard pressed to find a white racial bigot visibly showing support for the Democratic Party, and especially Obama's Democratic Party. The visions from last August and the tea party rallies with racist signs and slogans are still imbedded in our minds.


----------



## fyrenza

MaggieMae said:


> Let's just put it this way: You'd be hard pressed to find a white racial bigot visibly showing support for the Democratic Party, and especially Obama's Democratic Party. The visions from last August and the tea party rallies with racist signs and slogans are still imbedded in our minds.



LINKS?

To BOTH of your asertions ~ the racist signs AND PROOF that those weren't "plants,"

if you please?

Otherwise, slink off to whatever hole you crawled out of, and let us get on with the discussion/debate.


----------



## MaggieMae

Jarhead said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> because this person says she would never think that way.
> 
> The woman had MANY reasons to think white people hated her.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps she did.
> But that does not mean our discussing her means we hate her.
> 
> If she is a racist becuase white people had killed her father becuase he was black, then I would undersatand. I would hope she would learn to realize not all white people are monsters, but I certainly can understand her sentiments.
> 
> Hey, the way I see it, she and YOU should not be chastising Fox for reporting on the story of her suddenly resigning. It was newswoirthy as it would be with any appointee suddenly resigning....but becuase it was a Fox story, the truth about her came out and she got her job back (or one similar).
> 
> Querstion is, why did no other news source see it as newsworthy that an administeration appointee suddenly resigned under allegations of racism? Whether the allegations were true or not, the WH made it clear that they believed them toi be true...yet no one bothered to report the story.
> 
> Makes you wonder what else the MSM is hiding from the masses.
Click to expand...


The rest of MSM didn't immediately report it because they were running background to validate it.


----------



## boedicca

No.  They were busy calling the Tea Party RACISTS (i.e., The JournoList Rule) in the hopes of this story going away.


----------



## fyrenza

MaggieMae said:


> The rest of MSM didn't immediately report it because they were running background to validate it.



The Rest of LAME Stream Media didn't cover it 'cuz they didn't even KNOW about it!!!  

THEY wouldn't deign to even VIEW that dude's website.  He's on the Other Side, so he MUST be a racist!  

Nice try;

NO BANANA.


----------



## Truthmatters

Nope they did know about it , now prove they didnt.


----------



## fyrenza

boedicca said:


> No.  They were busy calling the Tea Party RACISTS (i.e., The JournoList Rule) in the hopes of this story going away.



SIS?  It that YOU???  

I'd Rep YOU up a STORM if I but could!


----------



## boedicca

Truthmatters said:


> Nope they did know about it , now prove they didnt.





And here is TM once again asking someone to prove a negative.

heh.


----------



## fyrenza

Truthmatters said:


> Nope they did know about it , now prove they didnt.



No.

YOU prove that they DID know.

Yeah.

It's like THAT.

YOU spin YOUR wheels trying to find some bogus article from a "valid" site.

See you later, alligator!


----------



## Truthmatters

You made the first claim stupid its for you to prove


----------



## fyrenza

Oh.  That's right.

In the 5th grade, they weren't exactly teaching abstract thinking,

and stuff like how it's freaking IMPOSSIBLE TO PROVE A NEGATIVE...


----------



## Truthmatters

boedicca said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nope they did know about it , now prove they didnt.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And here is TM once again asking someone to prove a negative.
> 
> heh.
Click to expand...


Then dont claim  what you cant prove


----------



## boedicca

Truthmatters said:


> You made the first claim stupid its for you to prove




No, you poor little booby.   You have made thousands of accusations on this board and never proved a one.

Your turn.


----------



## fyrenza

Up to this point, I have refrained from calling you any names,

but, honey?

You're fucking STOOPID,

and what's worse?

You think you actually have some brain cells to rub together.

THAT's how we KNOW "where you're coming from."


----------



## Truthmatters

fyrenza said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> The rest of MSM didn't immediately report it because they were running background to validate it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Rest of LAME Stream Media didn't cover it 'cuz they didn't even KNOW about it!!!
> 
> THEY wouldn't deign to even VIEW that dude's website.  He's on the Other Side, so he MUST be a racist!
> 
> Nice try;
> 
> NO BANANA.
Click to expand...


Are you really that stupid?

Of course the left views the right wing hack sites.

Just because they dont report all the lies they contain is proof of nothing.

You are just pulling shit right out of your ass.


----------



## MaggieMae

Avatar4321 said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fox news was convicting her from early morning on their shows
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Which show? If it's true it's the first I've heard about it. Please let me know what show. I've been asking for a while. The First show I've seen is OReilly Monday night which was after her resignation.
Click to expand...


Timeline of Breitbart's Sherrod smear | Media Matters for America


----------



## MaggieMae

boedicca said:


> mudwhistle said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> Then why did some on Fox call for her resignation?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seems Bill O'Reilly did........sadly after she had already resigned.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Hmmmm...I need to invest in that time warp system in which Bill O'Reilly can influence events that occur before he says anything.
Click to expand...


He did say she should resign, before he knew she already had. His second spot on Wednesday night is his apology for jumping the gun. Both videos are on YouTube.


----------



## MaggieMae

boedicca said:


> She never claimed she didn't say what was in the video clips.    Posting her verbatim quotes is not a lie.



Oh please. That edit was the quintessence of taking something out of context which, standing alone, entirely changes the truth.


----------



## boedicca

MaggieMae said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mudwhistle said:
> 
> 
> 
> Seems Bill O'Reilly did........sadly after she had already resigned.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hmmmm...I need to invest in that time warp system in which Bill O'Reilly can influence events that occur before he says anything.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> He did say she should resign, before he knew she already had. His second spot on Wednesday night is his apology for jumping the gun. Both videos are on YouTube.
Click to expand...



And Obama has proven again and again that he has the deepest respect and admiration for Bill O'Reilly and tailors all his decisions for O'Reilly's approval.

Yeah, that's the ticket.


----------



## MaggieMae

boedicca said:


> Truthmattersnot:
> 
> He didn't.
> 
> The clip where she has her revelations that it's really about being poor not about race was posted.
> 
> So, you lose.
> 
> The germane part of all of this is the NAACP laughing and applauding her earlier bigotry.  They didn't recant that.



Why wouldn't they? They were applauding what was happening THEN. The acronym NAACP means National Association for the *Advancement* of Colored People (not White People).


----------



## boedicca

MaggieMae said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> She never claimed she didn't say what was in the video clips.    Posting her verbatim quotes is not a lie.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh please. That edit was the quintessence of taking something out of context which, standing alone, entirely changes the truth.
Click to expand...



Just like all of the clips promoted by the Left to smear the Tea Party as racists are taken out of context.

It doesn't feel so good when it happens to a lefty, does it?

And that (just a hunch) is the point Breitbart was attempting to make.


----------



## MaggieMae

Jarhead said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> You right wing media edits a tape to create an impression that was a lie and now its Obamas fault.
> 
> just like everything Bush did is Obamas fault to you guys.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The tape was not edited.
> Know the facts.
Click to expand...


The clip played by Brietbart was 2 minutes long; the original tape was 43 minutes long. What would you call it? The condensed version instead of an edit?


----------



## boedicca

Nobody has yet provided a news program or new site that only shows full length clips of everything they report.

Where is that place?


----------



## Truthmatters

How about people running tape that is altered to make the person look bad?


----------



## MaggieMae

Avatar4321 said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> She never claimed she didn't say what was in the video clips.    Posting her verbatim quotes is not a lie.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> accepting or editing tapes to make the person appear to say the oppisite of what they mean is.
> 
> It is your right wing media that recut this tape.
> 
> You can try to avoid the truth all you want.
> 
> its what you always do.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So you know who editted the tape?
> 
> Please tell us. I'd love to know. I didn't realize you did. You said that you Sephard Smith had aggreed with you and he specifically said that no one knows who editted the tape.
> 
> I really want to know who editted the tape. There is still more to the story and I am confident that the identity of the edittor is the real story here.
Click to expand...


Well since Andrew Briebart's "mission" is to destroy the liberals, the party, and the liberal press, my guess is that either he himself or someone within his organization doctored the tape. After the kerfuffle between the NAACP and the Tea Party the week before, which basically ended with both leaders of each agreeing to meet to discuss their differences, that probably pissed off those like Briebart who _WANT_ to keep the racial fires smouldering.


----------



## MaggieMae

Avatar4321 said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
> 
> you blame Obama  for everything
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I blame him for firing a woman over a video tape he didn't bother to see without getting her side of the story or anyone else involved. Is there any reason he shouldn't be blamed for that?
Click to expand...


Probably because Obama didn't fire her. Vilsack did.


----------



## MaggieMae

The T said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> The thing is, there's no doubt that some liberal journalists undoubtedly would have wanted to jump on board with that conspiracy, but why is this being brought to light NOW? Why not THEN? Also, obviously this Journalist group didn't have enough support to stay alive anyway. No harm, no foul.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We didn't know about it back then. Politico wrote about it last year, and there has been an effort underway to discover exactly what it is. The Weigel affair brought it into the open.
> 
> *If you think leftwing journalists conspiring to affect the outcome of a presidential election is No Harm No Foul*, then you really are a corrupt puppy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't want to hear another word from lefties that think the media is unbiased or impartial.
> 
> This is explosive to some...but not to most. We knew this all along. It was (is) easy to spot. [Any wonder why cirulation and viewership has dwindled for them? Suprised that they attack FOX, Talk Radio, And the Internet Blogs?] This whole thing just puts their feet in the concrete. They will sink with this even further into _irrelevance _IMHO.
> 
> There is no real _Journalism on the left._ There hasn't been for decades.
Click to expand...


I've been working on a project which involves pulling headlines from various news outlets regarding the same story. It's to show how bias permeates ALL media, mainstream and Internet. Please don't be so ignorant to believe there are none favoring the conservative point of view that aren't guilty as sin for embellishing their headlines and content.


----------



## fyrenza

Truthmatters said:


> How about people running tape that is altered to make the person look bad?



LINKS, asshat.

LINKS would make you look like someone that actually knew how to READ,

so why NOT provide them?

Provide LINKS to someone ~ practically ANYONE ~ saying that what was shown was Edited.

It was taken out of context.

It was taken OUT of a speech that it was just a Part of,

but ALL OF IT WAS SAID,

BY MS. SHERROD,

and there was NO editing, that I could see, in the reports.

The "lesson?"  IF you care about the "moral of the story,"

was that we need to hear it ALL, not just some "blurbs" from it.

NEXT!


----------



## boedicca

Yep.  That's the Chicago Way.  Make a minion do the dirty work.


----------



## AquaAthena

boedicca said:


> *Nobody has yet provided a news program or new site that only shows full length clips of everything they report.*
> Where is that place?



I feel Brietbart was set up by a Left loon and this is what Obama will use to try to shut Fox down. A manufactured prelude to their next step. I do not feel Brietbart would have jeopardized his growing and soaring reputation by deliberately showing the clip *that was sent to him in April, 2010*. _And by whom_? 

Brietbart has too much to lose and has worked hard to gain the respect of people looking for truth. I think everybody is fed up with being called the R word and are very sensitive and on the defensive. Mistakes will be made. Just glad a good man, Glenn Beck, defended Sherrod's firing and that took place before he aired that tape on Tuesday and _after she had been fired..."_Just pull over and DO IT!"


----------



## MaggieMae

PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Daily Caller's "JournoList" expose has finally resolved the matter:
> 
> Based on Spencer Ackerman's tactic:
> 
> _*If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game theyve put upon us, Ackerman wrote on the Journolist listserv in April 2008. Instead, take one of them  Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares  and call them racists.*_
> 
> Conservatives Karl Rove and Fred Barnes respond to Journolist racist post | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment
> 
> 
> It's out in the open now.  The Left uses the racist accusation against the Right, the Tea Party, Conservatives, the GOP...  Anyone who critiques prominent lefties or their programs will be falsely attacked as a racist as a diversionary tactic.
> 
> More evidence is Sherrod's hateful comment regarding the GOP to Media Matters.
> 
> So here's the thing you lefties should understand:  we're not falling for it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh SNAP more evidence of the shenanigans.
> 
> I didn't even bother to read the attackers of this post responses.
Click to expand...


There's a whole separate thread about that now defunct organization and its alleged conspiracy which _amazingly_ reappeared just when the right needed a BIG diversion. Imagine that. (From 2008, no less.)


----------



## Immanuel

MaggieMae said:


> Avatar4321 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> accepting or editing tapes to make the person appear to say the oppisite of what they mean is.
> 
> It is your right wing media that recut this tape.
> 
> You can try to avoid the truth all you want.
> 
> its what you always do.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So you know who editted the tape?
> 
> Please tell us. I'd love to know. I didn't realize you did. You said that you Sephard Smith had aggreed with you and he specifically said that no one knows who editted the tape.
> 
> I really want to know who editted the tape. There is still more to the story and I am confident that the identity of the edittor is the real story here.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well since Andrew Briebart's "mission" is to destroy the liberals, the party, and the liberal press, my guess is that either he himself or someone within his organization doctored the tape. *After the kerfuffle between the NAACP and the Tea Party the week before, which basically ended with both leaders of each agreeing to meet to discuss their differences*, that probably pissed off those like Briebart who _WANT_ to keep the racial fires smouldering.
Click to expand...


Would you by any chance have a link to that part about the meeting?

I think that would be a great event.

Immie


----------



## Immanuel

MaggieMae said:


> The T said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> We didn't know about it back then. Politico wrote about it last year, and there has been an effort underway to discover exactly what it is. The Weigel affair brought it into the open.
> 
> *If you think leftwing journalists conspiring to affect the outcome of a presidential election is No Harm No Foul*, then you really are a corrupt puppy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't want to hear another word from lefties that think the media is unbiased or impartial.
> 
> This is explosive to some...but not to most. We knew this all along. It was (is) easy to spot. [Any wonder why cirulation and viewership has dwindled for them? Suprised that they attack FOX, Talk Radio, And the Internet Blogs?] This whole thing just puts their feet in the concrete. They will sink with this even further into _irrelevance _IMHO.
> 
> There is no real _Journalism on the left._ There hasn't been for decades.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I've been working on a project which involves pulling headlines from various news outlets regarding the same story. It's to show how bias permeates ALL media, mainstream and Internet. Please don't be so ignorant to believe there are none favoring the conservative point of view that aren't guilty as sin for embellishing their headlines and content.
Click to expand...


It always seems to me that it is leftist that believe that the media that favors their own point of view can do no wrong.

I guess it is just the side of the table you are sitting on.

Immie


----------



## AquaAthena

Immanuel said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The T said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't want to hear another word from lefties that think the media is unbiased or impartial.
> 
> This is explosive to some...but not to most. We knew this all along. It was (is) easy to spot. [Any wonder why cirulation and viewership has dwindled for them? Suprised that they attack FOX, Talk Radio, And the Internet Blogs?] This whole thing just puts their feet in the concrete. They will sink with this even further into _irrelevance _IMHO.
> 
> There is no real _Journalism on the left._ There hasn't been for decades.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've been working on a project which involves pulling headlines from various news outlets regarding the same story. It's to show how bias permeates ALL media, mainstream and Internet. Please don't be so ignorant to believe there are none favoring the conservative point of view that aren't guilty as sin for embellishing their headlines and content.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It always seems to me that it is leftist that believe that the media that favors their own point of view can do no wrong.
> 
> I guess it is just the side of the table you are sitting on.
> 
> Immie
Click to expand...


It's just that some will _manufacture anyth_ing to be divisive and that huge percentage is usually on the left side of the table...


----------



## The T

boedicca said:


> Nobody has yet provided a news program or new site that only shows full length clips of everything they report.
> 
> Where is that place?


 
Before the NAALCP released it? _NOWHERE_ or it would have been linked and posted...even by Brietbart.


----------



## The T

MaggieMae said:


> Avatar4321 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> accepting or editing tapes to make the person appear to say the oppisite of what they mean is.
> 
> It is your right wing media that recut this tape.
> 
> You can try to avoid the truth all you want.
> 
> its what you always do.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So you know who editted the tape?
> 
> Please tell us. I'd love to know. I didn't realize you did. You said that you Sephard Smith had aggreed with you and he specifically said that no one knows who editted the tape.
> 
> I really want to know who editted the tape. There is still more to the story and I am confident that the identity of the edittor is the real story here.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well since Andrew Briebart's "mission" is to destroy the liberals, the party, and the liberal press, my guess is that either he himself or someone within his organization doctored the tape. After the kerfuffle between the NAACP and the Tea Party the week before, which basically ended with both leaders of each agreeing to meet to discuss their differences, that probably pissed off those like Briebart who _WANT_ to keep the racial fires smouldering.
Click to expand...

 
His 'Mission' is to expose those that are taking this nation down the primrose path into RUIN. And exposing the lies of the very same.


----------



## rikules

boedicca said:


> The Daily Caller's "JournoList" expose has finally resolved the matter:
> 
> Based on Spencer Ackerman's tactic:
> 
> _*If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game theyve put upon us, Ackerman wrote on the Journolist listserv in April 2008. Instead, take one of them  Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares  and call them racists.*_
> 
> Conservatives Karl Rove and Fred Barnes respond to Journolist racist post | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment
> 
> 
> It's out in the open now.  The Left uses the racist accusation against the Right, the Tea Party, Conservatives, the GOP...  Anyone who critiques prominent lefties or their programs will be falsely attacked as a racist as a diversionary tactic.
> 
> More evidence is Sherrod's hateful comment regarding the GOP to Media Matters.
> 
> So here's the thing you lefties should understand:  we're not falling for it.





It is certainly a mistake for the left (or even for liberals) to keep playing the race card.

MOST conservatives are not actually racists though many of them may say things that SOUND racist; "blacks don't work, blacks are all violent, blacks are all thieves, blacks want free handouts, send them back to africa".....

it is also  true that most WHITE conservatives believe America is a WHITE EUROPEAN nation which can certainly be construed as "racist"

my problem with conservatives isn't that I think they are racists...

it's that they are OBVIOUSLY deranged and hatefilled  scumbags who  blame all the problem in America on "blacks, liberals, atheist, democrats, obama" and REFUSE to take any responsibliity for themselves or for republicans.

the left is terrible
the right is terrible
liberals are well intentioned but foolish
conservatives are mean and rotten

moderates are our only hope

RINOS and DINOS







which also


----------



## Truthmatters

A moderate who hates all other Americans?

wow.


----------



## Kat

rikules said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Daily Caller's "JournoList" expose has finally resolved the matter:
> 
> Based on Spencer Ackerman's tactic:
> 
> _*If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game theyve put upon us, Ackerman wrote on the Journolist listserv in April 2008. Instead, take one of them  Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares  and call them racists.*_
> 
> Conservatives Karl Rove and Fred Barnes respond to Journolist racist post | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment
> 
> 
> It's out in the open now.  The Left uses the racist accusation against the Right, the Tea Party, Conservatives, the GOP...  Anyone who critiques prominent lefties or their programs will be falsely attacked as a racist as a diversionary tactic.
> 
> More evidence is Sherrod's hateful comment regarding the GOP to Media Matters.
> 
> So here's the thing you lefties should understand:  we're not falling for it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is certainly a mistake for the left (or even for liberals) to keep playing the race card.
> 
> MOST conservatives are not actually racists though many of them may say things that SOUND racist; "blacks don't work, blacks are all violent, blacks are all thieves, blacks want free handouts, send them back to africa".....
> 
> *it is also  true that most WHITE conservatives believe America is a WHITE EUROPEAN nation* which can certainly be construed as "racist"
> 
> my problem with conservatives isn't that I think they are racists...
> 
> it's that they are OBVIOUSLY deranged and hatefilled  scumbags who  blame all the problem in America on "blacks, liberals, atheist, democrats, obama" and REFUSE to take any responsibliity for themselves or for republicans.
> 
> the left is terrible
> the right is terrible
> liberals are well intentioned but foolish
> conservatives are mean and rotten
> 
> moderates are our only hope
> 
> RINOS and DINOS
> which also
Click to expand...



Re the bolded:
I don't know where you got that. I certainly don't think that way, and no one I know thinks that way.
I believe America is a melting pot of all.


----------



## DiveCon

Kat said:


> rikules said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Daily Caller's "JournoList" expose has finally resolved the matter:
> 
> Based on Spencer Ackerman's tactic:
> 
> _*If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game theyve put upon us, Ackerman wrote on the Journolist listserv in April 2008. Instead, take one of them  Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares  and call them racists.*_
> 
> Conservatives Karl Rove and Fred Barnes respond to Journolist racist post | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment
> 
> 
> It's out in the open now.  The Left uses the racist accusation against the Right, the Tea Party, Conservatives, the GOP...  Anyone who critiques prominent lefties or their programs will be falsely attacked as a racist as a diversionary tactic.
> 
> More evidence is Sherrod's hateful comment regarding the GOP to Media Matters.
> 
> So here's the thing you lefties should understand:  we're not falling for it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is certainly a mistake for the left (or even for liberals) to keep playing the race card.
> 
> MOST conservatives are not actually racists though many of them may say things that SOUND racist; "blacks don't work, blacks are all violent, blacks are all thieves, blacks want free handouts, send them back to africa".....
> 
> *it is also  true that most WHITE conservatives believe America is a WHITE EUROPEAN nation* which can certainly be construed as "racist"
> 
> my problem with conservatives isn't that I think they are racists...
> 
> it's that they are OBVIOUSLY deranged and hatefilled  scumbags who  blame all the problem in America on "blacks, liberals, atheist, democrats, obama" and REFUSE to take any responsibliity for themselves or for republicans.
> 
> the left is terrible
> the right is terrible
> liberals are well intentioned but foolish
> conservatives are mean and rotten
> 
> moderates are our only hope
> 
> RINOS and DINOS
> which also
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Re the bolded:
> I don't know where you got that. I certainly don't think that way, and no one I know thinks that way.
> I believe America is a melting pot of all.
Click to expand...

it would be rather hard for me to think what he said


----------



## Immanuel

Truthmatters said:


> A moderate who hates all other Americans?
> 
> wow.



What do you think you have a lock on hatred?

Immie


----------



## fyrenza

MaggieMae said:


> There's a whole separate thread about that now defunct organization and its alleged conspiracy which _amazingly_ reappeared just when the right needed a BIG diversion. Imagine that. (From 2008, no less.)



You know what?

I'm sort of tired of just THINKING "Fuck you!"

NOW, I'm going to TYPE IT:

FUCK YOU!

AND, as your Prez, I will NOT allow this sort of CRAP to go unchallenged!


----------



## MaggieMae

Immanuel said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Avatar4321 said:
> 
> 
> 
> So you know who editted the tape?
> 
> Please tell us. I'd love to know. I didn't realize you did. You said that you Sephard Smith had aggreed with you and he specifically said that no one knows who editted the tape.
> 
> I really want to know who editted the tape. There is still more to the story and I am confident that the identity of the edittor is the real story here.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well since Andrew Briebart's "mission" is to destroy the liberals, the party, and the liberal press, my guess is that either he himself or someone within his organization doctored the tape. *After the kerfuffle between the NAACP and the Tea Party the week before, which basically ended with both leaders of each agreeing to meet to discuss their differences*, that probably pissed off those like Briebart who _WANT_ to keep the racial fires smouldering.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Would you by any chance have a link to that part about the meeting?
> 
> I think that would be a great event.
> 
> Immie
Click to expand...


I'm not sure anything has been arranged yet, but representatives from both feudal parties have been saying on various programs that they want to have a "summit" type meeting on race. Here's a transcript from last Friday's discussion on CNN's "John King's USA."

_But we begin tonight with a dramatic twist in the raw debate over racism between the NAACP and the Tea Party movement. One of the movement's most visible spokesman, Tea Party Express Leader Mark Williams today pulled a blog posting that even many of his supporters considered counter productive, if not outright racist. 

The posting was a satirical letter addressed to Abraham Lincoln from NAACP Chief Ben Jealous and in it Williams called Lincoln quote "the greatest racist ever" and referred to Jealous as quote "Tom's Nephew" and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People's (INAUDIBLE) colored person (ph).

Today, Williams wrote that he removed the posting because Jealous had expressed a desire to cool the heated rhetoric of recent days and to open a dialogue with the Tea Party Movement's leader. Mark Williams joins us tonight live from Sacramento. Mark, I read this satirical posting over and over again. Satire is supposed to be funny. It wasn't funny. What were you thinking? 

MARK WILLIAMS, TEA PARTY EXPRESS SPOKESMAN: Funny wasn't even in the room. I was making a very serious point about the hypocrisy that was involved in that whole NAACP thing. And I'm so very glad that Mr. Jealous has decided to put that behind us and move forward. And I sincerely hope he takes me up on my offer to come along on the Tea Party Express, as well as just to talk with us because he really does need to get out and come to some tea parties and see that we are working exactly for the ideals that the NAACP was allegedly founded to work for and that is -- 

(CROSSTALK) 

WILLIAMS: -- individual rights and freedom for everybody.

KING: Let's talk about that. But first let's focus, you say you were trying to highlight what you consider to be their hypocrisy. You have every right. You have your belief and your opinion. You have every right to argue your point. But it's how we argue our point in politics that often get us in trouble. And reading the postings on your own Web site today, a lot of your own supporters didn't like it and they thought you set the movement back. 

I want to read a couple of things in your original, again satirical letter. This is from you, but you're saying here that you're Ben Jealous. "Perhaps the most racist point of all in the tea parties is their demand that government stop raising our taxes. That is outrageous. How will we coloreds ever get a wide screen TV in every room if non-colored get to keep what they earn? Totally racist. The Tea Party expects coloreds to be productive members of society."

Here's one more, Mark. You also wrote this. "And the ridiculous idea of reducing the size and intrusiveness of government. What kind of massa would ever not want to control my life. As coloreds we must have somebody take care for us, otherwise, we would be on our own, have to think for ourselves and make decisions." 

How could you ever possibly think using this language, trying satire is something that would clearly offend so many people would help you make your point? 

WILLIAMS: Well again, the phrase colored people is not my language. And for whatever reason, I was taught it was racist. But for whatever reason, it's OK for other people to refer to themselves that way. And I have no idea even what color they are referring to. All I know is that we live in a country right now led by an administration that is doing its darnest to separate us by race, social status, by economic status, by geography. You name it, by social class, and that's what that sentence refers to. The division of social class. 

(CROSSTALK) 

WILLIAMS: I have no idea what is in somebody's head when they refer to a colored person. I know in my mind -- 

KING: But a lot of people, Mark, are trying -- 

(CROSSTALK) 

KING: A lot of people are trying to understand what was in your head when you decided to go so far in responding. Again, you have your beliefs, but was it a mistake? Do you apologize for trying this tact? Read your own postings and your own blog. People who say Mark, thanks for everything you have done in the last few years. You've been so great for our cause. Some of them flat out say they think what you wrote was racist. 

WILLIAMS: And when reasonable people -- or that could be construed as such -- when reasonable people soberly approach me and sat down and actually talked with me about it, I reread and re-thought some of it and I agreed with them that it was -- it could be misconstrued and probably inappropriate and more important to the point, getting in the way of discussion and dialogue, which is the reason why it was written in the first place, was to spark that. 

As you can see, Mr. Jealous has responded appropriately. And I have responded in kind and in reciprocal gesture and very happily, happy to make that reciprocal gesture. Because I would have far preferred to be on stage at the NAACP Convention explaining to the assembled membership why it was so important for them to join with the Tea Party Movement rather than to stand there, listen to squeeds (ph) from race baiters about what racists we were because that was a complete lie. 

*And now that Mr. Jealous is willing to sit down and talk with us, I absolutely applaud that, so I pulled the piece. And if there are those to whom I did apologize because they made the very, very sincere arguments -- *

(CROSSTALK) 
*
WILLIAMS: And the way I said it was getting in the way. And it was my intention, successful intention to get the dialogue going and to get this nonsense, the lies and the charges of racism behind us. 

KING: We'll learn if it's successful or not. You have certainly generated some controversy, some would -- some say throw a log on the fire that people had hoped to be put out, but I want to read you -- one of our producers just had an e-mail exchange with Mr. Jealous. And here is what he just told us moments ago. 

"I have not reached out to Mark Williams nor have we made any statements against the Tea Party. We have simply called on the leaders to repudiate racist elements in their ranks. If Mark Williams does so, I would be happy to sit down and talk to him." 

WILLIAMS: Well, guess what? From the very beginning of the tea parties, we have been repudiating that very thing. And Mr. Jealous, I'm very glad that you are taking me up on my offer. My -- you have my contact information. You have my private telephone number, Mr. Jealous. You've got my e-mail. You know where to find me. And if for some reason you don't have that sitting it on your desk in front of you, you should. The producers at CNN I'm sure will be more than happy to give it to you. And I will buy the first round of beers at our summit. *_more...
CNN.com - Transcripts


----------



## MaggieMae

Immanuel said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The T said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't want to hear another word from lefties that think the media is unbiased or impartial.
> 
> This is explosive to some...but not to most. We knew this all along. It was (is) easy to spot. [Any wonder why cirulation and viewership has dwindled for them? Suprised that they attack FOX, Talk Radio, And the Internet Blogs?] This whole thing just puts their feet in the concrete. They will sink with this even further into _irrelevance _IMHO.
> 
> There is no real _Journalism on the left._ There hasn't been for decades.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've been working on a project which involves pulling headlines from various news outlets regarding the same story. It's to show how bias permeates ALL media, mainstream and Internet. Please don't be so ignorant to believe there are none favoring the conservative point of view that aren't guilty as sin for embellishing their headlines and content.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It always seems to me that it is leftist that believe that the media that favors their own point of view can do no wrong.
> 
> I guess it is just the side of the table you are sitting on.
> 
> Immie
Click to expand...


That's absolutely the point. And the folks who operate major newspapers and online news dotcoms are mighty tired of being accused of being biased to the left just by virtue of the newspaper's banner. We never hear of the identical bias by news operations like _The Washington Times, The Washington Journal_, etc. 

Btw, this "project" is one of my free-lance jobs that I'll actually get paid for. If it's published, I'll get permission to post it here.


----------



## MaggieMae

AquaAthena said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> I've been working on a project which involves pulling headlines from various news outlets regarding the same story. It's to show how bias permeates ALL media, mainstream and Internet. Please don't be so ignorant to believe there are none favoring the conservative point of view that aren't guilty as sin for embellishing their headlines and content.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It always seems to me that it is leftist that believe that the media that favors their own point of view can do no wrong.
> 
> I guess it is just the side of the table you are sitting on.
> 
> Immie
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's just that some will _manufacture anyth_ing to be divisive and that huge percentage is usually on the left side of the table...
Click to expand...


And my research so far is proving you *so* wrong.


----------



## MaggieMae

The T said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Avatar4321 said:
> 
> 
> 
> So you know who editted the tape?
> 
> Please tell us. I'd love to know. I didn't realize you did. You said that you Sephard Smith had aggreed with you and he specifically said that no one knows who editted the tape.
> 
> I really want to know who editted the tape. There is still more to the story and I am confident that the identity of the edittor is the real story here.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well since Andrew Briebart's "mission" is to destroy the liberals, the party, and the liberal press, my guess is that either he himself or someone within his organization doctored the tape. After the kerfuffle between the NAACP and the Tea Party the week before, which basically ended with both leaders of each agreeing to meet to discuss their differences, that probably pissed off those like Briebart who _WANT_ to keep the racial fires smouldering.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> His 'Mission' is to expose those that are taking this nation down the primrose path into RUIN. And exposing the lies of the very same.
Click to expand...


His "mission" is dirty politics. Pond scum, which you people soak up like sponges as truthful. Just a few screamers from Brietbart's website biggovernment.com, all debunked.


The "video evidence" of Shirley Sherrod's "racism" (NEW)

"Nationwide ACORN child prostitution investigation" (UPDATED)

Platform for anti-gay Jennings smears

Breitbart-promoted O'Keefe Census tape features selective editing (NEW)

Breitbart-promoted video falsely accuses Democrats of reconciliation hypocrisy (NEW)

Wild accusations over Gladney case

Breitbart's websites make baseless claim that NEA engaged in lawbreaking

Bertha Lewis' nonexistent White House visit

The Maoist Christmas tree ornaments

The ACORN "document dump"

False claims of community organizers "praying" to Obama


----------



## PLYMCO_PILGRIM

boedicca said:


> The Daily Caller's "JournoList" expose has finally resolved the matter:
> 
> Based on Spencer Ackerman's tactic:
> 
> _*If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game theyve put upon us, Ackerman wrote on the Journolist listserv in April 2008. Instead, take one of them  Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares  and call them racists.*_
> 
> Conservatives Karl Rove and Fred Barnes respond to Journolist racist post | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment
> 
> 
> 
> It's out in the open now.  The Left uses the racist accusation against the Right, the Tea Party, Conservatives, the GOP...  Anyone who critiques prominent lefties or their programs will be falsely attacked as a racist as a diversionary tactic.
> 
> More evidence is Sherrod's hateful comment regarding the GOP to Media Matters.
> 
> So here's the thing you lefties should understand:  we're not falling for it.



This reminds me of how they seem to be treating every individual tea party organization.


----------



## MaggieMae

fyrenza said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> There's a whole separate thread about that now defunct organization and its alleged conspiracy which _amazingly_ reappeared just when the right needed a BIG diversion. Imagine that. (From 2008, no less.)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You know what?
> 
> I'm sort of tired of just THINKING "Fuck you!"
> 
> NOW, I'm going to TYPE IT:
> 
> FUCK YOU!
> 
> AND, as your Prez, I will NOT allow this sort of CRAP to go unchallenged!
Click to expand...


Feel better? I sure do because apparently you got nuthin. Challenge away, dear, but I would rely on more current data if you expect to get my attention.


----------



## MaggieMae

fyrenza said:


> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Amazingly, this has become the Right's new source of pride...
> 
> ...We lied, but because some Democrats temporarily fell for it...
> 
> ...We win!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wow.  You just TRULY don't "Get It," do you?
> 
> It wasn't "some dems" ~ it was the White House, putting pressure on her boss, and forcing HIM to do something about it, which I would imagine they Oh! SO helpfully suggested the remedy for.
> 
> Why can't you see that?  ARE you that Partisan?
> 
> If you are?
> 
> You ain't gonna last long, pal.  Not here, at least.
Click to expand...


How funny. Everyone is supposed to trust YOUR opinion as being gospel and if they don't, they're partisan, which you won't allow. Hmm, looks like we have another self-appointed Lord of USMB.


----------



## MaggieMae

Truthmatters said:


> Jarhead, you are needle dicked crackwhore with a pimplely face and a desire for skinflute in your mouth.
> 
> Now can you adress facts instread of thinking you are scaring old ladies with nasty talk.



That was uncalled for. Hardly anything "scares" this little old lady anymore. Plus Jarhead respectfully called me "Ma'am" which is always refreshing, no matter what someone's political persuasion is. I actually felt guilty because I referred to him as "soldier," when I know that jarheads are Marines and differentiate themselves from U.S. Army "soldiers."


----------



## MaggieMae

Immanuel said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> 
> Karl Rove is still around?
> 
> I thought... hoped... he had sailed off into the sunset in shame with the rest of the Bush Admin.
> 
> Immie
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh yeah...
> 
> _Republican strategists Karl Rove and Ed Gillespie have launched a new group that allows U.S. Republicans to give anonymously to discredit Democrats._
> 
> New GOP group allows anonymous donations - UPI.com
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not that I would even consider giving to such a group, but do you have a problem with anonymous giving?
> 
> Immie
Click to expand...


Apparently the website was changed from being open and transparent to anonymous because the big name doners didn't like being identified. It must be embarrassing when major doners always contribute more to the expected winner, whether it's a Republican or Democrat, because it then becomes obvious they really don't care about anything other than the amount of influence they can have on a transititioning administration.


----------



## MaggieMae

Jarhead said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> No ma'am. I am not. I am offering my own take on the film clip. I do not believe anyone else took it that way. Certainly no one reported it that way.
> So please explain how I am regurgitating?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because that part is exactly how pundits defending the Breitbart presentation of the tape are regurgitating.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Interesting. I realize you wont believe this, but my wife does not let me watch the "pundit" shows. She allows me to watch Fox news at 6PM and then she takes over the TV.
> 
> In the morning while having coffee, we watch the local NBC affiliate news.
> 
> My wife hates Oreilly, Hannity (so do I by the way) and she despoises Fox and Friends in the morning. And I respect her wishes as I love her more than life.
> 
> Sorry if you dont believe me, But it was my personal take. I have my own opinion.
Click to expand...


Fair enough. Sorry to jump to conclusions, but you and your wife are like the unexpected roses blooming in a bed of dandelions.


----------



## Jarhead

MaggieMae said:


> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because that part is exactly how pundits defending the Breitbart presentation of the tape are regurgitating.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting. I realize you wont believe this, but my wife does not let me watch the "pundit" shows. She allows me to watch Fox news at 6PM and then she takes over the TV.
> 
> In the morning while having coffee, we watch the local NBC affiliate news.
> 
> My wife hates Oreilly, Hannity (so do I by the way) and she despoises Fox and Friends in the morning. And I respect her wishes as I love her more than life.
> 
> Sorry if you dont believe me, But it was my personal take. I have my own opinion.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fair enough. Sorry to jump to conclusions, but you and your wife are like the unexpected roses blooming in a bed of dandelions.
Click to expand...

Putting aside the debate and the controversy...

It is not difficult to hear ANYONE refer to "one of his kind" to make the conclusion I made.

Regardless of race, that very much bothers me and when I hear it I make note of it.

So it may be a talking head topic for this situation, but even if it were not, it would be for me.

As for me and my wife? She saw how angry Oreilly would make me.,.....and she and I both do not like Hannity....and in the morning, we like to see the local forecast and traffic....

And as I said....I love my wife more than life itself.


----------



## MaggieMae

The T said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> txlonghorn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yep...can you believe she did that? I've never made a mistake in my life. Ok...maybe once but that was a long time ago.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can I remind you (or quote) your satire the next time some verbal _faux pas _by Obama gets spread all over the Internet? We're STILL seeing "reminders" of the 57-state slipup, which occurred during the campaign. In fact, Crusader Frank has it in his signature.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And so what? Obama is full of faux-pas along with being full of himself being the malignant _narcissist_ himself...and notice the left circling the wagons to defend the idiocy exhibited by Barry.
> 
> Boo-Hoo. Cry us a river.
Click to expand...


I was simply responding to your satirical comment, Mr. T. 

Interesting that you then go off on narcissism, which Mrs. Palin suffers tremendously from herself.


----------



## Ravi

boedicca said:


> The Daily Caller's "JournoList" expose has finally resolved the matter:
> 
> Based on Spencer Ackerman's tactic:
> 
> _*If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game theyve put upon us, Ackerman wrote on the Journolist listserv in April 2008. Instead, take one of them  Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares  and call them racists.*_
> 
> Conservatives Karl Rove and Fred Barnes respond to Journolist racist post | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment
> 
> 
> It's out in the open now.  The Left uses the racist accusation against the Right, the Tea Party, Conservatives, the GOP...  Anyone who critiques prominent lefties or their programs will be falsely attacked as a racist as a diversionary tactic.
> 
> More evidence is Sherrod's hateful comment regarding the GOP to Media Matters.
> 
> So here's the thing you lefties should understand:  we're not falling for it.


As we've learned in the past few days, the right wing media lies.

There is no reason to believe this article is factual.


----------



## MaggieMae

fyrenza said:


> More and more, I get to a point in these threads that I'm just, like,
> 
> WTF???  Oh.  AND STFU, you FUKTARD!!!
> 
> Some of y'all just CANNOT think critically.  You can't examine the EVIDENCE, and come to some sort of logical conclusion.
> 
> What scares me the MOST about this?
> 
> You DUMBASSES are sitting on JURIES, and influencing judges AND our system of laws,
> 
> and you couldn't call something WRONG, even if it cost your brother his life.
> 
> THAT's pretty sad, but it's folks like you that make me think that perhaps it WOULD be a Good Idea to LIMIT the ability of "just anyone" to vote.
> 
> Cripes!  Didn't you go to SKOOL?
> 
> I went to a CATHOLIC university, and even THEY didn't do some crap like that to their students!!!



Then go away. There are plenty of topics where you can scream your head off, IN BIG FONT!!! 

This is a fucking POLITICAL *forum*; if you don't like it, find somewhere else to park.


----------



## rikules

boedicca said:


> The Daily Caller's "JournoList" expose has finally resolved the matter:
> 
> Based on Spencer Ackerman's tactic:
> 
> _*If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game theyve put upon us, Ackerman wrote on the Journolist listserv in April 2008. Instead, take one of them  Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares  and call them racists.*_
> 
> Conservatives Karl Rove and Fred Barnes respond to Journolist racist post | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment
> 
> 
> It's out in the open now.  The Left uses the racist accusation against the Right, the Tea Party, Conservatives, the GOP...  Anyone who critiques prominent lefties or their programs will be falsely attacked as a racist as a diversionary tactic.
> 
> More evidence is Sherrod's hateful comment regarding the GOP to Media Matters.
> 
> So here's the thing you lefties should understand:  we're not falling for it.



As a white european tea party conservative I am appalled that liberals keep calling us "racists"

I am NOT a racist!

I merely want blacks sent back to Africa where they belong and for America to be officially sanctioned as WHITE, CHRISTIAN and EUROPEAN

that does NOT make me a racist!


----------



## MaggieMae

The T said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> 
> Karl Rove is still around?
> 
> I thought... hoped... he had sailed off into the sunset in shame with the rest of the Bush Admin.
> 
> Immie
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh yeah...
> 
> _Republican strategists Karl Rove and Ed Gillespie have launched a new group that allows U.S. Republicans to give anonymously to discredit Democrats._
> 
> New GOP group allows anonymous donations - UPI.com
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And you act like the Statist Left is sin-free?  Really?
Click to expand...


You have a serious comprehension problem. Immie asked a question, and I gave him the latest information on where to find Karl Rove. You got a problem with that? Ironically, the Rove-Gillespie donation site is set up much the same as the one George Soros established in 2008. So no, I don't consider my party affiliation "sin-free." So you can stop your silly presumptions. Is "statist" from your USMB shared Randian dictionary of demon characterizations? 

You people are a riot...


----------



## VaYank5150

rikules said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Daily Caller's "JournoList" expose has finally resolved the matter:
> 
> Based on Spencer Ackerman's tactic:
> 
> _*If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game theyve put upon us, Ackerman wrote on the Journolist listserv in April 2008. Instead, take one of them  Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares  and call them racists.*_
> 
> Conservatives Karl Rove and Fred Barnes respond to Journolist racist post | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment
> 
> 
> It's out in the open now.  The Left uses the racist accusation against the Right, the Tea Party, Conservatives, the GOP...  Anyone who critiques prominent lefties or their programs will be falsely attacked as a racist as a diversionary tactic.
> 
> More evidence is Sherrod's hateful comment regarding the GOP to Media Matters.
> 
> So here's the thing you lefties should understand:  we're not falling for it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As a white european tea party conservative I am appalled that liberals keep calling us "racists"
> 
> I am NOT a racist!
> 
> I merely want blacks sent back to Africa where they belong and for America to be officially sanctioned as WHITE, CHRISTIAN and EUROPEAN
> 
> that does NOT make me a racist!
Click to expand...


I am sensing sacrasm here, at least I hope I am.  But, I will play, if not a racist, what do your views make you?


----------



## MaggieMae

boedicca said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> me and My hubby kindly share the remote
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course you do.  Between the two of you, you just might have the equivalent of one functioning lower brain stem.
> 
> Do you work the gas pedal while he works the brakes, too?
Click to expand...


I do hope you recognize that you can be every bit as much of a bitch.


----------



## MaggieMae

NYcarbineer said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> Any time you cut a tape its called editing you fool
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Please cite a news program or news blog/website that shows all content in its entirety with no clips of certain segments being presented on their own.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> To intentionally edit a tape to significantly alter its meaning is dishonesty.
Click to expand...


But because Breitbart keeps saying he "doesn't know who edited the tape," some right-wingers are now trying to twist the story that the edited tape secretly came directly from the NAACP (for what reason, I cannot fathom). Amazing, simply amazing. By the end of THIS day, that will be what the righties accept as gospel truth. Watch.


----------



## MaggieMae

fyrenza said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> Let's just put it this way: You'd be hard pressed to find a white racial bigot visibly showing support for the Democratic Party, and especially Obama's Democratic Party. The visions from last August and the tea party rallies with racist signs and slogans are still imbedded in our minds.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LINKS?
> 
> To BOTH of your asertions ~ the racist signs AND PROOF that those weren't "plants,"
> 
> if you please?
> 
> Otherwise, slink off to whatever hole you crawled out of, and let us get on with the discussion/debate.
Click to expand...


I'm not wasting my time on a childish uninformed idiot like you. Last August's tea party rallies and legitimate photographs of participants have been all over the Internet for a solid year. Find them yourself.


----------



## MaggieMae

fyrenza said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> No.  They were busy calling the Tea Party RACISTS (i.e., The JournoList Rule) in the hopes of this story going away.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SIS?  It that YOU???
> 
> I'd Rep YOU up a STORM if I but could!
Click to expand...


I love your avatar signature. So appropos.


----------



## MaggieMae

boedicca said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hmmmm...I need to invest in that time warp system in which Bill O'Reilly can influence events that occur before he says anything.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He did say she should resign, before he knew she already had. His second spot on Wednesday night is his apology for jumping the gun. Both videos are on YouTube.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> And Obama has proven again and again that he has the deepest respect and admiration for Bill O'Reilly and tailors all his decisions for O'Reilly's approval.
> 
> Yeah, that's the ticket.
Click to expand...


Huh? You lost me.


----------



## Jarhead

rikules said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Daily Caller's "JournoList" expose has finally resolved the matter:
> 
> Based on Spencer Ackerman's tactic:
> 
> _*If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game theyve put upon us, Ackerman wrote on the Journolist listserv in April 2008. Instead, take one of them  Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares  and call them racists.*_
> 
> Conservatives Karl Rove and Fred Barnes respond to Journolist racist post | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment
> 
> 
> It's out in the open now.  The Left uses the racist accusation against the Right, the Tea Party, Conservatives, the GOP...  Anyone who critiques prominent lefties or their programs will be falsely attacked as a racist as a diversionary tactic.
> 
> More evidence is Sherrod's hateful comment regarding the GOP to Media Matters.
> 
> So here's the thing you lefties should understand:  we're not falling for it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As a white european tea party conservative I am appalled that liberals keep calling us "racists"
> 
> I am NOT a racist!
> 
> I merely want blacks sent back to Africa where they belong and for America to be officially sanctioned as WHITE, CHRISTIAN and EUROPEAN
> 
> that does NOT make me a racist!
Click to expand...


Yeah?

Well, I would like all of the Europeans shipped back to whence they came so my land can be pure. again. 

<sarcasm>


----------



## drsmith1072

boedicca said:


> The Daily Caller's "JournoList" expose has finally resolved the matter:
> 
> Based on Spencer Ackerman's tactic:
> 
> _*If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game theyve put upon us, Ackerman wrote on the Journolist listserv in April 2008. Instead, take one of them  Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares  and call them racists.*_
> 
> Conservatives Karl Rove and Fred Barnes respond to Journolist racist post | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment
> 
> 
> It's out in the open now.  The Left uses the racist accusation against the Right, the Tea Party, Conservatives, the GOP...  Anyone who critiques prominent lefties or their programs will be falsely attacked as a racist as a diversionary tactic.
> 
> More evidence is Sherrod's hateful comment regarding the GOP to Media Matters.
> 
> So here's the thing you lefties should understand:  we're not falling for it.



WOW look at all of those lemmings chiming in to thank you for a story about a two year old comment from ONE PERSON from a group that no longer exists. LOL 
Please do try to get some new material because this drudging up ancient stuff in the desperate need to try and affect the upcoming midterm elections is getting a little old.


----------



## Jarhead

drsmith1072 said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Daily Caller's "JournoList" expose has finally resolved the matter:
> 
> Based on Spencer Ackerman's tactic:
> 
> _*If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game theyve put upon us, Ackerman wrote on the Journolist listserv in April 2008. Instead, take one of them  Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares  and call them racists.*_
> 
> Conservatives Karl Rove and Fred Barnes respond to Journolist racist post | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment
> 
> 
> It's out in the open now.  The Left uses the racist accusation against the Right, the Tea Party, Conservatives, the GOP...  Anyone who critiques prominent lefties or their programs will be falsely attacked as a racist as a diversionary tactic.
> 
> More evidence is Sherrod's hateful comment regarding the GOP to Media Matters.
> 
> So here's the thing you lefties should understand:  we're not falling for it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WOW look at all of those lemmings chiming in to thank you for a story about a two year old comment from ONE PERSON from a group that no longer exists. LOL
> Please do try to get some new material because this drudging up ancient stuff in the desperate need to try and affect the upcoming midterm elections is getting a little old.
Click to expand...


And once again, the politicians of both parties have the people duking it out for them right before an election.

And we continue to service their selfish needs.


----------



## MaggieMae

boedicca said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> She never claimed she didn't say what was in the video clips.    Posting her verbatim quotes is not a lie.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh please. That edit was the quintessence of taking something out of context which, standing alone, entirely changes the truth.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Just like all of the clips promoted by the Left to smear the Tea Party as racists are taken out of context.
> 
> It doesn't feel so good when it happens to a lefty, does it?
> 
> And that (just a hunch) is the point Breitbart was attempting to make.
Click to expand...



"All" of them? I won't ask the absurd, like your new buddy Frenzied, by demanding that you post links to prove that "all" of the tea party statements were taken out of context, but I will say that eventually, as usual with you, I become bored by your snotty nitpicking, which amount to zilch by way of contributing to the topic.


----------



## MaggieMae

AquaAthena said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Nobody has yet provided a news program or new site that only shows full length clips of everything they report.*
> Where is that place?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I feel Brietbart was set up by a Left loon and this is what Obama will use to try to shut Fox down. A manufactured prelude to their next step. I do not feel Brietbart would have jeopardized his growing and soaring reputation by deliberately showing the clip *that was sent to him in April, 2010*. _And by whom_?
> 
> Brietbart has too much to lose and has worked hard to gain the respect of people looking for truth. I think everybody is fed up with being called the R word and are very sensitive and on the defensive. Mistakes will be made. Just glad a good man, Glenn Beck, defended Sherrod's firing and that took place before he aired that tape on Tuesday and _after she had been fired..."_Just pull over and DO IT!"
Click to expand...


Oh puke. I'm glad I have an empty stomach. Newsflash, honey. Brietbart has nothing to lose, are you kidding? Because people like you would believe him if he had video showing the earth was flat.


----------



## MaggieMae

rikules said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Daily Caller's "JournoList" expose has finally resolved the matter:
> 
> Based on Spencer Ackerman's tactic:
> 
> _*If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game theyve put upon us, Ackerman wrote on the Journolist listserv in April 2008. Instead, take one of them  Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares  and call them racists.*_
> 
> Conservatives Karl Rove and Fred Barnes respond to Journolist racist post | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment
> 
> 
> It's out in the open now.  The Left uses the racist accusation against the Right, the Tea Party, Conservatives, the GOP...  Anyone who critiques prominent lefties or their programs will be falsely attacked as a racist as a diversionary tactic.
> 
> More evidence is Sherrod's hateful comment regarding the GOP to Media Matters.
> 
> So here's the thing you lefties should understand:  we're not falling for it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As a white european tea party conservative I am appalled that liberals keep calling us "racists"
> 
> I am NOT a racist!
> 
> I merely want blacks sent back to Africa where they belong and for America to be officially sanctioned as WHITE, CHRISTIAN and EUROPEAN
> 
> that does NOT make me a racist!
Click to expand...


I commonly heard when I lived in the deep south many years ago, "Our darkies know their place." As though that was a caveat that released a white person from any obligation to treat the "darkies" as fellow humans.


----------



## Kat

MaggieMae said:


> rikules said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Daily Caller's "JournoList" expose has finally resolved the matter:
> 
> Based on Spencer Ackerman's tactic:
> 
> _*If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game theyve put upon us, Ackerman wrote on the Journolist listserv in April 2008. Instead, take one of them  Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares  and call them racists.*_
> 
> Conservatives Karl Rove and Fred Barnes respond to Journolist racist post | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment
> 
> 
> It's out in the open now.  The Left uses the racist accusation against the Right, the Tea Party, Conservatives, the GOP...  Anyone who critiques prominent lefties or their programs will be falsely attacked as a racist as a diversionary tactic.
> 
> More evidence is Sherrod's hateful comment regarding the GOP to Media Matters.
> 
> So here's the thing you lefties should understand:  we're not falling for it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As a white european tea party conservative I am appalled that liberals keep calling us "racists"
> 
> I am NOT a racist!
> 
> I merely want blacks sent back to Africa where they belong and for America to be officially sanctioned as WHITE, CHRISTIAN and EUROPEAN
> 
> that does NOT make me a racist!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *
> I commonly heard* when I lived in the deep south many years ago, "Our darkies know their place." As though that was a caveat that released a white person from any obligation to treat the "darkies" as fellow humans.
Click to expand...




HOGWASH...BS!!

I have lived in the deep south all of my life (well except 1 yr in Florida..1 year in Alaska, and 3 years in Wisconsin), and not ONE FREAKING time have I heard such.


----------



## VaYank5150

Kat said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rikules said:
> 
> 
> 
> As a white european tea party conservative I am appalled that liberals keep calling us "racists"
> 
> I am NOT a racist!
> 
> I merely want blacks sent back to Africa where they belong and for America to be officially sanctioned as WHITE, CHRISTIAN and EUROPEAN
> 
> that does NOT make me a racist!
> 
> 
> 
> *
> I commonly heard* when I lived in the deep south many years ago, "Our darkies know their place." As though that was a caveat that released a white person from any obligation to treat the "darkies" as fellow humans.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HOGWASH...BS!!
> 
> I have lived in the deep south all of my life (well except 1 yr in Florida..1 year in Alaska, and 3 years in Wisconsin), and not ONE FREAKING time have I heard such.
Click to expand...


Apparently, you have never ventured into Alabama or Mississippi....


----------



## MaggieMae

drsmith1072 said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Daily Caller's "JournoList" expose has finally resolved the matter:
> 
> Based on Spencer Ackerman's tactic:
> 
> _*If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game theyve put upon us, Ackerman wrote on the Journolist listserv in April 2008. Instead, take one of them  Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares  and call them racists.*_
> 
> Conservatives Karl Rove and Fred Barnes respond to Journolist racist post | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment
> 
> 
> It's out in the open now.  The Left uses the racist accusation against the Right, the Tea Party, Conservatives, the GOP...  Anyone who critiques prominent lefties or their programs will be falsely attacked as a racist as a diversionary tactic.
> 
> More evidence is Sherrod's hateful comment regarding the GOP to Media Matters.
> 
> So here's the thing you lefties should understand:  we're not falling for it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WOW look at all of those lemmings chiming in to thank you for a story about a two year old comment from ONE PERSON from a group that no longer exists. LOL
> Please do try to get some new material because this drudging up ancient stuff in the desperate need to try and affect the upcoming midterm elections is getting a little old.
Click to expand...


It's a typical Rovarian tactic, and it all has to do with timing. They are trying to equate the 2008 so-called "proof" that liberals will use false attacks as diversions to Brietbart's false attack as being a "plot" (a diversion) instigated by liberals. Get it?


----------



## Kat

VaYank5150 said:


> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> *
> I commonly heard* when I lived in the deep south many years ago, "Our darkies know their place." As though that was a caveat that released a white person from any obligation to treat the "darkies" as fellow humans.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HOGWASH...BS!!
> 
> I have lived in the deep south all of my life (well except 1 yr in Florida..1 year in Alaska, and 3 years in Wisconsin), and not ONE FREAKING time have I heard such.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Apparently, you have never ventured into Alabama or Mississippi....
Click to expand...


Apparently I grew up in Alabama. Apparently I now have as one neighbor a black family (wonderful people)...and on the other side a Jewish couple from Israel...and on my street there are more blacks than whites....and guess what?? We all get along PERFECTLY.
The ignorant type casting is half the problem in this country.

The most racism I actually heard was when I lived in Wisconsin.


----------



## 007

Truthmatters said:


> Pretty sad huh?
> 
> They scambled to post this news and cackled about her being a racist and then blamed Obama because he was tricked just like they were by this right wing hack.



This is all a grand scheme by obama. He's taken over the banks, the car companies, the lending institutions, health care, and the next is media. He needed a reason, so he created one. The whole Sherrod thing is a scheme for more control.


----------



## PLYMCO_PILGRIM

drsmith1072 said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Daily Caller's "JournoList" expose has finally resolved the matter:
> 
> Based on Spencer Ackerman's tactic:
> 
> _*If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game theyve put upon us, Ackerman wrote on the Journolist listserv in April 2008. Instead, take one of them  Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares  and call them racists.*_
> 
> Conservatives Karl Rove and Fred Barnes respond to Journolist racist post | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's out in the open now.  The Left uses the racist accusation against the Right, the Tea Party, Conservatives, the GOP...  Anyone who critiques prominent lefties or their programs will be falsely attacked as a racist as a diversionary tactic.
> 
> More evidence is Sherrod's hateful comment regarding the GOP to Media Matters.
> 
> So here's the thing you lefties should understand:  we're not falling for it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WOW look at all of those lemmings chiming in to thank you for a story about a two year old comment from ONE PERSON from a group that no longer exists. LOL
> Please do try to get some new material because this drudging up ancient stuff in the desperate need to try and affect the upcoming midterm elections is getting a little old.
Click to expand...



Its only relevant because the same tactic is still currently being employed by many in the media and the Obama administration.


----------



## VaYank5150

Kat said:


> VaYank5150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> HOGWASH...BS!!
> 
> I have lived in the deep south all of my life (well except 1 yr in Florida..1 year in Alaska, and 3 years in Wisconsin), and not ONE FREAKING time have I heard such.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently, you have never ventured into Alabama or Mississippi....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Apparently I grew up in Alabama. Apparently I now have as one neighbor a black family (wonderful people)...and on the other side a Jewish couple from Israel...and on my street there are more blacks than whites....and guess what?? We all get along PERFECTLY.
> The ignorant type casting is half the problem in this country.
> 
> The most racism I actually heard was when I lived in Wisconsin.
Click to expand...


Wow....I only stayed a week and saw and heard more white racist remarks than you have and you live there.  Odd?  I think so.


----------



## VaYank5150

Pale Rider said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> Pretty sad huh?
> 
> They scambled to post this news and cackled about her being a racist and then blamed Obama because he was tricked just like they were by this right wing hack.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is all a grand scheme by obama. He's taken over the banks, the car companies, the lending institutions, health care, and the next is media. He needed a reason, so he created one. The whole Sherrod thing is a scheme for more control.
Click to expand...


How and when did Obama take over the banks, the car companies, the lending institutions and healthcare exactly?


----------



## MaggieMae

Kat said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rikules said:
> 
> 
> 
> As a white european tea party conservative I am appalled that liberals keep calling us "racists"
> 
> I am NOT a racist!
> 
> I merely want blacks sent back to Africa where they belong and for America to be officially sanctioned as WHITE, CHRISTIAN and EUROPEAN
> 
> that does NOT make me a racist!
> 
> 
> 
> *
> I commonly heard* when I lived in the deep south many years ago, "Our darkies know their place." As though that was a caveat that released a white person from any obligation to treat the "darkies" as fellow humans.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HOGWASH...BS!!
> 
> I have lived in the deep south all of my life (well except 1 yr in Florida..1 year in Alaska, and 3 years in Wisconsin), and not ONE FREAKING time have I heard such.
Click to expand...


I lived there from 1964 through 1967, when the Civil Rights Bill was passed and at the time worked as a legal secretary in one of the Mississippi State Representative's law office in Biloxi where his wife also worked. I can guarangoddamnedtee that the same comment was made over and over again. The white southerners were extremely angry over the passage of civil rights, because many truly believed that they had been treating their Negroes civily all along (especially those that labored for them).

I didn't just make up the word.

*Thesaurus*  Legend:  Synonyms Related Words Antonyms
_Noun 1. darkie - (ethnic slur) offensive term for Black people
darkey, darky
derogation, disparagement, depreciation - a communication that belittles somebody or something
ethnic slur - a slur on someone's race or language
Black person, blackamoor, Negro, Negroid, Black - a person with dark skin who comes from Africa (or whose ancestors came from Africa) _


----------



## Kat

VaYank5150 said:


> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> VaYank5150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently, you have never ventured into Alabama or Mississippi....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently I grew up in Alabama. Apparently I now have as one neighbor a black family (wonderful people)...and on the other side a Jewish couple from Israel...and on my street there are more blacks than whites....and guess what?? We all get along PERFECTLY.
> The ignorant type casting is half the problem in this country.
> 
> The most racism I actually heard was when I lived in Wisconsin.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wow....I only stayed a week and saw and heard more white racist remarks than you have and you live there.  Odd?  I think so.
Click to expand...



I would say very odd. I have no reason to lie. Is there racism in the south? Of course..but there is also racism all over the country. The type casting is what really ticks me off.

Where were you for that week?


----------



## Jarhead

VaYank5150 said:


> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> VaYank5150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently, you have never ventured into Alabama or Mississippi....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently I grew up in Alabama. Apparently I now have as one neighbor a black family (wonderful people)...and on the other side a Jewish couple from Israel...and on my street there are more blacks than whites....and guess what?? We all get along PERFECTLY.
> The ignorant type casting is half the problem in this country.
> 
> The most racism I actually heard was when I lived in Wisconsin.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wow....I only stayed a week and saw and heard more white racist remarks than you have and you live there.  Odd?  I think so.
Click to expand...


Seems you tend to hang out with racists


----------



## Jarhead

Kat said:


> VaYank5150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently I grew up in Alabama. Apparently I now have as one neighbor a black family (wonderful people)...and on the other side a Jewish couple from Israel...and on my street there are more blacks than whites....and guess what?? We all get along PERFECTLY.
> The ignorant type casting is half the problem in this country.
> 
> The most racism I actually heard was when I lived in Wisconsin.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wow....I only stayed a week and saw and heard more white racist remarks than you have and you live there.  Odd?  I think so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I would say very odd. I have no reason to lie. Is there racism in the south? Of course..but there is also racism all over the country. The type casting is what really ticks me off.
> 
> Where were you for that week?
Click to expand...

Maybe hanging out with his racist friends?


----------



## Moon

MaggieMae said:


> rikules said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Daily Caller's "JournoList" expose has finally resolved the matter:
> 
> Based on Spencer Ackerman's tactic:
> 
> _*If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game theyve put upon us, Ackerman wrote on the Journolist listserv in April 2008. Instead, take one of them  Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares  and call them racists.*_
> 
> Conservatives Karl Rove and Fred Barnes respond to Journolist racist post | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment
> 
> 
> It's out in the open now.  The Left uses the racist accusation against the Right, the Tea Party, Conservatives, the GOP...  Anyone who critiques prominent lefties or their programs will be falsely attacked as a racist as a diversionary tactic.
> 
> More evidence is Sherrod's hateful comment regarding the GOP to Media Matters.
> 
> So here's the thing you lefties should understand:  we're not falling for it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As a white european tea party conservative I am appalled that liberals keep calling us "racists"
> 
> I am NOT a racist!
> 
> I merely want blacks sent back to Africa where they belong and for America to be officially sanctioned as WHITE, CHRISTIAN and EUROPEAN
> 
> that does NOT make me a racist!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I commonly heard when I lived in the deep south many years ago, "Our darkies know their place." As though that was a caveat that released a white person from any obligation to treat the "darkies" as fellow humans.
Click to expand...


I've lived in Alabama and Georgia since 1997 and I've never heard anything like that, and that's even after living around and working in rural areas.


----------



## 007

VaYank5150 said:


> Pale Rider said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> Pretty sad huh?
> 
> They scambled to post this news and cackled about her being a racist and then blamed Obama because he was tricked just like they were by this right wing hack.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is all a grand scheme by obama. He's taken over the banks, the car companies, the lending institutions, health care, and the next is media. He needed a reason, so he created one. The whole Sherrod thing is a scheme for more control.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How and when did Obama take over the banks, the car companies, the lending institutions and healthcare exactly?
Click to expand...


Which rock did you say you lived under?


----------



## Kat

MaggieMae said:


> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> *
> I commonly heard* when I lived in the deep south many years ago, "Our darkies know their place." As though that was a caveat that released a white person from any obligation to treat the "darkies" as fellow humans.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HOGWASH...BS!!
> 
> I have lived in the deep south all of my life (well except 1 yr in Florida..1 year in Alaska, and 3 years in Wisconsin), and not ONE FREAKING time have I heard such.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I lived there from 1964 through 1967, when the Civil Rights Bill was passed and at the time worked as a legal secretary in one of the Mississippi State Representative's law office in Biloxi where his wife also worked. I can guarangoddamnedtee that the same comment was made over and over again. The white southerners were extremely angry over the passage of civil rights, because many truly believed that they had been treating their Negroes civily all along (especially those that labored for them).
> 
> I didn't just make up the word.
> 
> *Thesaurus*  Legend:  Synonyms Related Words Antonyms
> _Noun 1. darkie - (ethnic slur) offensive term for Black people
> darkey, darky
> derogation, disparagement, depreciation - a communication that belittles somebody or something
> ethnic slur - a slur on someone's race or language
> Black person, blackamoor, Negro, Negroid, Black - a person with dark skin who comes from Africa (or whose ancestors came from Africa) _
Click to expand...


I never said there was no racism. You did say ''commonly heard''. I grew up here, and I am saying I didn't commonly hear. And I don't.

And btw..this is 2010.


----------



## VaYank5150

Kat said:


> VaYank5150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently I grew up in Alabama. Apparently I now have as one neighbor a black family (wonderful people)...and on the other side a Jewish couple from Israel...and on my street there are more blacks than whites....and guess what?? We all get along PERFECTLY.
> The ignorant type casting is half the problem in this country.
> 
> The most racism I actually heard was when I lived in Wisconsin.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wow....I only stayed a week and saw and heard more white racist remarks than you have and you live there.  Odd?  I think so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I would say very odd. I have no reason to lie. Is there racism in the south? Of course..but there is also racism all over the country. The type casting is what really ticks me off.
> 
> Where were you for that week?
Click to expand...


Daphne, AL and Biloxi, MS


----------



## Jarhead

Kat said:


> VaYank5150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> HOGWASH...BS!!
> 
> I have lived in the deep south all of my life (well except 1 yr in Florida..1 year in Alaska, and 3 years in Wisconsin), and not ONE FREAKING time have I heard such.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently, you have never ventured into Alabama or Mississippi....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Apparently I grew up in Alabama. Apparently I now have as one neighbor a black family (wonderful people)...and on the other side a Jewish couple from Israel...and on my street there are more blacks than whites....and guess what?? We all get along PERFECTLY.
> The ignorant type casting is half the problem in this country.
> 
> The most racism I actually heard was when I lived in Wisconsin.
Click to expand...

Is the wife of your black neighbor the maid for your Jewish neighbor?

(Just having some friday fun).


----------



## Jarhead

VaYank5150 said:


> Pale Rider said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> Pretty sad huh?
> 
> They scambled to post this news and cackled about her being a racist and then blamed Obama because he was tricked just like they were by this right wing hack.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is all a grand scheme by obama. He's taken over the banks, the car companies, the lending institutions, health care, and the next is media. He needed a reason, so he created one. The whole Sherrod thing is a scheme for more control.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How and when did Obama take over the banks, the car companies, the lending institutions and healthcare exactly?
Click to expand...


I guess your news media is not up on the news?


----------



## MaggieMae

Kat said:


> VaYank5150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> HOGWASH...BS!!
> 
> I have lived in the deep south all of my life (well except 1 yr in Florida..1 year in Alaska, and 3 years in Wisconsin), and not ONE FREAKING time have I heard such.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently, you have never ventured into Alabama or Mississippi....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Apparently I grew up in Alabama. Apparently I now have as one neighbor a black family (wonderful people)...and on the other side a Jewish couple from Israel...and on my street there are more blacks than whites....and guess what?? We all get along PERFECTLY.
> The ignorant type casting is half the problem in this country.
> 
> The most racism I actually heard was when I lived in Wisconsin.
Click to expand...


I'm guessing you're not old enough to have experienced life in the deep south 40 years ago. Yes, things have dramatically changed, and people don't make off-the-cuff slurs as often. But I'm here to tell you, it was an entirely different story back then. Also, I think Southern attitude depends on whether you come from a rural or an urban vicinity. In fact, Shirley Sherrod made a comment during one of her many interviews yesterday that (paraphrasing) "If you go to some of the small rural areas in the South, you would get the impression the Civil War never ended."


----------



## MaggieMae

Pale Rider said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> Pretty sad huh?
> 
> They scambled to post this news and cackled about her being a racist and then blamed Obama because he was tricked just like they were by this right wing hack.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is all a grand scheme by obama. He's taken over the banks, the car companies, the lending institutions, health care, and the next is media. He needed a reason, so he created one. The whole Sherrod thing is a scheme for more control.
Click to expand...


 And it's begun!!! Good job, Mr. Rove!!!

Post #276


----------



## Jarhead

Kat said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> HOGWASH...BS!!
> 
> I have lived in the deep south all of my life (well except 1 yr in Florida..1 year in Alaska, and 3 years in Wisconsin), and not ONE FREAKING time have I heard such.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I lived there from 1964 through 1967, when the Civil Rights Bill was passed and at the time worked as a legal secretary in one of the Mississippi State Representative's law office in Biloxi where his wife also worked. I can guarangoddamnedtee that the same comment was made over and over again. The white southerners were extremely angry over the passage of civil rights, because many truly believed that they had been treating their Negroes civily all along (especially those that labored for them).
> 
> I didn't just make up the word.
> 
> *Thesaurus*  Legend:  Synonyms Related Words Antonyms
> _Noun 1. darkie - (ethnic slur) offensive term for Black people
> darkey, darky
> derogation, disparagement, depreciation - a communication that belittles somebody or something
> ethnic slur - a slur on someone's race or language
> Black person, blackamoor, Negro, Negroid, Black - a person with dark skin who comes from Africa (or whose ancestors came from Africa) _
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I never said there was no racism. You did say ''commonly heard''. I grew up here, and I am saying I didn't commonly hear. And I don't.
> 
> And btw..this is 2010.
Click to expand...


In 1964-1967 I heard racial remarks everywhere I went.


----------



## Jarhead

MaggieMae said:


> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> VaYank5150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently, you have never ventured into Alabama or Mississippi....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently I grew up in Alabama. Apparently I now have as one neighbor a black family (wonderful people)...and on the other side a Jewish couple from Israel...and on my street there are more blacks than whites....and guess what?? We all get along PERFECTLY.
> The ignorant type casting is half the problem in this country.
> 
> The most racism I actually heard was when I lived in Wisconsin.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm guessing you're not old enough to have experienced life in the deep south 40 years ago. Yes, things have dramatically changed, and people don't make off-the-cuff slurs as often. But I'm here to tell you, it was an entirely different story back then. Also, I think Southern attitude depends on whether you come from a rural or an urban vicinity. In fact, Shirley Sherrod made a comment during one of her many interviews yesterday that (paraphrasing) "If you go to some of the small rural areas in the South, you would get the impression the Civil War never ended."
Click to expand...


Maggie, 

I doubt ANYONE would argue that racism was a major issue 40 years ago...ANYWHERE in the US.


----------



## Kat

MaggieMae said:


> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> VaYank5150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently, you have never ventured into Alabama or Mississippi....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently I grew up in Alabama. Apparently I now have as one neighbor a black family (wonderful people)...and on the other side a Jewish couple from Israel...and on my street there are more blacks than whites....and guess what?? We all get along PERFECTLY.
> The ignorant type casting is half the problem in this country.
> 
> The most racism I actually heard was when I lived in Wisconsin.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm guessing you're not old enough to have experienced life in the deep south 40 years ago. Yes, things have dramatically changed, and people don't make off-the-cuff slurs as often. But I'm here to tell you, it was an entirely different story back then. Also, I think Southern attitude depends on whether you come from a rural or an urban vicinity. In fact, Shirley Sherrod made a comment during one of her many interviews yesterday that (paraphrasing) "If you go to some of the small rural areas in the South, you would get the impression the Civil War never ended."
Click to expand...



Okay. I will give you that. I cannot deny how it was back then. If that is ALL you are referring to, then you have my apologies....my bad. But, I came in and it looked as if you were saying that is how it is now.


----------



## Kat

BTW...I must add that if you heard it back then..George Wallace was governor...a Democrat.


----------



## VaYank5150

Jarhead said:


> VaYank5150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pale Rider said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is all a grand scheme by obama. He's taken over the banks, the car companies, the lending institutions, health care, and the next is media. He needed a reason, so he created one. The whole Sherrod thing is a scheme for more control.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How and when did Obama take over the banks, the car companies, the lending institutions and healthcare exactly?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I guess your news media is not up on the news?
Click to expand...


Bush bailed out the banks, but they are still privately owned, yes?
Bush AND Obama bailed out some automobile makers, but they are still privately owned, yes?
The lending instituations...see my remarks on the banks
Healthcare has not been taken over by anyone, and my health insurance carrier, is still privately owned.


----------



## rdean

The Republican party is 90% white.  They are based in the deep south.  They promote "Confederate" day.  If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck then it must be..........


----------



## DiveCon

Kat said:


> VaYank5150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> HOGWASH...BS!!
> 
> I have lived in the deep south all of my life (well except 1 yr in Florida..1 year in Alaska, and 3 years in Wisconsin), and not ONE FREAKING time have I heard such.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently, you have never ventured into Alabama or Mississippi....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Apparently I grew up in Alabama. Apparently I now have as one neighbor a black family (wonderful people)...and on the other side a Jewish couple from Israel...and on my street there are more blacks than whites....and guess what?? We all get along PERFECTLY.
> The ignorant type casting is half the problem in this country.
> 
> The most racism I actually heard was when I lived in Wisconsin.
Click to expand...

apparently he didn't bother to look at your LOCATION


----------



## MaggieMae

Kat said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> HOGWASH...BS!!
> 
> I have lived in the deep south all of my life (well except 1 yr in Florida..1 year in Alaska, and 3 years in Wisconsin), and not ONE FREAKING time have I heard such.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I lived there from 1964 through 1967, when the Civil Rights Bill was passed and at the time worked as a legal secretary in one of the Mississippi State Representative's law office in Biloxi where his wife also worked. I can guarangoddamnedtee that the same comment was made over and over again. The white southerners were extremely angry over the passage of civil rights, because many truly believed that they had been treating their Negroes civily all along (especially those that labored for them).
> 
> I didn't just make up the word.
> 
> *Thesaurus*  Legend:  Synonyms Related Words Antonyms
> _Noun 1. darkie - (ethnic slur) offensive term for Black people
> darkey, darky
> derogation, disparagement, depreciation - a communication that belittles somebody or something
> ethnic slur - a slur on someone's race or language
> Black person, blackamoor, Negro, Negroid, Black - a person with dark skin who comes from Africa (or whose ancestors came from Africa) _
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I never said there was no racism. You did say ''commonly heard''. I grew up here, and I am saying I didn't commonly hear. And I don't.
> 
> And btw..this is 2010.
Click to expand...


I say "commonly heard" because I was obviously a Yankee so using the term "darkie" was softer in my presence. You wouldn't be trying to convince us that there aren't still huge numbers of southern whites who use all sorts of slanderous and insulting denigrations toward black people, would you? If so, then I have several websites where you can see for yourself the number of people whose bigotry has been bubbling up and they now have open forums where they can spew their unadulterated hatred for blacks.


----------



## DiveCon

Jarhead said:


> VaYank5150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently I grew up in Alabama. Apparently I now have as one neighbor a black family (wonderful people)...and on the other side a Jewish couple from Israel...and on my street there are more blacks than whites....and guess what?? We all get along PERFECTLY.
> The ignorant type casting is half the problem in this country.
> 
> The most racism I actually heard was when I lived in Wisconsin.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wow....I only stayed a week and saw and heard more white racist remarks than you have and you live there.  Odd?  I think so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Seems you tend to hang out with racists
Click to expand...

thats what i was thinking as i read his post


----------



## Kat

Jarhead said:


> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> VaYank5150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently, you have never ventured into Alabama or Mississippi....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently I grew up in Alabama. Apparently I now have as one neighbor a black family (wonderful people)...and on the other side a Jewish couple from Israel...and on my street there are more blacks than whites....and guess what?? We all get along PERFECTLY.
> The ignorant type casting is half the problem in this country.
> 
> The most racism I actually heard was when I lived in Wisconsin.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Is the wife of your black neighbor the maid for your Jewish neighbor?
> 
> (Just having some friday fun).
Click to expand...


----------



## Kat

DiveCon said:


> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> VaYank5150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wow....I only stayed a week and saw and heard more white racist remarks than you have and you live there.  Odd?  I think so.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seems you tend to hang out with racists
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> thats what i was thinking as i read his post
Click to expand...




Pretty valid point now that you guys mention it.


----------



## MaggieMae

Jarhead said:


> VaYank5150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pale Rider said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is all a grand scheme by obama. He's taken over the banks, the car companies, the lending institutions, health care, and the next is media. He needed a reason, so he created one. The whole Sherrod thing is a scheme for more control.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How and when did Obama take over the banks, the car companies, the lending institutions and healthcare exactly?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I guess your news media is not up on the news?
Click to expand...


None of those has been nationalized, i.e., "run by" the government. To the contrary, infusions of cash were pumped into the big banks and the auto industry *in order for them to stay alive within the private sector. *


----------



## DiveCon

Jarhead said:


> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> I lived there from 1964 through 1967, when the Civil Rights Bill was passed and at the time worked as a legal secretary in one of the Mississippi State Representative's law office in Biloxi where his wife also worked. I can guarangoddamnedtee that the same comment was made over and over again. The white southerners were extremely angry over the passage of civil rights, because many truly believed that they had been treating their Negroes civily all along (especially those that labored for them).
> 
> I didn't just make up the word.
> 
> *Thesaurus*  Legend:  Synonyms Related Words Antonyms
> _Noun 1. darkie - (ethnic slur) offensive term for Black people
> darkey, darky
> derogation, disparagement, depreciation - a communication that belittles somebody or something
> ethnic slur - a slur on someone's race or language
> Black person, blackamoor, Negro, Negroid, Black - a person with dark skin who comes from Africa (or whose ancestors came from Africa) _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I never said there was no racism. You did say ''commonly heard''. I grew up here, and I am saying I didn't commonly hear. And I don't.
> 
> And btw..this is 2010.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> In 1964-1967 I heard racial remarks everywhere I went.
Click to expand...

yeah, i seem to recall some very disturbing things happening in BOSTON in my youth


----------



## VaYank5150

DiveCon said:


> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> VaYank5150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wow....I only stayed a week and saw and heard more white racist remarks than you have and you live there.  Odd?  I think so.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seems you tend to hang out with racists
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> thats what i was thinking as i read his post
Click to expand...


It is simply THAT prevalent down there.  Hell, I stopped at a rest area between AL and MS and there was a group of guys unloading from a minivan and every one of them had a black t-shirt on, with mutliple KKK memebers dressed in their white bed sheets and the logo "The Original Boys In the Hood" on them....I couldn't believe it.


----------



## Kat

MaggieMae said:


> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> I lived there from 1964 through 1967, when the Civil Rights Bill was passed and at the time worked as a legal secretary in one of the Mississippi State Representative's law office in Biloxi where his wife also worked. I can guarangoddamnedtee that the same comment was made over and over again. The white southerners were extremely angry over the passage of civil rights, because many truly believed that they had been treating their Negroes civily all along (especially those that labored for them).
> 
> I didn't just make up the word.
> 
> *Thesaurus*  Legend:  Synonyms Related Words Antonyms
> _Noun 1. darkie - (ethnic slur) offensive term for Black people
> darkey, darky
> derogation, disparagement, depreciation - a communication that belittles somebody or something
> ethnic slur - a slur on someone's race or language
> Black person, blackamoor, Negro, Negroid, Black - a person with dark skin who comes from Africa (or whose ancestors came from Africa) _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I never said there was no racism. You did say ''commonly heard''. I grew up here, and I am saying I didn't commonly hear. And I don't.
> 
> And btw..this is 2010.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I say "commonly heard" because I was obviously a Yankee so using the term "darkie" was softer in my presence. You wouldn't be trying to convince us that there aren't still huge numbers of southern whites who use all sorts of slanderous and insulting denigrations toward black people, would you? If so, then I have several websites where you can see for yourself the number of people whose bigotry has been bubbling up and they now have open forums where they can spew their unadulterated hatred for blacks.
Click to expand...



I am not trying to convince you of a thing. I am telling you what I know. What I have seen. And what I know and have seen is racism is alive and well all over..not just the south.


----------



## Nonelitist

NYcarbineer said:


> What makes this thread most delightfully retarded is that President Obama himself repudiated Jeremiah Wright.



after listening to him for 20+ years.... his spiritual advisor.

My gosh you are an idiot.


----------



## Moon

MaggieMae said:


> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> I lived there from 1964 through 1967, when the Civil Rights Bill was passed and at the time worked as a legal secretary in one of the Mississippi State Representative's law office in Biloxi where his wife also worked. I can guarangoddamnedtee that the same comment was made over and over again. The white southerners were extremely angry over the passage of civil rights, because many truly believed that they had been treating their Negroes civily all along (especially those that labored for them).
> 
> I didn't just make up the word.
> 
> *Thesaurus*  Legend:  Synonyms Related Words Antonyms
> _Noun 1. darkie - (ethnic slur) offensive term for Black people
> darkey, darky
> derogation, disparagement, depreciation - a communication that belittles somebody or something
> ethnic slur - a slur on someone's race or language
> Black person, blackamoor, Negro, Negroid, Black - a person with dark skin who comes from Africa (or whose ancestors came from Africa) _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I never said there was no racism. You did say ''commonly heard''. I grew up here, and I am saying I didn't commonly hear. And I don't.
> 
> And btw..this is 2010.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I say "commonly heard" because I was obviously a Yankee so using the term "darkie" was softer in my presence. You wouldn't be trying to convince us that there aren't still huge numbers of southern whites who use all sorts of slanderous and insulting denigrations toward black people, would you? If so, then I have several websites where you can see for yourself the number of people whose bigotry has been bubbling up and they now have open forums where they can spew their unadulterated hatred for blacks.
Click to expand...


You haven't been in the South in 45 or so years, and yet you think you're an expert on present day racial attitudes here, and completely discount the experiences of people that live here now?


----------



## Jarhead

VaYank5150 said:


> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> VaYank5150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> How and when did Obama take over the banks, the car companies, the lending institutions and healthcare exactly?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I guess your news media is not up on the news?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Bush bailed out the banks, but they are still privately owned, yes?
> Bush AND Obama bailed out some automobile makers, but they are still privately owned, yes?
> The lending instituations...see my remarks on the banks
> Healthcare has not been taken over by anyone, and my health insurance carrier, is still privately owned.
Click to expand...


Like I said...it seems your News Media is not up on the news.

GM is majority owned by the government.
The government made a decision that priority holders of chrysler stock are the ones to take the loss (that is government control of prtivate CONTRACTUAL decisions)
The lending institutions can no longer keep the private and confidential information of their clients as private and confidential. They have lost that right to the government. That is government control.
Whereas you were promised that you will be able to keep your docotor if you wish, it has been disclosed that the promise was not true. The government has made it so you very well may NOT be able tomake your own decision as it pertains to your medical care.

Losing control to the government does not mean losing OWNERSHIP to the government.

It means losing control to the government even if you retain ownership.


----------



## MaggieMae

Jarhead said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently I grew up in Alabama. Apparently I now have as one neighbor a black family (wonderful people)...and on the other side a Jewish couple from Israel...and on my street there are more blacks than whites....and guess what?? We all get along PERFECTLY.
> The ignorant type casting is half the problem in this country.
> 
> The most racism I actually heard was when I lived in Wisconsin.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm guessing you're not old enough to have experienced life in the deep south 40 years ago. Yes, things have dramatically changed, and people don't make off-the-cuff slurs as often. But I'm here to tell you, it was an entirely different story back then. Also, I think Southern attitude depends on whether you come from a rural or an urban vicinity. In fact, Shirley Sherrod made a comment during one of her many interviews yesterday that (paraphrasing) "If you go to some of the small rural areas in the South, you would get the impression the Civil War never ended."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Maggie,
> 
> I doubt ANYONE would argue that racism was a major issue 40 years ago...ANYWHERE in the US.
Click to expand...


That's true, but as I recall I was responding to something specific (but can't remember what it was now).


----------



## Kat

VaYank5150 said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> Seems you tend to hang out with racists
> 
> 
> 
> thats what i was thinking as i read his post
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is simply THAT prevalent down there.  Hell, I stopped at a rest area between AL and MS and there was a group of guys unloading from a minivan and every one of them had a black t-shirt on, with mutliple KKK memebers dressed in their white bed sheets and the logo "The Original Boys In the Hood" on them....I couldn't believe it.
Click to expand...



All in one weeks time. Uh huh. Okay.


----------



## DiveCon

VaYank5150 said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> Seems you tend to hang out with racists
> 
> 
> 
> thats what i was thinking as i read his post
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is simply THAT prevalent down there.  Hell, I stopped at a rest area between AL and MS and there was a group of guys unloading from a minivan and every one of them had a black t-shirt on, with mutliple KKK memebers dressed in their white bed sheets and the logo "The Original Boys In the Hood" on them....I couldn't believe it.
Click to expand...

yeah, there are still pockets of ignorance


----------



## Jarhead

DiveCon said:


> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> I never said there was no racism. You did say ''commonly heard''. I grew up here, and I am saying I didn't commonly hear. And I don't.
> 
> And btw..this is 2010.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In 1964-1967 I heard racial remarks everywhere I went.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> yeah, i seem to recall some very disturbing things happening in BOSTON in my youth
Click to expand...


It is still quite evident in the NYC area....in BOTH directions.


----------



## Moon

VaYank5150 said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> Seems you tend to hang out with racists
> 
> 
> 
> thats what i was thinking as i read his post
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is simply THAT prevalent down there.  Hell, I stopped at a rest area between AL and MS and there was a group of guys unloading from a minivan and every one of them had a black t-shirt on, with mutliple KKK memebers dressed in their white bed sheets and the logo "The Original Boys In the Hood" on them....I couldn't believe it.
Click to expand...


Yeah, I call bullshit.


----------



## MaggieMae

Kat said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently I grew up in Alabama. Apparently I now have as one neighbor a black family (wonderful people)...and on the other side a Jewish couple from Israel...and on my street there are more blacks than whites....and guess what?? We all get along PERFECTLY.
> The ignorant type casting is half the problem in this country.
> 
> The most racism I actually heard was when I lived in Wisconsin.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm guessing you're not old enough to have experienced life in the deep south 40 years ago. Yes, things have dramatically changed, and people don't make off-the-cuff slurs as often. But I'm here to tell you, it was an entirely different story back then. Also, I think Southern attitude depends on whether you come from a rural or an urban vicinity. In fact, Shirley Sherrod made a comment during one of her many interviews yesterday that (paraphrasing) "If you go to some of the small rural areas in the South, you would get the impression the Civil War never ended."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Okay. I will give you that. I cannot deny how it was back then. If that is ALL you are referring to, then you have my apologies....my bad. But, I came in and it looked as if you were saying that is how it is now.
Click to expand...


I hope not. There's been a lot of migration from the North to the South which also has changed the face of the deep south in the last 50 years. I lived in Houston from 1976 to 1979, and saw very little bigotry by comparison. I haven't ventured south since, though.


----------



## Jarhead

Moon said:


> VaYank5150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> thats what i was thinking as i read his post
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is simply THAT prevalent down there.  Hell, I stopped at a rest area between AL and MS and there was a group of guys unloading from a minivan and every one of them had a black t-shirt on, with mutliple KKK memebers dressed in their white bed sheets and the logo "The Original Boys In the Hood" on them....I couldn't believe it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah, I call bullshit.
Click to expand...


Nah. VaYank does not BS in my book. I dont always agree with him, but I would never take one of his postings as BS.


----------



## Moon

Jarhead said:


> Moon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> VaYank5150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is simply THAT prevalent down there.  Hell, I stopped at a rest area between AL and MS and there was a group of guys unloading from a minivan and every one of them had a black t-shirt on, with mutliple KKK memebers dressed in their white bed sheets and the logo "The Original Boys In the Hood" on them....I couldn't believe it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, I call bullshit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Nah. VaYank does not BS in my book. I dont always agree with him, but I would never take one of his postings as BS.
Click to expand...


Funny that he claims to have seen things that those of us that live here never had.


----------



## 007

MaggieMae said:


> Pale Rider said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> Pretty sad huh?
> 
> They scambled to post this news and cackled about her being a racist and then blamed Obama because he was tricked just like they were by this right wing hack.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is all a grand scheme by obama. He's taken over the banks, the car companies, the lending institutions, health care, and the next is media. He needed a reason, so he created one. The whole Sherrod thing is a scheme for more control.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And it's begun!!! Good job, Mr. Rove!!!
> 
> Post #276
Click to expand...


Nope... Glenn Beck. In any case, it doesn't matter who exposes the left's under handed tactics, just so it's exposed.


----------



## Kat

MaggieMae said:


> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm guessing you're not old enough to have experienced life in the deep south 40 years ago. Yes, things have dramatically changed, and people don't make off-the-cuff slurs as often. But I'm here to tell you, it was an entirely different story back then. Also, I think Southern attitude depends on whether you come from a rural or an urban vicinity. In fact, Shirley Sherrod made a comment during one of her many interviews yesterday that (paraphrasing) "If you go to some of the small rural areas in the South, you would get the impression the Civil War never ended."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Okay. I will give you that. I cannot deny how it was back then. If that is ALL you are referring to, then you have my apologies....my bad. But, I came in and it looked as if you were saying that is how it is now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I hope not. There's been a lot of migration from the North to the South which also has changed the face of the deep south in the last 50 years. I lived in Houston from 1976 to 1979, and saw very little bigotry by comparison. I haven't ventured south since, though.
Click to expand...


The north coming to the south has NOTHING to do with it. I actually am married to a Yankee myself.
The worse I heard was in Wisconsin. I was told ''I would never live in the south...too many n****** there''.


----------



## Jarhead

Moon said:


> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Moon said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, I call bullshit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nah. VaYank does not BS in my book. I dont always agree with him, but I would never take one of his postings as BS.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Funny that he claims to have seen things that those of us that live here never had.
Click to expand...


I just offered my opinon based on my conversations with him. I believe what he says.

You have valid reason to not.

But mind you...I have lived in the NYC area all of my 52 years (with the exception of my military time) and I have never been to the Statue of Liberty.


----------



## JScott

Youre either racist or youre not. You know where you fit.


----------



## DiveCon

Moon said:


> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Moon said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, I call bullshit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nah. VaYank does not BS in my book. I dont always agree with him, but I would never take one of his postings as BS.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Funny that he claims to have seen things that those of us that live here never had.
Click to expand...

as was said earlier, maybe it was the type of people he hung around with


----------



## Jarhead

JScott said:


> Youre either racist or youre not. You know where you fit.



Irrelevant what you know about yourself.

It is what those with the loudest voices want to say about you.


----------



## 007

Kat said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> Okay. I will give you that. I cannot deny how it was back then. If that is ALL you are referring to, then you have my apologies....my bad. But, I came in and it looked as if you were saying that is how it is now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I hope not. There's been a lot of migration from the North to the South which also has changed the face of the deep south in the last 50 years. I lived in Houston from 1976 to 1979, and saw very little bigotry by comparison. I haven't ventured south since, though.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The north coming to the south has NOTHING to do with it. I actually am married to a Yankee myself.
> The worse I heard was in Wisconsin. I was told ''I would never live in the south...too many n****** there''.
Click to expand...


I live in Wisconsin, and I've lived down south, and there's no comparison. There's far more racism down south than up here... far more.


----------



## Kat

DiveCon said:


> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> I never said there was no racism. You did say ''commonly heard''. I grew up here, and I am saying I didn't commonly hear. And I don't.
> 
> And btw..this is 2010.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In 1964-1967 I heard racial remarks everywhere I went.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> yeah, i seem to recall some very disturbing things happening in BOSTON in my youth
Click to expand...


And Detroit, Chicago, California. Not that long ago either.
Point being...don't try and typecast the south alone.


----------



## Jarhead

DiveCon said:


> Moon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nah. VaYank does not BS in my book. I dont always agree with him, but I would never take one of his postings as BS.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Funny that he claims to have seen things that those of us that live here never had.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> as was said earlier, maybe it was the type of people he hung around with
Click to expand...


Maybe he, himself, owns a silk screening company and he went to Alabama to sell those shirts?


----------



## boedicca

There are assholes, idiots, and bigots everywhere.   No region has an exclusivity on prejudice.

Just sayin'.


----------



## Jarhead

Kat said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> In 1964-1967 I heard racial remarks everywhere I went.
> 
> 
> 
> yeah, i seem to recall some very disturbing things happening in BOSTON in my youth
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And Detroit, Chicago, California. Not that long ago either.
> Point being...don't try and typecast the south alone.
Click to expand...


Well, you cant deny that the south typcast itself 160 years ago. No?


----------



## Kat

Jarhead said:


> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> yeah, i seem to recall some very disturbing things happening in BOSTON in my youth
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And Detroit, Chicago, California. Not that long ago either.
> Point being...don't try and typecast the south alone.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, you cant deny that the south typcast itself 160 years ago. No?
Click to expand...



No. I won't deny at all. But, I know what it is now...I live here. I wasn't alive 160 years ago!!


----------



## Jarhead

Kat said:


> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> And Detroit, Chicago, California. Not that long ago either.
> Point being...don't try and typecast the south alone.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, you cant deny that the south typcast itself 160 years ago. No?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No. I won't deny at all. But, I know what it is now...I live here. I wasn't alive 160 years ago!!
Click to expand...


Yep. And neither was I.


----------



## Kat

Jarhead said:


> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well, you cant deny that the south typcast itself 160 years ago. No?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No. I won't deny at all. But, I know what it is now...I live here. I wasn't alive 160 years ago!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yep. And neither was I.
Click to expand...


Good to know!


----------



## boedicca

Kat said:


> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> And Detroit, Chicago, California. Not that long ago either.
> Point being...don't try and typecast the south alone.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, you cant deny that the south typcast itself 160 years ago. No?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No. I won't deny at all. But, I know what it is now...I live here. I wasn't alive 160 years ago!!
Click to expand...




If Sherrod can be excused for being a racist 24 years ago who has now repented, the fact that the U.S. fought a Civil War which ended slavery nearly 160 years ago and the passage of the Civil Rights act 46 years ago should mean that the "U.S. is a Racist Country" Meme's shelf date has long expired.

Just Frellin' Sayin'


----------



## VaYank5150

Moon said:


> VaYank5150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> thats what i was thinking as i read his post
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is simply THAT prevalent down there.  Hell, I stopped at a rest area between AL and MS and there was a group of guys unloading from a minivan and every one of them had a black t-shirt on, with mutliple KKK memebers dressed in their white bed sheets and the logo "The Original Boys In the Hood" on them....I couldn't believe it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah, I call bullshit.
Click to expand...


I kid you not.  I swear if that had taken place at a rest area in Virginia, I truly believe someone would have gotten an ass whoopin' at the very least.  But, these guys were so non-chalant about it, that it seemed as if it were simply accepted behavior down there...


----------



## Kat

VaYank5150 said:


> Moon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> VaYank5150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is simply THAT prevalent down there.  Hell, I stopped at a rest area between AL and MS and there was a group of guys unloading from a minivan and every one of them had a black t-shirt on, with mutliple KKK memebers dressed in their white bed sheets and the logo "The Original Boys In the Hood" on them....I couldn't believe it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, I call bullshit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I kid you not.  I swear if that had taken place at a rest area in Virginia, I truly believe someone would have gotten an ass whoopin' at the very least.  But, these guys were so non-chalant about it, that it seemed as if it were simply accepted behavior down there...
Click to expand...


Darlin, it may be accepted by you, but not by me, nor anyone I know. And I know a lot of people.


----------



## Moon

VaYank5150 said:


> Moon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> VaYank5150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is simply THAT prevalent down there.  Hell, I stopped at a rest area between AL and MS and there was a group of guys unloading from a minivan and every one of them had a black t-shirt on, with mutliple KKK memebers dressed in their white bed sheets and the logo "The Original Boys In the Hood" on them....I couldn't believe it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, I call bullshit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I kid you not.  I swear if that had taken place at a rest area in Virginia, I truly believe someone would have gotten an ass whoopin' at the very least.  But, these guys were so non-chalant about it, that it seemed as if it were simply accepted behavior down there...
Click to expand...


Never seen it or anything like it, and I've lived in areas where the Klan used to be pretty active.


----------



## Immanuel

MaggieMae said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well since Andrew Briebart's "mission" is to destroy the liberals, the party, and the liberal press, my guess is that either he himself or someone within his organization doctored the tape. *After the kerfuffle between the NAACP and the Tea Party the week before, which basically ended with both leaders of each agreeing to meet to discuss their differences*, that probably pissed off those like Briebart who _WANT_ to keep the racial fires smouldering.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Would you by any chance have a link to that part about the meeting?
> 
> I think that would be a great event.
> 
> Immie
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm not sure anything has been arranged yet, but representatives from both feudal parties have been saying on various programs that they want to have a "summit" type meeting on race. Here's a transcript from last Friday's discussion on CNN's "John King's USA."
> {snip for brevity}
Click to expand...


So, what I got from your post is that there are no talks in the works, just a lot of talking from blowhards about something that will probably never happen.  



MaggieMae said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> I've been working on a project which involves pulling headlines from various news outlets regarding the same story. It's to show how bias permeates ALL media, mainstream and Internet. Please don't be so ignorant to believe there are none favoring the conservative point of view that aren't guilty as sin for embellishing their headlines and content.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It always seems to me that it is leftist that believe that the media that favors their own point of view can do no wrong.
> 
> I guess it is just the side of the table you are sitting on.
> 
> Immie
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That's absolutely the point. And the folks who operate major newspapers and online news dotcoms are mighty tired of being accused of being biased to the left just by virtue of the newspaper's banner. We never hear of the identical bias by news operations like _The Washington Times, The Washington Journal_, etc.
> 
> Btw, this "project" is one of my free-lance jobs that I'll actually get paid for. If it's published, I'll get permission to post it here.
Click to expand...


They are getting mighty tired of being accused of being biased to the left?  Give me a break, Maggie, most of them are.  I am getting the sense that you think only conservative dot.coms and Fox are biased.



MaggieMae said:


> AquaAthena said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> 
> It always seems to me that it is leftist that believe that the media that favors their own point of view can do no wrong.
> 
> I guess it is just the side of the table you are sitting on.
> 
> Immie
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's just that some will _manufacture anyth_ing to be divisive and that huge percentage is usually on the left side of the table...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And my research so far is proving you *so* wrong.
Click to expand...


Really?  Like I said, I am getting the impression that you believe that only Fox and conservative websites are biased.

I have to say this and want to say it very politely so don't take this wrong, but in my book, that makes your research highly suspect.



VaYank5150 said:


> rikules said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Daily Caller's "JournoList" expose has finally resolved the matter:
> 
> Based on Spencer Ackerman's tactic:
> 
> _*If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game theyve put upon us, Ackerman wrote on the Journolist listserv in April 2008. Instead, take one of them  Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares  and call them racists.*_
> 
> Conservatives Karl Rove and Fred Barnes respond to Journolist racist post | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment
> 
> 
> It's out in the open now.  The Left uses the racist accusation against the Right, the Tea Party, Conservatives, the GOP...  Anyone who critiques prominent lefties or their programs will be falsely attacked as a racist as a diversionary tactic.
> 
> More evidence is Sherrod's hateful comment regarding the GOP to Media Matters.
> 
> So here's the thing you lefties should understand:  we're not falling for it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As a white european tea party conservative I am appalled that liberals keep calling us "racists"
> 
> I am NOT a racist!
> 
> I merely want blacks sent back to Africa where they belong and for America to be officially sanctioned as WHITE, CHRISTIAN and EUROPEAN
> 
> that does NOT make me a racist!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am sensing sacrasm here, at least I hope I am.  But, I will play, if not a racist, what do your views make you?
Click to expand...


Are you playing his game with him?

Rikules is no conservative.  Never has been and never will be.  He's smearing good people with that post and deliberately.  He's stooping to the level of TDM.

Immie


----------



## Ravi

Moon said:


> VaYank5150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> thats what i was thinking as i read his post
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is simply THAT prevalent down there.  Hell, I stopped at a rest area between AL and MS and there was a group of guys unloading from a minivan and every one of them had a black t-shirt on, with mutliple KKK memebers dressed in their white bed sheets and the logo "The Original Boys In the Hood" on them....I couldn't believe it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah, I call bullshit.
Click to expand...


Google


----------



## Moon

Ravi said:


> Moon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> VaYank5150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is simply THAT prevalent down there.  Hell, I stopped at a rest area between AL and MS and there was a group of guys unloading from a minivan and every one of them had a black t-shirt on, with mutliple KKK memebers dressed in their white bed sheets and the logo "The Original Boys In the Hood" on them....I couldn't believe it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, I call bullshit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Google
Click to expand...


Friends of yours?


----------



## Kat

Moon said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Moon said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, I call bullshit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Google
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Friends of yours?
Click to expand...


----------



## PLYMCO_PILGRIM

boedicca said:


> The Daily Caller's "JournoList" expose has finally resolved the matter:
> 
> Based on Spencer Ackerman's tactic:
> 
> _*&#8220;If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game they&#8217;ve put upon us,&#8221; Ackerman wrote on the Journolist listserv in April 2008. &#8220;Instead, take one of them &#8212; Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares &#8212; and call them racists.&#8221;*_
> 
> Conservatives Karl Rove and Fred Barnes respond to Journolist &#8216;racist&#8217; post | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment
> 
> 
> It's out in the open now.  The Left uses the racist accusation against the Right, the Tea Party, Conservatives, the GOP...  Anyone who critiques prominent lefties or their programs will be falsely attacked as a racist as a diversionary tactic.
> 
> More evidence is Sherrod's hateful comment regarding the GOP to Media Matters.
> 
> So here's the thing you lefties should understand:  we're not falling for it.



Nope not falling for it.


----------



## midcan5

"If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game they&#8217;ve put upon us. Instead, take one of them &#8212; Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares &#8212; and call them racists. Ask: why do they have such a deep-seated problem with a black politician who unites the country? What lurks behind those problems? This makes *them* sputter with rage, which in turn leads to overreaction and self-destruction."  full quote from Atlantic

It is curious that some opinion writer's defensive position means so much to conservatives?  Defending Obama during the Wright incident is long past, but because it is racially packed issue it never goes away. The story lasted through the whole campaign so pretending MSM didn't cover it is a denial of reality. 

I also find this funny because the 'no, you are' tactic is the only tactic used by most wingnuts on usmb et al.  I guess they have a patent on this comeback, or is that nothing more to say. LOL

This is another non story as Rome burns. Racism is in behavior, it is in results, denying it doesn't make it disappear. Imagine a moment in life when caught in a wrong and your argument is not what you did, but that you are not what you did. That is politics today, racism can be used - and it has been used since LBJ by republicans - but it must be subtle and deniable. Weird stuff. 

Good piece here: Journolist scandal: Liberals planned open letter - War Room - Salon.com


Journolist Liberal Conspiracy Story: Scandal or Overblown? | The Atlantic Wire


----------



## Ravi

Moon said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Moon said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, I call bullshit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Google
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Friends of yours?
Click to expand...

 No, but there are some in the area.


----------



## Moon

Ravi said:


> Moon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> Google
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Friends of yours?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, but there are some in the area.
Click to expand...


I never said there weren't people in the south who harbored racist feelings.  I'm challenging the notion that it is rampant, widespread or that there are "huge numbers".  You posting links to some of your favorite websites really doesn't prove anything one way or another.


----------



## Moon

midcan5 said:


> "If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game theyve put upon us. Instead, take one of them  Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares  and call them racists. Ask: why do they have such a deep-seated problem with a black politician who unites the country? What lurks behind those problems? This makes *them* sputter with rage, which in turn leads to overreaction and self-destruction."  full quote from Atlantic
> 
> It is curious that some opinion writer's defensive position means so much to conservatives?  Defending Obama during the Wright incident is long past, but because it is racially packed issue it never goes away. The story lasted through the whole campaign so pretending MSM didn't cover it is a denial of reality.
> 
> I also find this funny because the 'no, you are' tactic is the only tactic used by most wingnuts on usmb et al.  I guess they have a patent on this comeback, or is that nothing more to say. LOL
> 
> This is another non story as Rome burns. Racism is in behavior, it is in results, denying it doesn't make it disappear. Imagine a moment in life when caught in a wrong and your argument is not what you did, but that you are not what you did. That is politics today, racism can be used - and it has been used since LBJ by republicans - but it must be subtle and deniable. Weird stuff.
> 
> Good piece here: Journolist scandal: Liberals planned open letter - War Room - Salon.com
> 
> 
> Journolist Liberal Conspiracy Story: Scandal or Overblown? | The Atlantic Wire



Jeremiah Wright is a racist and spoke about racist topics in his church.  Fact.

Obama attended Wright's church for over 20 years.  Fact.

Fred Barnes and Karl Rove are racists.  Lies.

See the difference?  Do you think it's acceptable to tell lies about your political opponents because of uncomfortable facts about your guy?


----------



## Kat

Moon said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Moon said:
> 
> 
> 
> Friends of yours?
> 
> 
> 
> No, but there are some in the area.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I never said there weren't people in the south who harbored racist feelings.  I'm challenging the notion that it is rampant, widespread or that there are "huge numbers".  You posting links to some of your favorite websites really doesn't prove anything one way or another.
Click to expand...


I looked in there. Clicked a couple...couldn't find any directed to the south (but only clicked a couple, and of course I know the klan was/is in the south..but not south only). However the 2nd one I clicked went to Charles Manson. He happens to originally be from Ohio. I didn't know he was a klansman, but wouldn't surprise me.


----------



## Ravi

Moon said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Moon said:
> 
> 
> 
> Friends of yours?
> 
> 
> 
> No, but there are some in the area.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I never said there weren't people in the south who harbored racist feelings.  I'm challenging the notion that it is rampant, widespread or that there are "huge numbers".  You posting links to some of your favorite websites really doesn't prove anything one way or another.
Click to expand...

Actually...you said you called bullshit and I proved you wrong.

Quit whining.


----------



## Moon

Ravi said:


> Moon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, but there are some in the area.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I never said there weren't people in the south who harbored racist feelings.  I'm challenging the notion that it is rampant, widespread or that there are "huge numbers".  You posting links to some of your favorite websites really doesn't prove anything one way or another.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Actually...you said you called bullshit and I proved you wrong.
> 
> Quit whining.
Click to expand...


Actually, I called bullshit on VaYank's rest stop story, so what exactly is it you think you proved me wrong about?.


----------



## DiveCon

Moon said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Moon said:
> 
> 
> 
> I never said there weren't people in the south who harbored racist feelings.  I'm challenging the notion that it is rampant, widespread or that there are "huge numbers".  You posting links to some of your favorite websites really doesn't prove anything one way or another.
> 
> 
> 
> Actually...you said you called bullshit and I proved you wrong.
> 
> Quit whining.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually, I called bullshit on VaYank's rest stop story, so what exactly is it you think you proved me wrong about?.
Click to expand...

ravi has her own little world that is devoid of reality


----------



## Ravi

Moon said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Moon said:
> 
> 
> 
> I never said there weren't people in the south who harbored racist feelings.  I'm challenging the notion that it is rampant, widespread or that there are "huge numbers".  You posting links to some of your favorite websites really doesn't prove anything one way or another.
> 
> 
> 
> Actually...you said you called bullshit and I proved you wrong.
> 
> Quit whining.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually, I called bullshit on VaYank's rest stop story, so what exactly is it you think you proved me wrong about?.
Click to expand...

His rest story stop. The south is full of white supremists.


----------



## Immanuel

Ravi said:


> Moon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> Actually...you said you called bullshit and I proved you wrong.
> 
> Quit whining.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, I called bullshit on VaYank's rest stop story, so what exactly is it you think you proved me wrong about?.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> His rest story stop. The south is full of white supremists.
Click to expand...


I don't know if I can say the South is full of them, but I can say that there are some racists in Florida and Florida isn't even supposed to be the worst.  I've worked with some.  It is pretty sad indeed.  The worst part about it is that they don't have a clue that they are.

Immie


----------



## Moon

Ravi said:


> Moon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> Actually...you said you called bullshit and I proved you wrong.
> 
> Quit whining.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, I called bullshit on VaYank's rest stop story, so what exactly is it you think you proved me wrong about?.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> His rest story stop. The south is full of white supremists.
Click to expand...


So you were at the rest stop with him?  Do you have pictures?



Ravi said:


> The south is full of white supremists.



Prove it.  And I mean real proof, not a list of websites from a google search.  And nothing from more than 10 years ago, because I'm talking about present day, not the 1850s.

Also, you need to quantify "full of".  Is that 100%?  10 million?  Back up whatever answer you provide.

All you've shown so far is your own bigotry, so I'm happy to provide you with an opportunity to prove you're right.  Shouldn't be difficult since you seem so sure of yourself.


----------



## DiveCon

Ravi said:


> Moon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> Actually...you said you called bullshit and I proved you wrong.
> 
> Quit whining.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, I called bullshit on VaYank's rest stop story, so what exactly is it you think you proved me wrong about?.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> His rest story stop. The south is full of white supremists.
Click to expand...

yeah, and i suppose Boston, Chicago, NYC, Los Angeles are all racial havens of purity


----------



## Ravi

Moon said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Moon said:
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, I called bullshit on VaYank's rest stop story, so what exactly is it you think you proved me wrong about?.
> 
> 
> 
> His rest story stop. The south is full of white supremists.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So you were at the rest stop with him?  Do you have pictures?
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> The south is full of white supremists.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Prove it.  And I mean real proof, not a list of websites from a google search.  And nothing from more than 10 years ago, because I'm talking about present day, not the 1850s.
> 
> Also, you need to quantify "full of".  Is that 100%?  10 million?  Back up whatever answer you provide.
> 
> All you've shown so far is your own bigotry, so I'm happy to provide you with an opportunity to prove you're right.  Shouldn't be difficult since you seem so sure of yourself.
Click to expand...

Here's one group. You can pretend they don't exist, it matters not to me.

The link I provided to google already proved you wrong.

White Pride Group Urges Tea Party to Flaunt Its Bigotry - Miami News - Riptide 2.0


----------



## Ravi

DiveCon said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Moon said:
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, I called bullshit on VaYank's rest stop story, so what exactly is it you think you proved me wrong about?.
> 
> 
> 
> His rest story stop. The south is full of white supremists.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> yeah, and i suppose Boston, Chicago, NYC, Los Angeles are all racial havens of purity
Click to expand...

I never made that claim.


----------



## boedicca

Ravi said:


> Moon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> His rest story stop. The south is full of white supremists.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So you were at the rest stop with him?  Do you have pictures?
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> The south is full of white supremists.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Prove it.  And I mean real proof, not a list of websites from a google search.  And nothing from more than 10 years ago, because I'm talking about present day, not the 1850s.
> 
> Also, you need to quantify "full of".  Is that 100%?  10 million?  Back up whatever answer you provide.
> 
> All you've shown so far is your own bigotry, so I'm happy to provide you with an opportunity to prove you're right.  Shouldn't be difficult since you seem so sure of yourself.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Here's one group. You can pretend they don't exist, it matters not to me.
> 
> The link I provided to google already proved you wrong.
> 
> White Pride Group Urges Tea Party to Flaunt Its Bigotry - Miami News - Riptide 2.0
Click to expand...




So somebody set up a blog on Wordpress asking the Tea Party Movement to support their bigotry, and the Tea Party has not done so.

You point is?


----------



## Ravi

boedicca said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Moon said:
> 
> 
> 
> So you were at the rest stop with him?  Do you have pictures?
> 
> 
> 
> Prove it.  And I mean real proof, not a list of websites from a google search.  And nothing from more than 10 years ago, because I'm talking about present day, not the 1850s.
> 
> Also, you need to quantify "full of".  Is that 100%?  10 million?  Back up whatever answer you provide.
> 
> All you've shown so far is your own bigotry, so I'm happy to provide you with an opportunity to prove you're right.  Shouldn't be difficult since you seem so sure of yourself.
> 
> 
> 
> Here's one group. You can pretend they don't exist, it matters not to me.
> 
> The link I provided to google already proved you wrong.
> 
> White Pride Group Urges Tea Party to Flaunt Its Bigotry - Miami News - Riptide 2.0
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So somebody set up a blog on Wordpress asking the Tea Party Movement to support their bigotry, and the Tea Party has not done so.
> 
> You point is?
Click to expand...

That there are white supremists in Florida...btw, this is the group Trent Lott used to be associated with.


----------



## DiveCon

Ravi said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> His rest story stop. The south is full of white supremists.
> 
> 
> 
> yeah, and i suppose Boston, Chicago, NYC, Los Angeles are all racial havens of purity
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I never made that claim.
Click to expand...

and the south isn't "FULL" of them either
you DO understand the meaning of FULL, right?


----------



## Ravi

DiveCon said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> yeah, and i suppose Boston, Chicago, NYC, Los Angeles are all racial havens of purity
> 
> 
> 
> I never made that claim.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> and the south isn't "FULL" of them either
> you DO understand the meaning of FULL, right?
Click to expand...

Yes...I forgot how literal you people are. There are many white supremists in the south.


----------



## boedicca

Ravi said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> Here's one group. You can pretend they don't exist, it matters not to me.
> 
> The link I provided to google already proved you wrong.
> 
> White Pride Group Urges Tea Party to Flaunt Its Bigotry - Miami News - Riptide 2.0
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So somebody set up a blog on Wordpress asking the Tea Party Movement to support their bigotry, and the Tea Party has not done so.
> 
> You point is?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That there are white supremists in Florida...btw, this is the group Trent Lott used to be associated with.
Click to expand...




I heard that Robert Byrd used to hang out with a bunch of them as well.


Bada bing.


----------



## Moon

Ravi said:


> Moon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> His rest story stop. The south is full of white supremists.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So you were at the rest stop with him?  Do you have pictures?
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> The south is full of white supremists.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Prove it.  And I mean real proof, not a list of websites from a google search.  And nothing from more than 10 years ago, because I'm talking about present day, not the 1850s.
> 
> Also, you need to quantify "full of".  Is that 100%?  10 million?  Back up whatever answer you provide.
> 
> All you've shown so far is your own bigotry, so I'm happy to provide you with an opportunity to prove you're right.  Shouldn't be difficult since you seem so sure of yourself.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Here's one group. You can pretend they don't exist, it matters not to me.
> 
> The link I provided to google already proved you wrong.
> 
> White Pride Group Urges Tea Party to Flaunt Its Bigotry - Miami News - Riptide 2.0
Click to expand...


I don't doubt that group exists, and they appear to be a bunch of idiots to me.  I notice they have chapters in California, Illinois, Indiana, Maryland, Nevada, New York and Ohio.  Are you sure you want to use them as proof that "the south is full of white supremists"?

You've actually proven nothing at all.  Shall I wait for your supporting evidence?  Or do you have pictures that support VaYank's rest stop story since that was what I was calling bullshit on?


----------



## Jarhead

boedicca said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> So somebody set up a blog on Wordpress asking the Tea Party Movement to support their bigotry, and the Tea Party has not done so.
> 
> You point is?
> 
> 
> 
> That there are white supremists in Florida...btw, this is the group Trent Lott used to be associated with.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I heard that Robert Byrd used to hang out with a bunch of them as well.
> 
> 
> Bada bing.
Click to expand...


And the moral of the story?

Our politicians have US duking it out for them.

They all need to go. Every dam last one of them.


----------



## Ravi

boedicca said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> So somebody set up a blog on Wordpress asking the Tea Party Movement to support their bigotry, and the Tea Party has not done so.
> 
> You point is?
> 
> 
> 
> That there are white supremists in Florida...btw, this is the group Trent Lott used to be associated with.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I heard that Robert Byrd used to hang out with a bunch of them as well.
> 
> 
> Bada bing.
Click to expand...

No, that was the KKK. But Byrd eventually quit them, Lott continued his ties.


----------



## Jarhead

Ravi said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> That there are white supremists in Florida...btw, this is the group Trent Lott used to be associated with.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I heard that Robert Byrd used to hang out with a bunch of them as well.
> 
> 
> Bada bing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, that was the KKK. But Byrd eventually quit them, Lott continued his ties.
Click to expand...


And OJ never committed another murder again.


----------



## Moon

Ravi said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> I never made that claim.
> 
> 
> 
> and the south isn't "FULL" of them either
> you DO understand the meaning of FULL, right?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes...I forgot how literal you people are. There are many white supremists in the south.
Click to expand...


Quantify "many" please.  If you're going to make accusations, I think it's important we know all the facts.

Thanks.


----------



## DiveCon

Ravi said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> I never made that claim.
> 
> 
> 
> and the south isn't "FULL" of them either
> you DO understand the meaning of FULL, right?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes...I forgot how literal you people are. There are many white supremists in the south.
Click to expand...

can you quantify that "many" with a percentage, or number of some kind?


----------



## boedicca

Ravi said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> That there are white supremists in Florida...btw, this is the group Trent Lott used to be associated with.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I heard that Robert Byrd used to hang out with a bunch of them as well.
> 
> 
> Bada bing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, that was the KKK. But Byrd eventually quit them, Lott continued his ties.
Click to expand...




The KKK are not White Supremacists?


If you are going to criticize Lott, who stepped down from a position of power, for associating with none racists, then perhaps you should apply the same standard to Obama who has surrounded himself with racists.


----------



## Jarhead

Moon said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> and the south isn't "FULL" of them either
> you DO understand the meaning of FULL, right?
> 
> 
> 
> Yes...I forgot how literal you people are. There are many white supremists in the south.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Quantify "many" please.  If you're going to make accusations, I think it's important we know all the facts.
> 
> Thanks.
Click to expand...


Well, 

Seeing as 5 signs with racial connotations out of tens of thousands of tea partyers is deemed as many....

I would say 5 out of tens of thousands is many.


----------



## Jarhead

boedicca said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> I heard that Robert Byrd used to hang out with a bunch of them as well.
> 
> 
> Bada bing.
> 
> 
> 
> No, that was the KKK. But Byrd eventually quit them, Lott continued his ties.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The KKK are not White Supremacists?
Click to expand...


Nope...becuase democrats belong to the KKK


----------



## Kat

jarhead said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> no, that was the kkk. But byrd eventually quit them, lott continued his ties.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the kkk are not white supremacists?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> nope...becuase democrats belong to the kkk
Click to expand...



bingo!


----------



## boedicca

Jarhead said:


> Moon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes...I forgot how literal you people are. There are many white supremists in the south.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quantify "many" please.  If you're going to make accusations, I think it's important we know all the facts.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well,
> 
> Seeing as 5 signs with racial connotations out of tens of thousands of tea partyers is deemed as many....
> 
> I would say 5 out of tens of thousands is many.
Click to expand...



Correction, millions of tea partiers.


----------



## Jarhead

boedicca said:


> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Moon said:
> 
> 
> 
> Quantify "many" please.  If you're going to make accusations, I think it's important we know all the facts.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well,
> 
> Seeing as 5 signs with racial connotations out of tens of thousands of tea partyers is deemed as many....
> 
> I would say 5 out of tens of thousands is many.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Correction, millions of tea partiers.
Click to expand...


Yes, but I was not in the mood for the defelction and her start to debate how there is "No way there are millions of tea partyers"....

SO I went with a more agreeable number.


----------



## boedicca

Jarhead said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well,
> 
> Seeing as 5 signs with racial connotations out of tens of thousands of tea partyers is deemed as many....
> 
> I would say 5 out of tens of thousands is many.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Correction, millions of tea partiers.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes, but I was not in the mood for the defelction and her start to debate how there is "No way there are millions of tea partyers"....
> 
> SO I went with a more agreeable number.
Click to expand...




Just send them to the Gallup Poll.  28% of Americans sympathized with the Tea Party in the April 2010 poll.  I suspect that ratio has increased since then.

Tea Partiers Are Fairly Mainstream in Their Demographics


----------



## Ravi

Jarhead said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> I heard that Robert Byrd used to hang out with a bunch of them as well.
> 
> 
> Bada bing.
> 
> 
> 
> No, that was the KKK. But Byrd eventually quit them, Lott continued his ties.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And OJ never committed another murder again.
Click to expand...

What does that have to do with this discussion?


----------



## Ravi

boedicca said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> I heard that Robert Byrd used to hang out with a bunch of them as well.
> 
> 
> Bada bing.
> 
> 
> 
> No, that was the KKK. But Byrd eventually quit them, Lott continued his ties.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The KKK are not White Supremacists?
> 
> 
> If you are going to criticize Lott, who stepped down from a position of power, for associating with none racists, then perhaps you should apply the same standard to Obama who has surrounded himself with racists.
Click to expand...



Here we go again...Obama is a racist...I imagine that is the platform the Republicans will run on judging from this past week.


----------



## boedicca

Using your standards, he is.


----------



## Jarhead

Ravi said:


> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, that was the KKK. But Byrd eventually quit them, Lott continued his ties.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And OJ never committed another murder again.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What does that have to do with this discussion?
Click to expand...


There are certain actions that you can just never give a pass to.

A man makes a mistake and kills someone while drunk driving? Yep. In time, you give him a pass. It was a horrible mistake and he learned from it. Itr was not aoconscious decision. He truly believed he can drive safely. (And I lostr a relative to a drunk driver). It was not premeditated

A man conciously murders someone out of revenge? Not a mistake. A conscious decision. He should never get a pass. It was premeditated.

A man not only hates black people but is part of a group that admittedly tries to hurt and kill black people? That is not a "mistake". That was a conscious decision made and he continued with for a period of time. It was premediated. He knew what he was doing wheile he did it. That is unforgiveable and he should never be given a pass. Much less be allowed to be part of our law making.


----------



## Ravi

I'm replying to Jarhead, but the quote function doesn't seem to be working.

I disagree. Belonging to a racist organization while a young man isn't quite the same thing as cold-bloodedly murdering your wife and her friend because of a jealous rage and an obvious anger/entitlement problem.

I think that people can get past bad things they've done in the past...if they are remorseful. Byrd seemed remorseful, obviously OJ did not.

That said, I doubt I would have ever voted for Robert Byrd simply because I could never be sure. But enough black people showed up at his funeral that it seems he made amends.


----------



## Kat

Ravi said:


> I'm replying to Jarhead, but the quote function doesn't seem to be working.
> 
> I disagree. Belonging to a racist organization while a young man isn't quite the same thing as cold-bloodedly murdering your wife and her friend because of a jealous rage and an obvious anger/entitlement problem.
> 
> I think that people can get past bad things they've done in the past...if they are remorseful. Byrd seemed remorseful, obviously OJ did not.
> 
> That said, I doubt I would have ever voted for Robert Byrd simply because I could never be sure. But enough black people showed up at his funeral that it seems he made amends.





Quote seems to be working again.
You have a bit of a point I guess...especially the part about never being sure about Byrd.

A lot of blacks showed up for George Wallace too..do you think he was racist?


What about the proof Moon wants?


----------



## Ravi

boedicca said:


> Using your standards, he is.


What are my standards?


----------



## Ravi

Kat said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm replying to Jarhead, but the quote function doesn't seem to be working.
> 
> I disagree. Belonging to a racist organization while a young man isn't quite the same thing as cold-bloodedly murdering your wife and her friend because of a jealous rage and an obvious anger/entitlement problem.
> 
> I think that people can get past bad things they've done in the past...if they are remorseful. Byrd seemed remorseful, obviously OJ did not.
> 
> That said, I doubt I would have ever voted for Robert Byrd simply because I could never be sure. But enough black people showed up at his funeral that it seems he made amends.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quote seems to be working again.
> You have a bit of a point I guess...especially the part about never being sure about Byrd.
> 
> A lot of blacks showed up for George Wallace too..do you think he was racist?
> 
> 
> What about the proof Moon wants?
Click to expand...

I'm not interested in looking for it. If he chooses to believe other wise he is welcome to do so.


----------



## Jarhead

Ravi said:


> I'm replying to Jarhead, but the quote function doesn't seem to be working.
> 
> I disagree. Belonging to a racist organization while a young man isn't quite the same thing as cold-bloodedly murdering your wife and her friend because of a jealous rage and an obvious anger/entitlement problem.
> 
> I think that people can get past bad things they've done in the past...if they are remorseful. Byrd seemed remorseful, obviously OJ did not.
> 
> That said, I doubt I would have ever voted for Robert Byrd simply because I could never be sure. But enough black people showed up at his funeral that it seems he made amends.



But that is my point.

OJ did not seem remoreseful. But if he did? Do we give him a pass?

Why should anyone not think that Byrd showed remorse for political expediency?

Bear in mind...he was not a kid. He was an adult when he belonged to the KKK.

It is easy to give a pass to someone who shows remorse. But if they have the ability to hate, then they have the ability to fool people as well.

And finally, if a man murders someone (pre-mediated) and he shows great remorse. And he is then offered all kinds of money to help those get over their "murdering" tendencies, was it the money and the fame that prompted him to show remorse?

Sorry, I believe you must suffer the consequences of your actions. I believe Byrd was rewarded for them. He is actually put on a pedestal for OVERCOMING those hateful feelings.

At best, he should have been ignored and allowed to go on his merry way with no fame or fortune.


----------



## Ravi

Byrd didn't do anything illegal, iirc. Simpson did.

There is nothing wrong with being happy that people overcome their own bad nature.


----------



## Kat

Ravi said:


> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm replying to Jarhead, but the quote function doesn't seem to be working.
> 
> I disagree. Belonging to a racist organization while a young man isn't quite the same thing as cold-bloodedly murdering your wife and her friend because of a jealous rage and an obvious anger/entitlement problem.
> 
> I think that people can get past bad things they've done in the past...if they are remorseful. Byrd seemed remorseful, obviously OJ did not.
> 
> That said, I doubt I would have ever voted for Robert Byrd simply because I could never be sure. But enough black people showed up at his funeral that it seems he made amends.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quote seems to be working again.
> You have a bit of a point I guess...especially the part about never being sure about Byrd.
> 
> A lot of blacks showed up for George Wallace too..do you think he was racist?
> 
> 
> What about the proof Moon wants?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'm not interested in looking for it. If he chooses to believe other wise he is welcome to do so.
Click to expand...




Okay, then what about your opinion of George Wallace? Do you think he was a racist?


----------



## Ravi

Kat said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> Quote seems to be working again.
> You have a bit of a point I guess...especially the part about never being sure about Byrd.
> 
> A lot of blacks showed up for George Wallace too..do you think he was racist?
> 
> 
> What about the proof Moon wants?
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not interested in looking for it. If he chooses to believe other wise he is welcome to do so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Okay, then what about your opinion of George Wallace? Do you think he was a racist?
Click to expand...

I'd have to research it...I know he has that reputation but didn't he also eventually become a better person?


----------



## Kat

Ravi said:


> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not interested in looking for it. If he chooses to believe other wise he is welcome to do so.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Okay, then what about your opinion of George Wallace? Do you think he was a racist?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'd have to research it...I know he has that reputation but didn't he also eventually become a better person?
Click to expand...


After he was gunned down, and suffered many years of pain, and got old, he apologized. Does that make what he did any less horrible?


----------



## Ravi

Kat said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> Okay, then what about your opinion of George Wallace? Do you think he was a racist?
> 
> 
> 
> I'd have to research it...I know he has that reputation but didn't he also eventually become a better person?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> After he was gunned down, and suffered many years of pain, and got old, he apologized. Does that make what he did any less horrible?
Click to expand...

Maybe...like I said, I'd have to research it. Was he in your opinion truly remorseful? That counts for something.


----------



## Moon

Ravi said:


> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm replying to Jarhead, but the quote function doesn't seem to be working.
> 
> I disagree. Belonging to a racist organization while a young man isn't quite the same thing as cold-bloodedly murdering your wife and her friend because of a jealous rage and an obvious anger/entitlement problem.
> 
> I think that people can get past bad things they've done in the past...if they are remorseful. Byrd seemed remorseful, obviously OJ did not.
> 
> That said, I doubt I would have ever voted for Robert Byrd simply because I could never be sure. But enough black people showed up at his funeral that it seems he made amends.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quote seems to be working again.
> You have a bit of a point I guess...especially the part about never being sure about Byrd.
> 
> A lot of blacks showed up for George Wallace too..do you think he was racist?
> 
> 
> What about the proof Moon wants?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'm not interested in looking for it. If he chooses to believe other wise he is welcome to do so.
Click to expand...


What I believe is that you made a couple of bigoted remarks and now you can't back them up.  You seemed so sure of your rightness, I figured it would be a simple task for you.  Maybe you'd rather retract what you said earlier?  Honestly, if you can't back it up, you should retract it, otherwise you like like someone who is either lying or doesn't know what they're talking about.


----------



## Immanuel

Ravi said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> Using your standards, he is.
> 
> 
> 
> What are my standards?
Click to expand...


You have standards?  

Immie


----------



## Kat

Ravi said:


> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'd have to research it...I know he has that reputation but didn't he also eventually become a better person?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> After he was gunned down, and suffered many years of pain, and got old, he apologized. Does that make what he did any less horrible?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Maybe...like I said, I'd have to research it. Was he in your opinion truly remorseful? That counts for something.
Click to expand...



I honestly can't answer that.  It took him 33 years to do it, which meant he pretty much spent his entire life that way. He apologized 2 years before he died.


----------



## sitarro

NYcarbineer said:


> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> The right will not be able to force the admin to react to these manufacctured stroies anymore.
> 
> This last case will make it impossible for them to FORCE immediate action from the WH.
> 
> You guys screwed your pooch of false outrage.
> 
> Now people will be required (even you righties) to examine these cases slowly and get all the imfo.
> 
> 
> I think this is a sign that the right is desperate to negatively effect the midterms because they know they are not going to be able to claim they have a mandate with the few seats they gain.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You babble too much.
> 
> So the right forced immediate action from the WH?
> 
> Thats pretty sad. A blogger forced the White House to act without thinking.
> 
> Seems to me the White House has a bigger issue. Maybe they should stop reading blogs as fact....you know....LIKE YOU DO!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Foxnews reported and commented on the dishonestly edited tape as fact.  You agree then that Foxnews should not be accepted as a credible source of news?
Click to expand...


It wasn't edited dimwit, the entire 43 minutes weren't shown........ hell, who wants to watch 43 minutes of that idiot.


----------



## MaggieMae

Moon said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> I never said there was no racism. You did say ''commonly heard''. I grew up here, and I am saying I didn't commonly hear. And I don't.
> 
> And btw..this is 2010.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I say "commonly heard" because I was obviously a Yankee so using the term "darkie" was softer in my presence. You wouldn't be trying to convince us that there aren't still huge numbers of southern whites who use all sorts of slanderous and insulting denigrations toward black people, would you? If so, then I have several websites where you can see for yourself the number of people whose bigotry has been bubbling up and they now have open forums where they can spew their unadulterated hatred for blacks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You haven't been in the South in 45 or so years, and yet you think you're an expert on present day racial attitudes here, and completely discount the experiences of people that live here now?
Click to expand...


I've already alluded to the fact that racial bias in the South is better than it was back then. And where have I "completely discounted" anything? Good grief, you people come here and make blanket inaccurate observations that really piss me off.


----------



## DiveCon

MaggieMae said:


> Moon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> I say "commonly heard" because I was obviously a Yankee so using the term "darkie" was softer in my presence. You wouldn't be trying to convince us that there aren't still huge numbers of southern whites who use all sorts of slanderous and insulting denigrations toward black people, would you? If so, then I have several websites where you can see for yourself the number of people whose bigotry has been bubbling up and they now have open forums where they can spew their unadulterated hatred for blacks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You haven't been in the South in 45 or so years, and yet you think you're an expert on present day racial attitudes here, and completely discount the experiences of people that live here now?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I've already alluded to the fact that racial bias in the South is better than it was back then. And where have I "completely discounted" anything? Good grief, you people come here and make blanket inaccurate observations that really piss me off.
Click to expand...

trust me, the racists in the south didn't soften their racism for Yankees
again, i don't broad brush all Southerners as racist the way so many have in this thread
but there are still POCKETS of IGNORANCE all over this country, not just in the south


----------



## boedicca

Ravi said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> Using your standards, he is.
> 
> 
> 
> What are my standards?
Click to expand...


It's pretty clear to anyone who reads your posts.   You should be able to figure it out on your own.


----------



## Moon

MaggieMae said:


> Moon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> I say "commonly heard" because I was obviously a Yankee so using the term "darkie" was softer in my presence. You wouldn't be trying to convince us that there aren't still huge numbers of southern whites who use all sorts of slanderous and insulting denigrations toward black people, would you? If so, then I have several websites where you can see for yourself the number of people whose bigotry has been bubbling up and they now have open forums where they can spew their unadulterated hatred for blacks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You haven't been in the South in 45 or so years, and yet you think you're an expert on present day racial attitudes here, and completely discount the experiences of people that live here now?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I've already alluded to the fact that racial bias in the South is better than it was back then. And where have I "completely discounted" anything? Good grief, you people come here and make blanket inaccurate observations that really piss me off.
Click to expand...


Then stop trying so hard to make those of us that live here now look wrong when viewed through your 45 year old prism.  Here's a refresher for you, since you seem to ignore your own words:


			
				MaggieMae said:
			
		

> You wouldn't be trying to convince us that there aren't still huge numbers of southern whites who use all sorts of slanderous and insulting denigrations toward black people, would you? If so, then I have several websites where you can see for yourself the number of people whose bigotry has been bubbling up and they now have open forums where they can spew their unadulterated hatred for blacks.



Now tell me you weren't trying to discount what other posters here have said.  

People making ignorant, bigoted statements piss me off.  I guess we're even.


----------



## Ravi

Kat said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> After he was gunned down, and suffered many years of pain, and got old, he apologized. Does that make what he did any less horrible?
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe...like I said, I'd have to research it. Was he in your opinion truly remorseful? That counts for something.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I honestly can't answer that.  It took him 33 years to do it, which meant he pretty much spent his entire life that way. He apologized 2 years before he died.
Click to expand...

I just read through his bio on wikipedia and can say that there is no way I would have ever voted for him. I don't know if he was really sorry or not...


----------



## Ravi

boedicca said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> Using your standards, he is.
> 
> 
> 
> What are my standards?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's pretty clear to anyone who reads your posts.   You should be able to figure it out on your own.
Click to expand...

I know what they are but I was curious to know your opinion since you remarked on it.

But it was probably just a dig, so no biggie.


----------



## The T

boedicca said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> I heard that Robert Byrd used to hang out with a bunch of them as well.
> 
> 
> Bada bing.
> 
> 
> 
> No, that was the KKK. But Byrd eventually quit them, Lott continued his ties.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The KKK are not White Supremacists?
> 
> 
> If you are going to criticize Lott, who stepped down from a position of power, for associating with none racists, then perhaps you should apply the same standard to Obama who has surrounded himself with racists.
Click to expand...

 
...And worse...


----------



## Kat

Ravi said:


> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe...like I said, I'd have to research it. Was he in your opinion truly remorseful? That counts for something.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I honestly can't answer that.  It took him 33 years to do it, which meant he pretty much spent his entire life that way. He apologized 2 years before he died.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I just read through his bio on wikipedia and can say that there is no way I would have ever voted for him. I don't know if he was really sorry or not...
Click to expand...



Then we are on the same page here.


----------



## MaggieMae

Jarhead said:


> VaYank5150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> I guess your news media is not up on the news?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bush bailed out the banks, but they are still privately owned, yes?
> Bush AND Obama bailed out some automobile makers, but they are still privately owned, yes?
> The lending instituations...see my remarks on the banks
> Healthcare has not been taken over by anyone, and my health insurance carrier, is still privately owned.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Like I said...it seems your News Media is not up on the news.
> 
> GM is majority owned by the government.
> The government made a decision that priority holders of chrysler stock are the ones to take the loss (that is government control of prtivate CONTRACTUAL decisions)
> Both auto companies are doing far better the first quarter of 2010 than they did in all of 2008-09. There is practically no debate anymore than unemployment would have been far, far worse if those two major companies were allowed to go under. Greater unemployment equals more people needing government services (also at taxpayer expense). Which is worse?
> 
> The lending institutions can no longer keep the private and confidential information of their clients as private and confidential. They have lost that right to the government. That is government control.
> Where do you get that idea? And which part of the financial reform package can that information be found? Are you sure you're not confusing disclosure of hedge fund investor information when manipulation is suspected?
> 
> Whereas you were promised that you will be able to keep your docotor if you wish, it has been disclosed that the promise was not true. The government has made it so you very well may NOT be able tomake your own decision as it pertains to your medical care.
> Again, where has "it been disclosed" that you can't keep your own doctor?
> 
> Losing control to the government does not mean losing OWNERSHIP to the government.
> 
> It means losing control to the government even if you retain ownership.
Click to expand...


......


----------



## boedicca

Here's the thing about Big Government interference that MM doesn't acknowledge:

We will never know how much better things would have been if they hadn't mucked things up.

What we do know is that at this point after the 1981 recession, economic growth was more than double what it is now and real private sector jobs were being created.   The difference?  Reagan cut taxes instead of increasing the size of the federal government as a percent of BDP by an Obamanian 25%.

Obamanomics = EPIC FAIL


----------



## MaggieMae

Jarhead said:


> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well, you cant deny that the south typcast itself 160 years ago. No?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No. I won't deny at all. But, I know what it is now...I live here. I wasn't alive 160 years ago!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yep. And neither was I.
Click to expand...


This may come as a surprise, but neither was I.


----------



## MaggieMae

Moon said:


> VaYank5150 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Moon said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, I call bullshit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I kid you not.  I swear if that had taken place at a rest area in Virginia, I truly believe someone would have gotten an ass whoopin' at the very least.  But, these guys were so non-chalant about it, that it seemed as if it were simply accepted behavior down there...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Never seen it or anything like it, and I've lived in areas where the Klan used to be pretty active.
Click to expand...


I don't think he was describing true Klanmen. Probably just a bunch of yahoos acting like smartasses.


----------



## NYcarbineer

boedicca said:


> Here's the thing about Big Government interference that MM doesn't acknowledge:
> 
> We will never know how much better things would have been if they hadn't mucked things up.
> 
> What we do know is that at this point after the 1981 recession, economic growth was more than double what it is now and real private sector jobs were being created.   The difference?  Reagan cut taxes instead of increasing the size of the federal government as a percent of BDP by an Obamanian 25%.
> 
> Obamanomics = EPIC FAIL



The country was in recession from July of 1981 until November of 1982.  You don't know what you're talking about.

At this point in the Reagan presidency the country was IN recession  and Reagan was a couple months away from signing the biggest tax increase in history.


----------



## boedicca

The 1981-1982 recession lasted 16 months, and then a real recovery began.

This one started in late 2007, and given the unemployment levels which are not resulting in net increases in the employed, it's difficult to claim that we ever really entered a recovery.


Reagan CUT Taxes in 1981 (Economic Recovery Tax Act (ERTA)) - the superior GDP growth was due to these.


Here's the Quarterly GDP Growth Rate 

Q1 2008	-0.7%	
Q2 2008	1.5%	
Q3 2008	-2.7%	
Q4 2008	-5.4%	
Q1 2009	-6.4%	
Q2 2009	-0.7%	
Q3 2009	2.3%	
*Q4 2009	5.6%	
Q1 2010	2.7%	
Q2 2010	3.2%	est*



And here we have the 1981 Recession and recovery

Q3 1981	5.0%
Q4 1981	-4.9%
Q1 1982	-6.4%
Q3 1982	2.2%
Q4 1982	-1.5%
Q1 1983	0.3%
*Q2 1983	5.1%
Q3 1983	9.3%
Q4 1983	8.1%*


Not the differences in the last three quarters of each sequence.  There is a material difference.  Growth matters.   Something Obama clearly doesn't understand how to encourage.


----------



## MaggieMae

Immanuel said:
			
		

> Really? Like I said, I am getting the impression that you believe that only Fox and conservative websites are biased.
> 
> I have to say this and want to say it very politely so don't take this wrong, but in my book, that makes your research highly suspect.



So far, all I've done is take a headline, one that becomes a top news story everywhere, and copied how each headline is worded--not any text. The problem is the embellishment of those headlines which are directed to a desired audience that fits the political leaning of the particular news medium. This is a hypothetical example:

FINANCIAL REFORM BILL HURTS ECONOMY

FINANCIAL REFORM BILL - ANOTHER WIN FOR OBAMA

OBAMA SIGNS FINANCIAL REFORM INTO LAW

Only the last headline is unbiased accuracy. Now an unbiased report may be included in the text of each, and there may be some opinionators contributing to those news stories, but the headlines alone are often ONLY what people read and thereby form THEIR opinions around.


----------



## MaggieMae

Moon said:


> midcan5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> "If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game theyve put upon us. Instead, take one of them  Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares  and call them racists. Ask: why do they have such a deep-seated problem with a black politician who unites the country? What lurks behind those problems? This makes *them* sputter with rage, which in turn leads to overreaction and self-destruction."  full quote from Atlantic
> 
> It is curious that some opinion writer's defensive position means so much to conservatives?  Defending Obama during the Wright incident is long past, but because it is racially packed issue it never goes away. The story lasted through the whole campaign so pretending MSM didn't cover it is a denial of reality.
> 
> I also find this funny because the 'no, you are' tactic is the only tactic used by most wingnuts on usmb et al.  I guess they have a patent on this comeback, or is that nothing more to say. LOL
> 
> This is another non story as Rome burns. Racism is in behavior, it is in results, denying it doesn't make it disappear. Imagine a moment in life when caught in a wrong and your argument is not what you did, but that you are not what you did. That is politics today, racism can be used - and it has been used since LBJ by republicans - but it must be subtle and deniable. Weird stuff.
> 
> Good piece here: Journolist scandal: Liberals planned open letter - War Room - Salon.com
> 
> 
> Journolist Liberal Conspiracy Story: Scandal or Overblown? | The Atlantic Wire
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jeremiah Wright is a racist and spoke about racist topics in his church.  Fact.
> 
> Obama attended Wright's church for over 20 years.  Fact.
> 
> Fred Barnes and Karl Rove are racists.  Lies.
> 
> See the difference?  Do you think it's acceptable to tell lies about your political opponents because of uncomfortable facts about your guy?
Click to expand...


You're missing the point. If you want to discuss Obama and the Reverend, let's do that. But the ONLY reason this particular website was mentioned NOW is to deflect the fact that the right wing media (especially bloggers like Breitbart) *are* distorting facts. If Rove can convince people that, due to what this one man opined in that journal, liberals are indeed in the business of deliberately baiting people like Breitbart, then he (Rove) will have succeeded by tricking the mind into believing some liberal pulled a fast one.


----------



## MaggieMae

boedicca said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> So somebody set up a blog on Wordpress asking the Tea Party Movement to support their bigotry, and the Tea Party has not done so.
> 
> You point is?
> 
> 
> 
> That there are white supremists in Florida...btw, this is the group Trent Lott used to be associated with.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I heard that Robert Byrd used to hang out with a bunch of them as well.
> 
> 
> Bada bing.
Click to expand...


I was waiting for someone to bring him into the conversation. I'm oh so shocked that it was YOU!  
Bada bitch.


----------



## MaggieMae

Jarhead said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> That there are white supremists in Florida...btw, this is the group Trent Lott used to be associated with.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I heard that Robert Byrd used to hang out with a bunch of them as well.
> 
> 
> Bada bing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And the moral of the story?
> 
> Our politicians have US duking it out for them.
> 
> They all need to go. Every dam last one of them.
Click to expand...


And replaced with what? A bunch of newbies that will take, oh I don't know, a year before they get sucked in by the thousands of lobbyists too?


----------



## MaggieMae

Jarhead said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> I heard that Robert Byrd used to hang out with a bunch of them as well.
> 
> 
> Bada bing.
> 
> 
> 
> No, that was the KKK. But Byrd eventually quit them, Lott continued his ties.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And OJ never committed another murder again.
Click to expand...


Why don't you ask any resident of West Virginia, black or white, how they feel about Robert Byrd, then get back to us.


----------



## MaggieMae

Moon said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> and the south isn't "FULL" of them either
> you DO understand the meaning of FULL, right?
> 
> 
> 
> Yes...I forgot how literal you people are. There are many white supremists in the south.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Quantify "many" please.  If you're going to make accusations, I think it's important we know all the facts.
> 
> Thanks.
Click to expand...


Oh please. You seem to be in denial that they exist, in larger numbers than ever before.


----------



## DiveCon

MaggieMae said:


> Moon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes...I forgot how literal you people are. There are many white supremists in the south.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quantify "many" please.  If you're going to make accusations, I think it's important we know all the facts.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh please. You seem to be in denial that they exist, in larger numbers than ever before.
Click to expand...

do you have any proof they are growing in number, from a reliable source?


----------



## MaggieMae

Jarhead said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, that was the KKK. But Byrd eventually quit them, Lott continued his ties.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The KKK are not White Supremacists?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Nope...becuase democrats belong to the KKK
Click to expand...


Make that past-tense, and also your history needs review. They were dubbed Dixicrats, but white Southern bigots nonetheless.


----------



## boedicca

It's pretty telling seeing MaggieMaggot defend a known member of the KKK.

Buying indulgences with OTHER PEOPLE'S TAX MONEY doesn't absolves him of being a KKK member and building is political career (as noted by Bill Clinton at his funeral) by associating with them.


----------



## MaggieMae

boedicca said:


> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> Correction, millions of tea partiers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, but I was not in the mood for the defelction and her start to debate how there is "No way there are millions of tea partyers"....
> 
> SO I went with a more agreeable number.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just send them to the Gallup Poll.  28% of Americans sympathized with the Tea Party in the April 2010 poll.  I suspect that ratio has increased since then.
> 
> Tea Partiers Are Fairly Mainstream in Their Demographics
Click to expand...


 Yes, I "sympathize" with them too because until they start detailing how in hell they're going to do all they demand, the tea partiers are just making a lot of noise and spinning their wheels.


----------



## MaggieMae

Jarhead said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> And OJ never committed another murder again.
> 
> 
> 
> What does that have to do with this discussion?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There are certain actions that you can just never give a pass to.
> 
> A man makes a mistake and kills someone while drunk driving? Yep. In time, you give him a pass. It was a horrible mistake and he learned from it. Itr was not aoconscious decision. He truly believed he can drive safely. (And I lostr a relative to a drunk driver). It was not premeditated
> 
> A man conciously murders someone out of revenge? Not a mistake. A conscious decision. He should never get a pass. It was premeditated.
> 
> A man not only hates black people but is part of a group that admittedly tries to hurt and kill black people? That is not a "mistake". That was a conscious decision made and he continued with for a period of time. It was premediated. He knew what he was doing wheile he did it. That is unforgiveable and he should never be given a pass. Much less be allowed to be part of our law making.
Click to expand...


Oh that is just bullcrap. What about all those "Born Again Christians" who become icons of their communities and church even after they have acted like bastards all their lives toward other people? THEY believe that what Jesus preached was forgiveness, period.


----------



## boedicca

MaggieMae said:


> Oh that is just bullcrap. What about all those "Born Again Christians" who become icons of their communities and church even after they have acted like bastards all their lives toward other people? THEY believe that what Jesus preached was forgiveness, period.




So what about a "Born Again Civil Rightist" who became an icon of the Senate after acting like a racist bastard during the formative years of his political career?  HE believed that all that POLITICS required was just spreading around other people's money in order to buy absolution, period.


----------



## DiveCon

boedicca said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh that is just bullcrap. What about all those "Born Again Christians" who become icons of their communities and church even after they have acted like bastards all their lives toward other people? THEY believe that what Jesus preached was forgiveness, period.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So what about a "Born Again Civil Rightist" who became an icon of the Senate after acting like a racist bastard during the formative years of his political career?  HE believed that all that POLITICS required was just spreading around other people's money in order to buy absolution, period.
Click to expand...

hey now, he had a (D) after his name, so all is forgiven
but if you have an (R) after your name, it doesn't matter if you were the first in the senate to hire blacks on your staff, you are still a racist to your dieing day


----------



## MaggieMae

boedicca said:


> Here's the thing about Big Government interference that MM doesn't acknowledge:
> 
> We will never know how much better things would have been if they hadn't mucked things up.
> 
> What we do know is that at this point after the 1981 recession, economic growth was more than double what it is now and real private sector jobs were being created.   The difference?  Reagan cut taxes instead of increasing the size of the federal government as a percent of BDP by an Obamanian 25%.
> 
> Obamanomics = EPIC FAIL



On the flip side, we can be 100% sure that the economy WOULD have been devasted if the banks were not given TARP funds. The Big 6 had the capability of taking down the entire world's economy, as it had already begun to show that effect with the crash of Lehman Brothers. The jury is still out on health care reform. Cutting taxes further at this delicate point in time would mean a decrease in billions from the Treasury which would simply add to the deficit. And those are simple F.A.C.T.S that you cannot seem to get through your thick skull.

I don't give a shit what Reagan did. Times were different then. Very, very different.


----------



## boedicca

MaggieMae said:


> On the flip side, we can be 100% sure that the economy WOULD have been devasted if the banks were not given TARP funds. The Big 6 had the capability of taking down the entire world's economy, as it had already begun to show that effect with the crash of Lehman Brothers. The jury is still out on health care reform. Cutting taxes further at this delicate point in time would mean a decrease in billions from the Treasury which would simply add to the deficit. And those are simple F.A.C.T.S that you cannot seem to get through your thick skull.
> 
> I don't give a shit what Reagan did. Times were different then. Very, very different.



I quote myself.   If we had had a Reagan style policy, we would be in a high growth recovery right now.



boedicca said:


> The 1981-1982 recession lasted 16 months, and then a real recovery began.
> 
> This one started in late 2007, and given the unemployment levels which are not resulting in net increases in the employed, it's difficult to claim that we ever really entered a recovery.
> 
> 
> Reagan CUT Taxes in 1981 (Economic Recovery Tax Act (ERTA)) - the superior GDP growth was due to these.
> 
> 
> Here's the Quarterly GDP Growth Rate
> 
> Q1 2008	-0.7%
> Q2 2008	1.5%
> Q3 2008	-2.7%
> Q4 2008	-5.4%
> Q1 2009	-6.4%
> Q2 2009	-0.7%
> Q3 2009	2.3%
> *Q4 2009	5.6%
> Q1 2010	2.7%
> Q2 2010	3.2%	est*
> 
> 
> 
> And here we have the 1981 Recession and recovery
> 
> Q3 1981	5.0%
> Q4 1981	-4.9%
> Q1 1982	-6.4%
> Q3 1982	2.2%
> Q4 1982	-1.5%
> Q1 1983	0.3%
> *Q2 1983	5.1%
> Q3 1983	9.3%
> Q4 1983	8.1%*
> 
> 
> Not the differences in the last three quarters of each sequence.  There is a material difference.  Growth matters.   Something Obama clearly doesn't understand how to encourage.


----------



## MaggieMae

DiveCon said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Moon said:
> 
> 
> 
> Quantify "many" please.  If you're going to make accusations, I think it's important we know all the facts.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh please. You seem to be in denial that they exist, in larger numbers than ever before.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> do you have any proof they are growing in number, from a reliable source?
Click to expand...


You can read about most of them here. Click the appropriate group off to the right of the page.

Extremism in America: Introduction


----------



## MaggieMae

boedicca said:


> It's pretty telling seeing MaggieMaggot defend a known member of the KKK.
> 
> Buying indulgences with OTHER PEOPLE'S TAX MONEY doesn't absolves him of being a KKK member and building is political career (as noted by Bill Clinton at his funeral) by associating with them.



You've fast become the Queen Bitch. Happy? 

Suck someone else into your regurgitating hatefest, sweetheart. And I do hope you sleep well in spite of your misery.


----------



## MaggieMae

boedicca said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh that is just bullcrap. What about all those "Born Again Christians" who become icons of their communities and church even after they have acted like bastards all their lives toward other people? THEY believe that what Jesus preached was forgiveness, period.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So what about a "Born Again Civil Rightist" who became an icon of the Senate after acting like a racist bastard during the formative years of his political career?  HE believed that all that POLITICS required was just spreading around other people's money in order to buy absolution, period.
Click to expand...


Ah shaddap.


----------



## boedicca

MaggieMae said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh that is just bullcrap. What about all those "Born Again Christians" who become icons of their communities and church even after they have acted like bastards all their lives toward other people? THEY believe that what Jesus preached was forgiveness, period.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So what about a "Born Again Civil Rightist" who became an icon of the Senate after acting like a racist bastard during the formative years of his political career?  HE believed that all that POLITICS required was just spreading around other people's money in order to buy absolution, period.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ah shaddap.
Click to expand...




Here's a little story about that:  No.


----------



## boedicca

MaggieMae said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's pretty telling seeing MaggieMaggot defend a known member of the KKK.
> 
> Buying indulgences with OTHER PEOPLE'S TAX MONEY doesn't absolves him of being a KKK member and building is political career (as noted by Bill Clinton at his funeral) by associating with them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You've fast become the Queen Bitch. Happy?
> 
> Suck someone else into your regurgitating hatefest, sweetheart. And I do hope you sleep well in spite of your misery.
Click to expand...




ROFL!   Go to your profile, select statistics, and pull up the archive of your posts.

Now that is a hatefest.


----------



## DiveCon

MaggieMae said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh please. You seem to be in denial that they exist, in larger numbers than ever before.
> 
> 
> 
> do you have any proof they are growing in number, from a reliable source?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You can read about most of them here. Click the appropriate group off to the right of the page.
> 
> Extremism in America: Introduction
Click to expand...

ah, the proverbial wild goose chase


----------



## Immanuel

MaggieMae said:


> Jarhead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> No. I won't deny at all. But, I know what it is now...I live here. I wasn't alive 160 years ago!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep. And neither was I.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This may come as a surprise, but neither was I.
Click to expand...


Really?  I had you pegged as "older than dirt".

Immie


----------



## Immanuel

MaggieMae said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really? Like I said, I am getting the impression that you believe that only Fox and conservative websites are biased.
> 
> I have to say this and want to say it very politely so don't take this wrong, but in my book, that makes your research highly suspect.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So far, all I've done is take a headline, one that becomes a top news story everywhere, and copied how each headline is worded--not any text. The problem is the embellishment of those headlines which are directed to a desired audience that fits the political leaning of the particular news medium. This is a hypothetical example:
> 
> FINANCIAL REFORM BILL HURTS ECONOMY
> 
> FINANCIAL REFORM BILL - ANOTHER WIN FOR OBAMA
> 
> OBAMA SIGNS FINANCIAL REFORM INTO LAW
> 
> Only the last headline is unbiased accuracy. Now an unbiased report may be included in the text of each, and there may be some opinionators contributing to those news stories, but the headlines alone are often ONLY what people read and thereby form THEIR opinions around.
Click to expand...


For the record, if you only do current headlines, this is going to be highly slanted to your favor due to the current power of the Democratic Party.  If you review headlines from say four years ago, I suspect the slant would flip-flop.

Immie


----------



## boedicca

Not really.  The press four years ago hated Bush even more than they love Obama now.


----------



## Immanuel

boedicca said:


> Not really.  The press four years ago hated Bush even more than they love Obama now.



Correct, and the left wing press did an awful lot to smear him... hell, so did the right wing press.

Immie


----------



## theDoctorisIn

This whole left/right "You're the racists!" "No, you're the racists!" back and forth is pretty much one of the more sickening trends I've seen in rhetoric in a _long _time.


----------



## Charles_Main

How Typical When Confronted with proof of the Depth of the Left wings medias, so called Objective Journalists, Political activism these idiots point at one story on the right.

Were talking about over 400 Liberal Journalists, from Places like the Post, and the Times, actively discussion their plans to UN OBJECTIVELY report the news, and use Racily charge Smears to intimidate Opposition to Obama. They are admitting that the wright story was a legit story, that if reported on fairly could significantly hurt Obama's chances and planning their Attack to silence the story, and those on the right pushing it. 

This is so much bigger, and more important, that one stupid ass Conservative Blogger, and Shawn Hannity who DOES NOT CLAIM TO BE OBJECTIVE. This is unbelievable, I said it during the election. Journalism is Dead in America. NOBODY is reporting the truth anymore. It is all propaganda. 

This is proof that the Bulk of or main stream media, is no longer Objective, and are actively supporting one side, by choosing what to report, and slanting those reports, and calling people racists. 

At one point they talk about ways to shut down Fox news, for being biased, Which is rather Ironic as they are actually engaging in a conspiracy to be BIASED.


----------



## Charles_Main

theDoctorisIn said:


> This whole left/right "You're the racists!" "No, you're the racists!" back and forth is pretty much one of the more sickening trends I've seen in rhetoric in a _long _time.




Please, The left has been doing this for 40 years. This is not standard operating procedure of the right.


----------



## theDoctorisIn

Charles_Main said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> This whole left/right "You're the racists!" "No, you're the racists!" back and forth is pretty much one of the more sickening trends I've seen in rhetoric in a _long _time.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Please, The left has been doing this for 40 years. This is not standard operating procedure of the right.
Click to expand...


You're either ridiculously naive or a blind partisan hack.

This has literally been a political football since the beginning of this country. It literally caused a civil war. Race politics are nothing new, and certainly used by every party ever in this country, since the dawn of this country.


----------



## Foxfyre

The saddest thing about all this is that whoever decided *RACIST* was the worst thing you could use as a label for anybody, everybody and anything and everything has become *RACIST!!!!!*

And in the process, the most partisan and gullible among us have lost all sense of what the word even means and could not define it now to save their lives.  They can't go to the dictionary because the definitions there don't fit.

Maybe that's the way we'll finally get rid of it.  Make it so obscure and all encompassing so that it becomes meaningless.


----------



## DiveCon

Foxfyre said:


> The saddest thing about all this is that whoever decided *RACIST* was the worst thing you could use as a label for anybody, everybody and anything and everything has become *RACIST!!!!!*
> 
> And in the process, the most partisan and gullible among us have lost all sense of what the word even means and could not define it now to save their lives.  They can't go to the dictionary because the definitions there don't fit.
> 
> Maybe that's the way we'll finally get rid of it.  Make it so obscure and all encompassing so that it becomes meaningless.


its been misused so much, its lost some of the sting


----------



## Kat

DiveCon said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> 
> The saddest thing about all this is that whoever decided *RACIST* was the worst thing you could use as a label for anybody, everybody and anything and everything has become *RACIST!!!!!*
> 
> And in the process, the most partisan and gullible among us have lost all sense of what the word even means and could not define it now to save their lives.  They can't go to the dictionary because the definitions there don't fit.
> 
> Maybe that's the way we'll finally get rid of it.  Make it so obscure and all encompassing so that it becomes meaningless.
> 
> 
> 
> its been misused so much, its lost some of the sting
Click to expand...



Yup, I have been saying that for a long time now. It is watered down now, and diminishes true racism. A shame.


----------



## mudwhistle

Kat said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> 
> The saddest thing about all this is that whoever decided *RACIST* was the worst thing you could use as a label for anybody, everybody and anything and everything has become *RACIST!!!!!*
> 
> And in the process, the most partisan and gullible among us have lost all sense of what the word even means and could not define it now to save their lives.  They can't go to the dictionary because the definitions there don't fit.
> 
> Maybe that's the way we'll finally get rid of it.  Make it so obscure and all encompassing so that it becomes meaningless.
> 
> 
> 
> its been misused so much, its lost some of the sting
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Yup, I have been saying that for a long time now. It is watered down now, and diminishes true racism. A shame.
Click to expand...


Obama is going back to attacking the rich and throwing racism around like spit-wads because that's really all he has. He can't win on his record. 

White America has been suckered. This guy is no different from Jessie Jackson and Al Sharpton.....the difference being that he never suffered from discrimination in the US like they did. He's merely supplanted them as a Civil Rights icon. 

Electing this guy didn't heal the wounds of this country with respect to race. It merely reopened them and Obama is currently pouring salt in that gaping wound.


----------



## MaggieMae

boedicca said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's pretty telling seeing MaggieMaggot defend a known member of the KKK.
> 
> Buying indulgences with OTHER PEOPLE'S TAX MONEY doesn't absolves him of being a KKK member and building is political career (as noted by Bill Clinton at his funeral) by associating with them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You've fast become the Queen Bitch. Happy?
> 
> Suck someone else into your regurgitating hatefest, sweetheart. And I do hope you sleep well in spite of your misery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROFL!   Go to your profile, select statistics, and pull up the archive of your posts.
> 
> Now that is a hatefest.
Click to expand...


Your point? I enjoy posting my political opinions, which is what this forum is all about. You seem to enjoy hurling insults when someone disagrees with you.


----------



## boedicca

You're projecting, dearie.

Now back to the topic, mudwhistle, divecon, kat, and foxfyre have all nailed it:

The overuse of the Racist accusation has caused the term to have no meaning other than the accused disagrees with the Progressive Agenda.


----------



## 007

boedicca said:


> You're projecting, dearie.
> 
> Now back to the topic, mudwhistle, divecon, kat, and foxfyre have all nailed it:
> 
> The overuse of the Racist accusation has caused the term to have no meaning other than the accused disagrees with the Progressive Agenda.



When it's coming from the left anyway. But when we see things happen like obama's lap dog eric holder ordering the won case against the black panthers for voting place intimidation dropped, and then the justice department ordered again to not bring any more charges against anyone black, THAT is RACISM, in it's purest form, and it's coming from the obama administration.


----------



## boedicca

Indeed.

So much for a Post-Racial Presidency.


----------



## The T

boedicca said:


> Indeed.
> 
> So much for a Post-Racial Presidency.


 
It was All _Fantasy *. *_The only reason it [rascism]still exists is that the left is obscessed with it...and the only way they think they can win. It's all they have left. They've lost every other debate on intellectual grounds.


----------



## Foxfyre

The T said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed.
> 
> So much for a Post-Racial Presidency.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It was All _Fantasy *. *_The only reason it [rascism]still exists is that the left is obscessed with it...and the only way they think they can win. It's all they have left. They've lost every other debate on intellectual grounds.
Click to expand...


There is power, prestige, influence, security, and wealth to be had by promoting and exploting racism.  Until that is corrected, both those claiming to be benefactors and their beneficiaries will continue to promote it.  And that, in my opinion, is why they continue to be obsessed with it.  That and it continues to be useful as an epithet to throw at their adversaries.


----------



## The T

Foxfyre said:


> The T said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed.
> 
> So much for a Post-Racial Presidency.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It was All _Fantasy *. *_The only reason it [rascism]still exists is that the left is obscessed with it...and the only way they think they can win. It's all they have left. They've lost every other debate on intellectual grounds.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There is power, prestige, influence, security, and wealth to be had by promoting and exploting racism. Until that is corrected, both those claiming to be benefactors and their beneficiaries will continue to promote it. And that, in my opinion, is why they continue to be obsessed with it. That and it continues to be useful as an epithet to throw at their adversaries.
Click to expand...

 
I agree. But at who's expense? We on the Conservative side have grown beyond this knowing that these issues have been addressed...over 500,000 gave their blood in the battle grounds all over this nation in the 1860's...followed by many others that subsequently followed.

Many of us Conservatives know the message of Dr. King...(And he was killed for it)...Content of character...but yet there are those that want to drag us back to those days...for political gain. For the NEW Slavery foisted by ONE party.

So much the price of realizing there is only ONE race...?

It's sick, it's twisted to those of us that may be the TRUE 'Progressives' on this subject.


----------



## boedicca

Jim Webb is starting to see the light (although he continues to pander to blacks):

_Policy makers ignored such disparities within America's white cultures when, in advancing minority diversity programs, they treated whites as a fungible monolith. Also lost on these policy makers were the differences in economic and educational attainment among nonwhite cultures. Thus nonwhite groups received special consideration in a wide variety of areas including business startups, academic admissions, job promotions and lucrative government contracts.

Where should we go from here? Beyond our continuing obligation to assist those African-Americans still in need, government-directed diversity programs should end.

Nondiscrimination laws should be applied equally among all citizens, including those who happen to be white. The need for inclusiveness in our society is undeniable and irreversible, both in our markets and in our communities. Our government should be in the business of enabling opportunity for all, not in picking winners. It can do so by ensuring that artificial distinctions such as race do not determine outcomes. _

James Webb: Diversity and the Myth of White Privilege - WSJ.com


It's a step in the right direction.


----------



## Foxfyre

The T said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The T said:
> 
> 
> 
> It was All _Fantasy *. *_The only reason it [rascism]still exists is that the left is obscessed with it...and the only way they think they can win. It's all they have left. They've lost every other debate on intellectual grounds.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is power, prestige, influence, security, and wealth to be had by promoting and exploting racism. Until that is corrected, both those claiming to be benefactors and their beneficiaries will continue to promote it. And that, in my opinion, is why they continue to be obsessed with it. That and it continues to be useful as an epithet to throw at their adversaries.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I agree. But at who's expense? We on the Conservative side have grown beyond this knowing that these issues have been addressed...over 500,000 gave their blood in the battle grounds all over this nation in the 1860's...followed by many others that subsequently followed.
> 
> Many of us Conservatives know the message of Dr. King...(And he was killed for it)...Content of character...but yet there are those that want to drag us back to those days...for political gain. For the NEW Slavery foisted by ONE party.
> 
> So much the price of realizing there is only ONE race...?
> 
> It's sick, it's twisted to those of us that may be the TRUE 'Progressives' on this subject.
Click to expand...


It is at the expense of those exploited of course, and the rest of us who bear the miserable legacy of a society that remains divided into self serving groups rather than seeing ourselves all in the same bucket with everybody pulling together to achieve shared goals that include everybody.


----------



## The T

Foxfyre said:


> The T said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is power, prestige, influence, security, and wealth to be had by promoting and exploting racism. Until that is corrected, both those claiming to be benefactors and their beneficiaries will continue to promote it. And that, in my opinion, is why they continue to be obsessed with it. That and it continues to be useful as an epithet to throw at their adversaries.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I agree. But at who's expense? We on the Conservative side have grown beyond this knowing that these issues have been addressed...over 500,000 gave their blood in the battle grounds all over this nation in the 1860's...followed by many others that subsequently followed.
> 
> Many of us Conservatives know the message of Dr. King...(And he was killed for it)...Content of character...but yet there are those that want to drag us back to those days...for political gain. For the NEW Slavery foisted by ONE party.
> 
> So much the price of realizing there is only ONE race...?
> 
> It's sick, it's twisted to those of us that may be the TRUE 'Progressives' on this subject.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is at the expense of those exploited of course, and the rest of us who bear the miserable legacy of a society that remains divided into self serving groups rather than seeing ourselves all in the same bucket with everybody pulling together to achieve shared goals that include everybody.
Click to expand...

 

Exactly. *E Pluribus Unum...*_Isn't just a saying. _Some of us take it to heart.

Forgotten by the LEFT.


----------



## Foxfyre

boedicca said:


> Jim Webb is starting to see the light (although he continues to pander to blacks): . . . .
> 
> James Webb: Diversity and the Myth of White Privilege - WSJ.com
> 
> 
> It's a step in the right direction.



Good find Boedicca.  And this is another drum to add to the one I and a few others have been beating for years now.  Thomas Sowell, one of my favorite historians, has done exhaustive study on the condition and progress of blacks in this country and has compiled irrefutable evidence that though still behind and still emeshed in segregation, black people were progressing and improving their situations at a far faster rate than white people were. . .UNTIL. . . .white people decided to help.  From that point on, progress slowed to a crawl or, in some cases, reversed itself.

Good intentions can produce very bad unintended consequences.  Until we all acknowledge that, and appreciate how much some are capitalizing on racism for their own purposes, it isn't going to get better.  And there will be those who will keep on doing their damndest to make sure that racism in all of its ugliness will continue to be front and center in the American culture.


----------



## The T

boedicca said:


> Jim Webb is starting to see the light (although he continues to pander to blacks):
> 
> _Policy makers ignored such disparities within America's white cultures when, in advancing minority diversity programs, they treated whites as a fungible monolith. Also lost on these policy makers were the differences in economic and educational attainment among nonwhite cultures. Thus nonwhite groups received special consideration in a wide variety of areas including business startups, academic admissions, job promotions and lucrative government contracts._
> 
> _Where should we go from here? Beyond our continuing obligation to assist those African-Americans still in need, government-directed diversity programs should end._
> 
> _Nondiscrimination laws should be applied equally among all citizens, including those who happen to be white. The need for inclusiveness in our society is undeniable and irreversible, both in our markets and in our communities. Our government should be in the business of enabling opportunity for all, not in picking winners. It can do so by ensuring that artificial distinctions such as race do not determine outcomes. _
> 
> James Webb: Diversity and the Myth of White Privilege - WSJ.com
> 
> 
> It's a step in the right direction.


 
Nice to see that there are those that seem to get it...pandering to Humans/Citizens...rather than the usual divisive _groupthink_  pluarlism.


----------



## Rinata

boedicca said:


> The Daily Caller's "JournoList" expose has finally resolved the matter:
> 
> Based on Spencer Ackerman's tactic:
> 
> _*If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game theyve put upon us, Ackerman wrote on the Journolist listserv in April 2008. Instead, take one of them  Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares  and call them racists.*_
> 
> Conservatives Karl Rove and Fred Barnes respond to Journolist racist post | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment
> 
> 
> It's out in the open now.  The Left uses the racist accusation against the Right, the Tea Party, Conservatives, the GOP...  Anyone who critiques prominent lefties or their programs will be falsely attacked as a racist as a diversionary tactic.
> 
> More evidence is Sherrod's hateful comment regarding the GOP to Media Matters.
> 
> So here's the thing you lefties should understand:  we're not falling for it.



If I were you, I'd be embarrassed by all of the absolute nuts that thanked you for this stupid post. You people love to act as though you are so innocent in your criticisms of President Obama. They are not truthful criticisms and you know that. Name calling and pictures of monkeys and just plain hate. And you say you're not falling for it?? A little turned around, aren't you?? We're not falling for it. Take all of those angelic faces that you feel have been so unjustly attacked, and go soak your heads. Idiots.


----------



## Rinata

Truthmatters said:


> The right will not be able to force the admin to react to these manufacctured stroies anymore.
> 
> This last case will make it impossible for them to FORCE immediate action from the WH.
> 
> You guys screwed your pooch of false outrage.
> Now people will be required (even you righties) to examine these cases slowly and get all the imfo.
> 
> 
> I think this is a sign that the right is desperate to negatively effect the midterms because they know they are not going to be able to claim they have a mandate with the few seats they gain.



Love that expression!!


----------



## Foxfyre

Rinata said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Daily Caller's "JournoList" expose has finally resolved the matter:
> 
> Based on Spencer Ackerman's tactic:
> 
> _*&#8220;If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game they&#8217;ve put upon us,&#8221; Ackerman wrote on the Journolist listserv in April 2008. &#8220;Instead, take one of them &#8212; Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares &#8212; and call them racists.&#8221;*_
> 
> Conservatives Karl Rove and Fred Barnes respond to Journolist &#8216;racist&#8217; post | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment
> 
> It's out in the open now.  The Left uses the racist accusation against the Right, the Tea Party, Conservatives, the GOP...  Anyone who critiques prominent lefties or their programs will be falsely attacked as a racist as a diversionary tactic.
> 
> More evidence is Sherrod's hateful comment regarding the GOP to Media Matters.
> 
> So here's the thing you lefties should understand:  we're not falling for it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If I were you, I'd be embarrassed by all of the absolute nuts that thanked you for this stupid post. You people love to act as though you are so innocent in your criticisms of President Obama. They are not truthful criticisms and you know that. Name calling and pictures of monkeys and just plain hate. And you say you're not falling for it?? A little turned around, aren't you?? We're not falling for it. Take all of those angelic faces that you feel have been so unjustly attacked, and go soak your heads. Idiots.
Click to expand...


The monkeys your side used to portray President Bush were not hateful I guess.  They were to indicate that he was dumb like a monkey.   I think that was hateful.  And should not be condoned.

So yes, those who use monkeys to portray President Obama are being hateful.   But to assume that they are portraying a black man rather than indicate that he is dumb like a monkey is a real stretch.  Rational people would say that if one is non racist, then if it is okay to use monkeys to portray President Bush as dumb, then it is okay to use monkeys to portray President Obama as dumb.

Nobody but you seems to be making an association of black people and monkeys.

So who is focused on race here?

I think using monkeys to caricature a President of the United States is hateful.  And not one of the people Boedicca named in her post has done that.  To anybody.


----------



## The T

Foxfyre said:


> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Daily Caller's "JournoList" expose has finally resolved the matter:
> 
> Based on Spencer Ackerman's tactic:
> 
> _*If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game theyve put upon us, Ackerman wrote on the Journolist listserv in April 2008. Instead, take one of them  Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares  and call them racists.*_
> 
> Conservatives Karl Rove and Fred Barnes respond to Journolist racist post | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment
> 
> It's out in the open now. The Left uses the racist accusation against the Right, the Tea Party, Conservatives, the GOP... Anyone who critiques prominent lefties or their programs will be falsely attacked as a racist as a diversionary tactic.
> 
> More evidence is Sherrod's hateful comment regarding the GOP to Media Matters.
> 
> So here's the thing you lefties should understand: we're not falling for it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If I were you, I'd be embarrassed by all of the absolute nuts that thanked you for this stupid post. You people love to act as though you are so innocent in your criticisms of President Obama. They are not truthful criticisms and you know that. Name calling and pictures of monkeys and just plain hate. And you say you're not falling for it?? A little turned around, aren't you?? We're not falling for it. Take all of those angelic faces that you feel have been so unjustly attacked, and go soak your heads. Idiots.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The monkeys your side used to portray President Bush were not hateful I guess. They were to indicate that he was dumb like a monkey. I think that was hateful. And should not be condoned.
> 
> So yes, those who use monkeys to portray President Obama are being hateful. But to assume that they are portraying a black man rather than indicate that he is dumb like a monkey is a real stretch. Rational people would say that if one is non racist, then if it is okay to use monkeys to portray President Bush as dumb, then it is okay to use monkeys to portray President Obama as dumb.
> 
> Nobody but you seems to be making an association of black people and monkeys.
> 
> So who is focused on race here?
> 
> I think using monkeys to caricature a President of the United States is hateful. And not one of the people Boedicca named in her post has done that. To anybody.
Click to expand...

 

Case in point...ONE of many on the WEB...but yet there is NO double Standard?








It is the Left that perpetuates this crap...and frankly? it's sick...and the last gasp of a party of folks that is in dire straights because they have ZERO left...and panicked.


----------



## boedicca

Rinata said:


> If I were you, I'd be embarrassed by all of the absolute nuts that thanked you for this stupid post. You people love to act as though you are so innocent in your criticisms of President Obama. They are not truthful criticisms and you know that. Name calling and pictures of monkeys and just plain hate. And you say you're not falling for it?? A little turned around, aren't you?? We're not falling for it. Take all of those angelic faces that you feel have been so unjustly attacked, and go soak your heads. Idiots.





Sorry to disappoint, but I am thrilled that so many decent, honest people are not falling for the dishonest tactic of being accused of Racism because they do not support Obama's radical Big Government Agenda.

You are the one making it about race, not us.  It would behoove you to engage in a bit of self-reflection to understand what that means about you.


----------



## boedicca

Rinata said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> The right will not be able to force the admin to react to these manufacctured stroies anymore.
> 
> This last case will make it impossible for them to FORCE immediate action from the WH.
> 
> You guys screwed your pooch of false outrage.
> Now people will be required (even you righties) to examine these cases slowly and get all the imfo.
> 
> 
> I think this is a sign that the right is desperate to negatively effect the midterms because they know they are not going to be able to claim they have a mandate with the few seats they gain.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Love that expression!!
Click to expand...




It's not at all surprising that the two of you get your kicks from beastiality.

And we now have yet another reason to pity the dog in TM's Av.


----------



## MaggieMae

theDoctorisIn said:


> Charles_Main said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> This whole left/right "You're the racists!" "No, you're the racists!" back and forth is pretty much one of the more sickening trends I've seen in rhetoric in a _long _time.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Please, The left has been doing this for 40 years. This is not standard operating procedure of the right.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You're either ridiculously naive or a blind partisan hack.
> 
> This has literally been a political football since the beginning of this country. It literally caused a civil war. Race politics are nothing new, and certainly used by every party ever in this country, since the dawn of this country.
Click to expand...


And I feel quite sure that right wing pundits had (and have) their own little e-mail groups where they toss around ideas, like shutting down the biggest liberal voices, like Rachel Maddow. None of them like to be constantly on the defensive. Are the righties here seriously wanting us to believe that Hannity, Beck, Brietbart, Horowitz, et al., don't talk to each other about what they'd _like_ to do and how they might actually make it happen?

Sign me,
Not Born Yesterday


----------



## MaggieMae

The T said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> If I were you, I'd be embarrassed by all of the absolute nuts that thanked you for this stupid post. You people love to act as though you are so innocent in your criticisms of President Obama. They are not truthful criticisms and you know that. Name calling and pictures of monkeys and just plain hate. And you say you're not falling for it?? A little turned around, aren't you?? We're not falling for it. Take all of those angelic faces that you feel have been so unjustly attacked, and go soak your heads. Idiots.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The monkeys your side used to portray President Bush were not hateful I guess. They were to indicate that he was dumb like a monkey. I think that was hateful. And should not be condoned.
> 
> So yes, those who use monkeys to portray President Obama are being hateful. But to assume that they are portraying a black man rather than indicate that he is dumb like a monkey is a real stretch. Rational people would say that if one is non racist, then if it is okay to use monkeys to portray President Bush as dumb, then it is okay to use monkeys to portray President Obama as dumb.
> 
> Nobody but you seems to be making an association of black people and monkeys.
> 
> So who is focused on race here?
> 
> I think using monkeys to caricature a President of the United States is hateful. And not one of the people Boedicca named in her post has done that. To anybody.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Case in point...ONE of many on the WEB...but yet there is NO double Standard?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is the Left that perpetuates this crap...and frankly? it's sick...and the last gasp of a party of folks that is in dire straights because they have ZERO left...and panicked.
Click to expand...


The only double standard here is that it's always okay to revisit George W. Bush's presidency if it's to your advantage.


----------



## Dante

boedicca said:


> The Daily Caller's "JournoList" expose has finally resolved the matter:
> 
> Based on Spencer Ackerman's tactic:
> 
> _*If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game theyve put upon us, Ackerman wrote on the Journolist listserv in April 2008. Instead, take one of them  Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares  and call them racists.*_
> 
> Conservatives Karl Rove and Fred Barnes respond to Journolist racist post | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment
> 
> 
> It's out in the open now.  The Left uses the racist accusation against the Right, the Tea Party, Conservatives, the GOP...  Anyone who critiques prominent lefties or their programs will be falsely attacked as a racist as a diversionary tactic.
> 
> More evidence is Sherrod's hateful comment regarding the GOP to Media Matters.
> 
> So here's the thing you lefties should understand:  we're not falling for it.


right wing whacko list:

AllieBaba (07-23-2010), Annie (07-22-2010), AquaAthena (07-22-2010), ba1614 (07-22-2010), Foxfyre (07-23-2010), fyrenza (07-22-2010), Kat (07-22-2010), keee keee (Yesterday), KissMy (07-23-2010), masquerade (07-22-2010), Misty (07-22-2010), mudwhistle (07-22-2010), Nonelitist (07-23-2010), Pale Rider (07-22-2010), pete (07-23-2010), PLYMCO_PILGRIM (07-22-2010), sitarro (07-23-2010), The Rabbi (07-22-2010), The T (07-22-2010), Wicked Jester (07-23-2010), WillowTree (07-22-2010), Zander (07-23-2010), Zoom-boing (07-23-2010)


----------



## mudwhistle

> July 22, 2010
> *Hello, I'm a Racist, Pleased to Meet You*
> 
> By *Selwyn Duke*
> 
> There is such a thing as a conditioned response. Here's an example: Leftists call conservatives "racists." Conservatives cower and stutter some defense. Leftists call conservatives "racists" some more. Conservatives cower some more. Question: How do you think you break this pattern?
> 
> We've seen this again with the recent vitriol spewed by NAACP head Ben Jealous (a fitting last name). Speaking at the NAACP convention in Kansas City, Jealous accused the Tea Party of, take a guess...cue the "Jeopardy!" music..."racism." Just as predictably, many conservatives are running around trying to convince everyone that, by gum, they really are swell guys. No, really. I'm not a racist. I don't beat my wife. I don't kick my dog. I eat my organic vegetables and drive a Prius.
> 
> Look, why don't we just save everyone the trouble? Every time a conservative renders an opinion, we can just play a recording with a little weaselly voice screeching, "You're a wacist! You're a wacist!" (Barney Frank-style) followed by a music video featuring The Cowering Conservative -- I mean 1950s-style, duck-and-cover footage, with the tune and all.
> 
> And such conservatives abound. Oh, don't get me wrong, conservative brethren, I love ya, man. But frankly, too many of you are saps. You really don't get it. People who advocated welfare reform in the 1990s were accused of being "racist." If you're for border control, you're "racist." If you criticize Obama, you're "racist." If you oppose quotas, you're "racist." If you say that, be it nature or nurture, there are differences among groups, you're "racist." If you want English to be the national language, you're "racist." The word has become meaningless, used only to stifle and stigmatize opposition. And if calling you a heretic worked in that regard, the left would do that. And if calling you a Fig Newton worked, they would do that.
> 
> for the rest of the article......American Thinker: Hello, I'm a Racist, Pleased to Meet You



Quite informative. Anyone who's been called a racist for their viewpoints might want to read this and learn from it.


----------



## boedicca

Dante said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Daily Caller's "JournoList" expose has finally resolved the matter:
> 
> Based on Spencer Ackerman's tactic:
> 
> _*If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game theyve put upon us, Ackerman wrote on the Journolist listserv in April 2008. Instead, take one of them  Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares  and call them racists.*_
> 
> Conservatives Karl Rove and Fred Barnes respond to Journolist racist post | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment
> 
> 
> It's out in the open now.  The Left uses the racist accusation against the Right, the Tea Party, Conservatives, the GOP...  Anyone who critiques prominent lefties or their programs will be falsely attacked as a racist as a diversionary tactic.
> 
> More evidence is Sherrod's hateful comment regarding the GOP to Media Matters.
> 
> So here's the thing you lefties should understand:  we're not falling for it.
> 
> 
> 
> right wing whacko list:
> 
> AllieBaba (07-23-2010), Annie (07-22-2010), AquaAthena (07-22-2010), ba1614 (07-22-2010), Foxfyre (07-23-2010), fyrenza (07-22-2010), Kat (07-22-2010), keee keee (Yesterday), KissMy (07-23-2010), masquerade (07-22-2010), Misty (07-22-2010), mudwhistle (07-22-2010), Nonelitist (07-23-2010), Pale Rider (07-22-2010), pete (07-23-2010), PLYMCO_PILGRIM (07-22-2010), sitarro (07-23-2010), The Rabbi (07-22-2010), The T (07-22-2010), Wicked Jester (07-23-2010), WillowTree (07-22-2010), Zander (07-23-2010), Zoom-boing (07-23-2010)
Click to expand...



When Dante insults people, that's a definite affirmation that we are in the right!

Thanks!


----------



## Dante

boedicca said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Daily Caller's "JournoList" expose has finally resolved the matter:
> 
> Based on Spencer Ackerman's tactic:
> 
> _*If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game theyve put upon us, Ackerman wrote on the Journolist listserv in April 2008. Instead, take one of them  Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares  and call them racists.*_
> 
> Conservatives Karl Rove and Fred Barnes respond to Journolist racist post | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment
> 
> 
> It's out in the open now.  The Left uses the racist accusation against the Right, the Tea Party, Conservatives, the GOP...  Anyone who critiques prominent lefties or their programs will be falsely attacked as a racist as a diversionary tactic.
> 
> More evidence is Sherrod's hateful comment regarding the GOP to Media Matters.
> 
> So here's the thing you lefties should understand:  we're not falling for it.
> 
> 
> 
> right wing whacko list:
> 
> AllieBaba (07-23-2010), Annie (07-22-2010), AquaAthena (07-22-2010), ba1614 (07-22-2010), Foxfyre (07-23-2010), fyrenza (07-22-2010), Kat (07-22-2010), keee keee (Yesterday), KissMy (07-23-2010), masquerade (07-22-2010), Misty (07-22-2010), mudwhistle (07-22-2010), Nonelitist (07-23-2010), Pale Rider (07-22-2010), pete (07-23-2010), PLYMCO_PILGRIM (07-22-2010), sitarro (07-23-2010), The Rabbi (07-22-2010), The T (07-22-2010), Wicked Jester (07-23-2010), WillowTree (07-22-2010), Zander (07-23-2010), Zoom-boing (07-23-2010)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> When Dante insults people, that's a definite affirmation that we are in the right!
> 
> Thanks!
Click to expand...


awe, we get our little feelings hurt? you actually feel insulted?


----------



## mudwhistle

Dante said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dante said:
> 
> 
> 
> right wing whacko list:
> 
> AllieBaba (07-23-2010), Annie (07-22-2010), AquaAthena (07-22-2010), ba1614 (07-22-2010), Foxfyre (07-23-2010), fyrenza (07-22-2010), Kat (07-22-2010), keee keee (Yesterday), KissMy (07-23-2010), masquerade (07-22-2010), Misty (07-22-2010), mudwhistle (07-22-2010), Nonelitist (07-23-2010), Pale Rider (07-22-2010), pete (07-23-2010), PLYMCO_PILGRIM (07-22-2010), sitarro (07-23-2010), The Rabbi (07-22-2010), The T (07-22-2010), Wicked Jester (07-23-2010), WillowTree (07-22-2010), Zander (07-23-2010), Zoom-boing (07-23-2010)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When Dante insults people, that's a definite affirmation that we are in the right!
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> awe, we get our little feelings hurt? you actually feel insulted?
Click to expand...


You're not smart enough to realize she wears it like a badge of honor.


----------



## boedicca

Dante has a hugely inflated sense of his importance in other people's lives.   At most, he is the internet equivalent of a gnat.    

Just sayin'.


----------



## Mr. Shaman

VaYank5150 said:


> Who the hell is Spencer Ackerman and *WTF is "The Daily Caller's "JournoList""?*


It's merely *Tucker Carlson's latest-stab** at relevancy*.  

You'd think....by now....*Karl Rove would start maintaining a little, lower profile*....seeing-as-how he's no-longer part o' Cheney's "crew". 

​


----------



## Rinata

boedicca said:


> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> If I were you, I'd be embarrassed by all of the absolute nuts that thanked you for this stupid post. You people love to act as though you are so innocent in your criticisms of President Obama. They are not truthful criticisms and you know that. Name calling and pictures of monkeys and just plain hate. And you say you're not falling for it?? A little turned around, aren't you?? We're not falling for it. Take all of those angelic faces that you feel have been so unjustly attacked, and go soak your heads. Idiots.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry to disappoint, but I am thrilled that so many decent, honest people are not falling for the dishonest tactic of being accused of Racism because they do not support Obama's radical Big Government Agenda.
> 
> You are the one making it about race, not us.  It would behoove you to engage in a bit of self-reflection to understand what that means about you.
Click to expand...


Are you deliberately being obtuse or are you just stupid?? Gee, those awful dems say we're racist because we don't like, "Obama's Big Government Agenda". 

Tell me, in your opinion, what has Obama done since he's been president that you consider to be a good thing???


----------



## Sky Dancer

Foxfyre said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jim Webb is starting to see the light (although he continues to pander to blacks): . . . .
> 
> James Webb: Diversity and the Myth of White Privilege - WSJ.com
> 
> 
> It's a step in the right direction.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Good find Boedicca.  And this is another drum to add to the one I and a few others have been beating for years now.  Thomas Sowell, one of my favorite historians, has done exhaustive study on the condition and progress of blacks in this country and has compiled irrefutable evidence that though still behind and still emeshed in segregation, black people were progressing and improving their situations at a far faster rate than white people were. . .UNTIL. . . .white people decided to help.  From that point on, progress slowed to a crawl or, in some cases, reversed itself.
> 
> Good intentions can produce very bad unintended consequences.  Until we all acknowledge that, and appreciate how much some are capitalizing on racism for their own purposes, it isn't going to get better.  And there will be those who will keep on doing their damndest to make sure that racism in all of its ugliness will continue to be front and center in the American culture.
Click to expand...


Interesting.  You think anyone who dares bring up the topic of racism is capitalizing on racism and making it worse?

I guess as long as everyone else but Glenn Beck shuts up, you'll be happy.


----------



## DiveCon

Rinata said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> If I were you, I'd be embarrassed by all of the absolute nuts that thanked you for this stupid post. You people love to act as though you are so innocent in your criticisms of President Obama. They are not truthful criticisms and you know that. Name calling and pictures of monkeys and just plain hate. And you say you're not falling for it?? A little turned around, aren't you?? We're not falling for it. Take all of those angelic faces that you feel have been so unjustly attacked, and go soak your heads. Idiots.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry to disappoint, but I am thrilled that so many decent, honest people are not falling for the dishonest tactic of being accused of Racism because they do not support Obama's radical Big Government Agenda.
> 
> You are the one making it about race, not us.  It would behoove you to engage in a bit of self-reflection to understand what that means about you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Are you deliberately being obtuse or are you just stupid?? Gee, those awful dems say we're racist because we don't like, "Obama's Big Government Agenda".
> 
> Tell me, in your opinion, what has Obama done since he's been president that you consider to be a good thing???
Click to expand...

i can name 2 right now

i liked that he gave the commander on the ship off Africa the authority to do what he had to do based on the situation at hand

and that he admitted that he was wrong in calling the Cambridge Police "acting stupidly"
now, can you name 2 things Bush did right?


----------



## Jack Fate

Sky Dancer said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jim Webb is starting to see the light (although he continues to pander to blacks): . . . .
> 
> James Webb: Diversity and the Myth of White Privilege - WSJ.com
> 
> 
> It's a step in the right direction.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Good find Boedicca.  And this is another drum to add to the one I and a few others have been beating for years now.  Thomas Sowell, one of my favorite historians, has done exhaustive study on the condition and progress of blacks in this country and has compiled irrefutable evidence that though still behind and still emeshed in segregation, black people were progressing and improving their situations at a far faster rate than white people were. . .UNTIL. . . .white people decided to help.  From that point on, progress slowed to a crawl or, in some cases, reversed itself.
> 
> Good intentions can produce very bad unintended consequences.  Until we all acknowledge that, and appreciate how much some are capitalizing on racism for their own purposes, it isn't going to get better.  And there will be those who will keep on doing their damndest to make sure that racism in all of its ugliness will continue to be front and center in the American culture.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Interesting.  You think anyone who dares bring up the topic of racism is capitalizing on racism and making it worse?
> 
> I guess as long as everyone else but Glenn Beck shuts up, you'll be happy.
Click to expand...


That's not the point.  The point is this.  To USE the term "racist" to label anyone who disagrees with your political policy is wrong.  

That's the point.  Can you see that?


----------



## boedicca

Rinata said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> If I were you, I'd be embarrassed by all of the absolute nuts that thanked you for this stupid post. You people love to act as though you are so innocent in your criticisms of President Obama. They are not truthful criticisms and you know that. Name calling and pictures of monkeys and just plain hate. And you say you're not falling for it?? A little turned around, aren't you?? We're not falling for it. Take all of those angelic faces that you feel have been so unjustly attacked, and go soak your heads. Idiots.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry to disappoint, but I am thrilled that so many decent, honest people are not falling for the dishonest tactic of being accused of Racism because they do not support Obama's radical Big Government Agenda.
> 
> You are the one making it about race, not us.  It would behoove you to engage in a bit of self-reflection to understand what that means about you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Are you deliberately being obtuse or are you just stupid?? Gee, those awful dems say we're racist because we don't like, "Obama's Big Government Agenda".
> 
> Tell me, in your opinion, what has Obama done since he's been president that you consider to be a good thing???
Click to expand...



He hasn't fulfilled his promise to close Gitmo and he has provided plenty of publicity for the oft misunderstood leafy green vegetable, arugula.

As to being obtuse or stupid, I'll defer to you as you are so highly accomplished at both.


----------



## mudwhistle

DiveCon said:


> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry to disappoint, but I am thrilled that so many decent, honest people are not falling for the dishonest tactic of being accused of Racism because they do not support Obama's radical Big Government Agenda.
> 
> You are the one making it about race, not us.  It would behoove you to engage in a bit of self-reflection to understand what that means about you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you deliberately being obtuse or are you just stupid?? Gee, those awful dems say we're racist because we don't like, "Obama's Big Government Agenda".
> 
> Tell me, in your opinion, what has Obama done since he's been president that you consider to be a good thing???
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> i can name 2 right now
> 
> i liked that he gave the commander on the ship off Africa the authority to do what he had to do based on the situation at hand
> 
> and that he admitted that he was wrong in calling the Cambridge Police "acting stupidly"
> now, can you name 2 things Bush did right?
Click to expand...


The first one he was obligated by law to do. The other was an apology for a knee-jerk reaction....which his Administration continues to repeat over and over. The latest is the firing of Shirley Sherrod. Obviously he hasn't learned his lesson. 

Bush did what had to be done to punish those responsible for 9/11, and he succeeded in Iraq when everyone said he couldn't. Also Bush has fought HIV/AIDS in Africa to a much greater extent then Obama. He also was in the process of lowering the deficit before the Dems took over Congress. It had shrunk from over $500 billion to around $167 billion in 06' even though we had those terrible tax-cuts for the rich in place.


----------



## DiveCon

mudwhistle said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are you deliberately being obtuse or are you just stupid?? Gee, those awful dems say we're racist because we don't like, "Obama's Big Government Agenda".
> 
> Tell me, in your opinion, what has Obama done since he's been president that you consider to be a good thing???
> 
> 
> 
> i can name 2 right now
> 
> i liked that he gave the commander on the ship off Africa the authority to do what he had to do based on the situation at hand
> 
> and that he admitted that he was wrong in calling the Cambridge Police "acting stupidly"
> now, can you name 2 things Bush did right?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The first one he was obligated by law to do. The other was an apology for a knee-jerk reaction....which his Administration continues to repeat over and over. The latest is the firing of Shirley Sherrod. Obviously he hasn't learned his lesson.
> 
> Bush did what had to be done to punish those responsible for 9/11, and he succeeded in Iraq when everyone said he couldn't. Also Bush has fought HIV/AIDS in Africa to a much greater extent then Obama. He also was in the process of lowering the deficit before the Dems took over Congress. It had shrunk from over $500 billion to around $167 billion in 06' even though we had those terrible tax-cuts for the rich in place.
Click to expand...

dang, i'd forgot about the African Aids aid

thanks for the reminder


----------



## Mr. Shaman

boedicca said:


> It's out in the open now.


....As usual..... ​


> "According to Ezra Klein of the Washington Post, *the journalist who began the listserv, Carlson is promoting inaccuracies  in his selective quotations. So its no surprise that official Fox opinion news would facilitate the promotion of the inaccuracies and selective quoting.*"


----------



## boedicca

Ezra Klein can clear up anything he thinks is misleading by publishing the entire archive.

Just sayin'.


----------



## DiveCon

Tucker Carlson - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Rinata

DiveCon said:


> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry to disappoint, but I am thrilled that so many decent, honest people are not falling for the dishonest tactic of being accused of Racism because they do not support Obama's radical Big Government Agenda.
> 
> You are the one making it about race, not us.  It would behoove you to engage in a bit of self-reflection to understand what that means about you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you deliberately being obtuse or are you just stupid?? Gee, those awful dems say we're racist because we don't like, "Obama's Big Government Agenda".
> 
> Tell me, in your opinion, what has Obama done since he's been president that you consider to be a good thing???
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i liked that he gave the commander on the ship off Africa the authority to do what he had to do based on the situation at hand
> 
> and that he admitted that he was wrong in calling the Cambridge Police "acting stupidly"
> now, can you name 2 things Bush did right?
Click to expand...


My question was to someone else, but I'm a sport. And impressed that you finally said something positive!! So I'll answer. 

I was so angry when I saw our citizens having to perform like acrobats when they were jumping out of the twin towers. When Bush stood with that fireman and said we would get the people that did this, I was so thrilled!! I truly liked him at that moment. Also, I know that we increased development and humanitarian aid to Africa from $1.4 billion in 2001 to more than $4 billion per year now. That was a terrific accomplishment by the Bush administration. And I really like Laura and the twins. Especially Genna. She's a wonderful girl.


----------



## Rinata

boedicca said:


> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry to disappoint, but I am thrilled that so many decent, honest people are not falling for the dishonest tactic of being accused of Racism because they do not support Obama's radical Big Government Agenda.
> 
> You are the one making it about race, not us.  It would behoove you to engage in a bit of self-reflection to understand what that means about you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you deliberately being obtuse or are you just stupid?? Gee, those awful dems say we're racist because we don't like, "Obama's Big Government Agenda".
> 
> Tell me, in your opinion, what has Obama done since he's been president that you consider to be a good thing???
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> He hasn't fulfilled his promise to close Gitmo and he has provided plenty of publicity for the oft misunderstood leafy green vegetable, arugula.
> 
> As to being obtuse or stupid, I'll defer to you as you are so highly accomplished at both.
Click to expand...


Dive Con has shown more class than you have. You should be mortified. Your answer is really stupid and evasive.


----------



## DiveCon

Rinata said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are you deliberately being obtuse or are you just stupid?? Gee, those awful dems say we're racist because we don't like, "Obama's Big Government Agenda".
> 
> Tell me, in your opinion, what has Obama done since he's been president that you consider to be a good thing???
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He hasn't fulfilled his promise to close Gitmo and he has provided plenty of publicity for the oft misunderstood leafy green vegetable, arugula.
> 
> As to being obtuse or stupid, I'll defer to you as you are so highly accomplished at both.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Dive Con has shown more class than you have. You should be mortified. Your answer is really stupid and evasive.
Click to expand...

i'm also glad he hasnt closed gitmo
but clearly the last one was a tongue in cheek comment


----------



## boedicca

Rinata said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are you deliberately being obtuse or are you just stupid?? Gee, those awful dems say we're racist because we don't like, "Obama's Big Government Agenda".
> 
> Tell me, in your opinion, what has Obama done since he's been president that you consider to be a good thing???
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He hasn't fulfilled his promise to close Gitmo and he has provided plenty of publicity for the oft misunderstood leafy green vegetable, arugula.
> 
> As to being obtuse or stupid, I'll defer to you as you are so highly accomplished at both.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Dive Con has shown more class than you have. You should be mortified. Your answer is really stupid and evasive.
Click to expand...



It's what an accusatory and disingenuous post like your deserved.  If you are going to accuse others of being stupid or obtuse, don't expect an answer in a spirit of goodwill.


----------



## boedicca

DiveCon said:


> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> He hasn't fulfilled his promise to close Gitmo and he has provided plenty of publicity for the oft misunderstood leafy green vegetable, arugula.
> 
> As to being obtuse or stupid, I'll defer to you as you are so highly accomplished at both.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dive Con has shown more class than you have. You should be mortified. Your answer is really stupid and evasive.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> i'm also glad he hasnt closed gitmo
> but clearly the last one was a tongue in cheek comment
Click to expand...



You might think differently if you were an arugula farmer or green grocer.


----------



## DiveCon

boedicca said:


> divecon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> dive con has shown more class than you have. You should be mortified. Your answer is really stupid and evasive.
> 
> 
> 
> i'm also glad he hasnt closed gitmo
> but clearly the last one was a tongue in cheek comment
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> you might think differently if you were an arugula farmer or green grocer.
Click to expand...

lol


----------



## Mr. Shaman

boedicca said:


> The Left uses the racist accusation against the Right, the Tea Party, Conservatives, the GOP...  Anyone who critiques prominent lefties or their programs will be falsely attacked as a racist as a diversionary tactic.



Would *these* be considered *diversionary T-shirts???????*


----------



## boedicca

Yes, they are.

American Thinker: Hello, I'm a Racist, Pleased to Meet You


----------



## DiveCon

boedicca said:


> Yes, they are.
> 
> American Thinker: Hello, I'm a Racist, Pleased to Meet You


shaman doesnt understand sarcasm very well


----------



## boedicca

Indeed.  It takes higher brain functions (which he clearly is lacking) to appreciate satire.


----------



## Rinata

boedicca said:


> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> He hasn't fulfilled his promise to close Gitmo and he has provided plenty of publicity for the oft misunderstood leafy green vegetable, arugula.
> 
> As to being obtuse or stupid, I'll defer to you as you are so highly accomplished at both.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dive Con has shown more class than you have. You should be mortified. Your answer is really stupid and evasive.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> It's what an accusatory and disingenuous post like your deserved.  If you are going to accuse others of being stupid or obtuse, don't expect an answer in a spirit of goodwill.
Click to expand...


Blah, blah, blah. Should have saved yourself the trouble.


----------



## boedicca

Indeed.   Interacting with you is a monumental waste of time.  I won't make that mistake again.

Adios.


----------



## Kat




----------



## Moon

boedicca said:


> Indeed.  It takes higher brain functions (which he clearly is lacking) to appreciate satire.



Yes, but he has a nice sense of color and frames his comments beautifully using the center justified option.


----------



## Rinata

boedicca said:


> Indeed.   Interacting with you is a monumental waste of time.  I won't make that mistake again.
> 
> Adios.



You just did, with your stupid neg rep. And let me clear something up. You did not interact. That was the point of my last post. I was trying to tell you that. My bad. I know I have to spell things out to certain people. 

Oh, and thanks for the neg rep. That's how I know I pissed you off. I'm so glad.


----------



## boedicca

^^^^^


----------



## Kat

boedicca said:


> ^^^^^





Darn, you beat me to it!!


----------



## boedicca

It was an Emergency Situation requiring immediate triage!


----------



## Kat

Here's a diff one


----------



## mudwhistle




----------



## Rinata

Geez, did a bunch of 3rd graders take over this thread??


----------



## Kat

Rinata said:


> Geez, did a bunch of 3rd graders take over this thread??






Obviously??



Rinata said:


> Blah, blah, blah. Should have saved yourself the trouble.


----------



## teapartysamurai

Rinata said:


> Geez, did a bunch of 3rd graders take over this thread??


 
Third graders, liberals, same thing!


----------



## PLYMCO_PILGRIM

This thread makes the liberal media look horrible, I would think those that support this type of agenda driven behavior in reporting would just let the thread die


----------



## teapartysamurai

Truthmatters said:


> The right will not be able to force the admin to react to these manufacctured stroies anymore.
> 
> This last case will make it impossible for them to FORCE immediate action from the WH.
> 
> You guys screwed your pooch of false outrage.
> 
> Now people will be required (even you righties) to examine these cases slowly and get all the imfo.
> 
> 
> I think this is a sign that the right is desperate to negatively effect the midterms because they know they are not going to be able to claim they have a mandate with the few seats they gain.


 
"manufactured"

TM, do you live in an alternative reality where lies are fact and fact are lies.

Oh, I forgot.  You do.  You are a liberal.


----------



## DiveCon

teapartysamurai said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> The right will not be able to force the admin to react to these manufacctured stroies anymore.
> 
> This last case will make it impossible for them to FORCE immediate action from the WH.
> 
> You guys screwed your pooch of false outrage.
> 
> Now people will be required (even you righties) to examine these cases slowly and get all the imfo.
> 
> 
> I think this is a sign that the right is desperate to negatively effect the midterms because they know they are not going to be able to claim they have a mandate with the few seats they gain.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "manufactured"
> 
> TM, do you live in an alternative reality where lies are fact and fact are lies.
> 
> Oh, I forgot.  You do.  You are a liberal.
Click to expand...

yes, she does
havent you read many of her posts yet?


----------



## boedicca

Oh puh-leeeze - not before breakfast!


----------



## MaggieMae

boedicca said:


> You're projecting, dearie.
> 
> Now back to the topic, mudwhistle, divecon, kat, and foxfyre have all nailed it:
> 
> The overuse of the Racist accusation has caused the term to have no meaning other than the accused disagrees with the Progressive Agenda.



If you read what divecon, kat and foxfyre (immanuel too) say, they believe (as do I) that the label alone is meaningless. Only you and mudwhistle attribute it as meaningful only to "progressives" or black liberals like Sharpton, et al.)


----------



## boedicca

Think that if it give you comfort.  When reality eludes a person, taking refuge in a fantasy life is often a consolation.  Hope yours is filled with rainbows and sparkly unicorns!


----------



## MaggieMae

Foxfyre said:


> The T said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed.
> 
> So much for a Post-Racial Presidency.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It was All _Fantasy *. *_The only reason it [rascism]still exists is that the left is obscessed with it...and the only way they think they can win. It's all they have left. They've lost every other debate on intellectual grounds.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There is power, prestige, influence, security, and wealth to be had by promoting and exploting racism.  Until that is corrected, both those claiming to be benefactors and their beneficiaries will continue to promote it.  And that, in my opinion, is why they continue to be obsessed with it.  That and it continues to be useful as an epithet to throw at their adversaries.
Click to expand...


I spoke too soon. So now you too lay it all on "progressives"?? Which is it?



			
				Foxfyre said:
			
		

> The saddest thing about all this is that whoever decided RACIST was the worst thing you could use as a label for anybody, everybody and anything and everything has become RACIST!!!!!
> 
> And in the process, the most partisan and gullible among us have lost all sense of what the word even means and could not define it now to save their lives. They can't go to the dictionary because the definitions there don't fit.
> 
> Maybe that's the way we'll finally get rid of it. Make it so obscure and all encompassing so that it becomes meaningless.



But since you've taken sides (again), let me offer an example: If the Republicans didn't *also* exploit racism for political points, they would have fired Michael Steele a long time ago.


----------



## boedicca

Not the way the Lefties do:


Based on Spencer Ackerman's tactic:

_*&#8220;If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game they&#8217;ve put upon us,&#8221; Ackerman wrote on the Journolist listserv in April 2008. &#8220;Instead, take one of them &#8212; Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares &#8212; and call them racists.&#8221;*_

Conservatives Karl Rove and Fred Barnes respond to Journolist &#8216;racist&#8217; post | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment


----------



## MaggieMae

boedicca said:


> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> The right will not be able to force the admin to react to these manufacctured stroies anymore.
> 
> This last case will make it impossible for them to FORCE immediate action from the WH.
> 
> You guys screwed your pooch of false outrage.
> Now people will be required (even you righties) to examine these cases slowly and get all the imfo.
> 
> 
> I think this is a sign that the right is desperate to negatively effect the midterms because they know they are not going to be able to claim they have a mandate with the few seats they gain.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Love that expression!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> It's not at all surprising that the two of you get your kicks from beastiality.
> 
> And we now have yet another reason to pity the dog in TM's Av.
Click to expand...


And to think I once gave you kudos for at least presenting articulate and well thought out observations. So many of you have sunk to new lows in recent months. Pity.


----------



## Immanuel

MaggieMae said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The T said:
> 
> 
> 
> It was All _Fantasy *. *_The only reason it [rascism]still exists is that the left is obscessed with it...and the only way they think they can win. It's all they have left. They've lost every other debate on intellectual grounds.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is power, prestige, influence, security, and wealth to be had by promoting and exploting racism.  Until that is corrected, both those claiming to be benefactors and their beneficiaries will continue to promote it.  And that, in my opinion, is why they continue to be obsessed with it.  That and it continues to be useful as an epithet to throw at their adversaries.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I spoke too soon. So now you too lay it all on "progressives"?? Which is it?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The saddest thing about all this is that whoever decided RACIST was the worst thing you could use as a label for anybody, everybody and anything and everything has become RACIST!!!!!
> 
> And in the process, the most partisan and gullible among us have lost all sense of what the word even means and could not define it now to save their lives. They can't go to the dictionary because the definitions there don't fit.
> 
> Maybe that's the way we'll finally get rid of it. Make it so obscure and all encompassing so that it becomes meaningless.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But since you've taken sides (again), let me offer an example: If the Republicans didn't *also* exploit racism for political points, they would have fired Michael Steele a long time ago.
Click to expand...


Firing Michael Steele would have major consequences to the Republican Party.  Its enemies would rally around Mr. Steele and the Republican Party would be declared racist for another thousand years and the name Michael Steele would be used as proof of their racism.

Suddenly Mr. Steele would become the darling of the Democratic Party and they would be preaching his good deeds like Rev. Wright preaches about BLT or Fred Phelps preaches the fallacy that God hates gays.  

Immie

PS I realize that gays is not the term Phelps uses, but I don't like his term because it is being used in a derogatory manner so I attempted to change it.


----------



## MaggieMae

boedicca said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> Dive Con has shown more class than you have. You should be mortified. Your answer is really stupid and evasive.
> 
> 
> 
> i'm also glad he hasnt closed gitmo
> but clearly the last one was a tongue in cheek comment
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You might think differently if you were an arugula farmer or green grocer.
Click to expand...


Yes, I'm sure the Obama family's taste for different foods has done wonders for organic farmers, just as the Bush family's taste for pretzels and pig ears has done wonders for Wise snack products.


----------



## MaggieMae

boedicca said:


> ^^^^^



You were pointing to yourself. Choke on your own spittle did ya?


----------



## boedicca

Only to someone who is board illiterate and doesn't understand that ^^^^ points to the post above.

Please, get a hobby .... or go play with your rainbow colored unicorns in Maggie land.


----------



## MaggieMae

PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:


> This thread makes the liberal media look horrible, I would think those that support this type of agenda driven behavior in reporting would just let the thread die



Why? It was obviously brought into the limelight now as a diversion. If it were all that important, we would have known about it over a year ago.


----------



## MaggieMae

boedicca said:


> Think that if it give you comfort.  When reality eludes a person, taking refuge in a fantasy life is often a consolation.  Hope yours is filled with rainbows and sparkly unicorns!



This from someone who uses a mermaid as her avatar. Tee hee...


----------



## boedicca

MaggieMae said:


> PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:
> 
> 
> 
> This thread makes the liberal media look horrible, I would think those that support this type of agenda driven behavior in reporting would just let the thread die
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why? It was obviously brought into the limelight now as a diversion. If it were all that important, we would have known about it over a year ago.
Click to expand...



Spoken like a good little apparatchik.

Does that mean the statute of limitation for anything is now a year?


----------



## MaggieMae

boedicca said:


> Not the way the Lefties do:
> 
> 
> Based on Spencer Ackerman's tactic:
> 
> _*If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game theyve put upon us, Ackerman wrote on the Journolist listserv in April 2008. Instead, take one of them  Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares  and call them racists.*_
> 
> Conservatives Karl Rove and Fred Barnes respond to Journolist racist post | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment



Ohhhh, big bad dangerous statements.


----------



## boedicca

MaggieMae said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> Think that if it give you comfort.  When reality eludes a person, taking refuge in a fantasy life is often a consolation.  Hope yours is filled with rainbows and sparkly unicorns!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This from someone who uses a mermaid as her avatar. Tee hee...
Click to expand...




Here's the difference:  I realize the mermaid is just a piece of artwork.

You actually believe that the leftwing ideology is good for people.


----------



## MaggieMae

boedicca said:


> Only to someone who is board illiterate and doesn't understand that ^^^^ points to the post above.
> 
> Please, get a hobby .... or go play with your rainbow colored unicorns in Maggie land.



I just thought I'd give you a taste of the same medicine you and your BFFs were giving Rinata yesterday. But I guess no one else can play your silly little games, eh?


----------



## MaggieMae

boedicca said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:
> 
> 
> 
> This thread makes the liberal media look horrible, I would think those that support this type of agenda driven behavior in reporting would just let the thread die
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why? It was obviously brought into the limelight now as a diversion. If it were all that important, we would have known about it over a year ago.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Spoken like a good little apparatchik.
> 
> Does that mean the statute of limitation for anything is now a year?
Click to expand...


No, but you yahoos need some NEW material, me thinks.


----------



## boedicca

MaggieMae said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not the way the Lefties do:
> 
> 
> Based on Spencer Ackerman's tactic:
> 
> _*If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game theyve put upon us, Ackerman wrote on the Journolist listserv in April 2008. Instead, take one of them  Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares  and call them racists.*_
> 
> Conservatives Karl Rove and Fred Barnes respond to Journolist racist post | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ohhhh, big bad dangerous statements.
Click to expand...




It's not surprising that you don't believe that words matter.


----------



## MaggieMae

boedicca said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> Think that if it give you comfort.  When reality eludes a person, taking refuge in a fantasy life is often a consolation.  Hope yours is filled with rainbows and sparkly unicorns!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This from someone who uses a mermaid as her avatar. Tee hee...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's the difference:  I realize the mermaid is just a piece of artwork.
> 
> You actually believe that the leftwing ideology is good for people.
Click to expand...


Yes, I do. So I guess since I have something solid to believe in and you just admitted to taking refuge in fantasy, I think I win. 

But I could be missing something with you. Could be you just drink too much.


----------



## DiveCon

MaggieMae said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> i'm also glad he hasnt closed gitmo
> but clearly the last one was a tongue in cheek comment
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You might think differently if you were an arugula farmer or green grocer.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes, I'm sure the Obama family's taste for different foods has done wonders for organic farmers, just as the Bush family's taste for pretzels and pig ears has done wonders for Wise snack products.
Click to expand...

pig ears?
you mean pork rinds?


btw, dont knock pork rinds if you havent tried em'


----------



## DiveCon

MaggieMae said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not the way the Lefties do:
> 
> 
> Based on Spencer Ackerman's tactic:
> 
> _*If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game theyve put upon us, Ackerman wrote on the Journolist listserv in April 2008. Instead, take one of them  Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares  and call them racists.*_
> 
> Conservatives Karl Rove and Fred Barnes respond to Journolist racist post | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ohhhh, big bad dangerous statements.
Click to expand...

it is if you believe words mean things

for them to just take anyone and falsely portray them as racists
yes that IS bad


----------



## boedicca

MaggieMae said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> This from someone who uses a mermaid as her avatar. Tee hee...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's the difference:  I realize the mermaid is just a piece of artwork.
> 
> You actually believe that the leftwing ideology is good for people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes, I do. So I guess since I have something solid to believe in and you just admitted to taking refuge in fantasy, I think I win.
> 
> But I could be missing something with you. Could be you just drink too much.
Click to expand...



You're even more deluded than you appear.  Having an Avatar is not a full representation of my beliefs.   

You adhere to a philosophy that has resulted in millions of deaths at the hands of totalitarians.   You either have a defective moral core, or you're just plain stupid.

Which reminds me of Churchill, who would have said to you:  "I may be drunk, Miss, but in the morning I will be sober and you will still be stupid. "


----------



## MaggieMae

DiveCon said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> You might think differently if you were an arugula farmer or green grocer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, I'm sure the Obama family's taste for different foods has done wonders for organic farmers, just as the Bush family's taste for pretzels and pig ears has done wonders for Wise snack products.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> pig ears?
> you mean pork rinds?
> 
> 
> btw, dont knock pork rinds if you havent tried em'
Click to expand...


  YES, thank you. I couldn't think what they were called. Now it's funny. And yes, I have tried them. Crunchy and tasteless.


----------



## MaggieMae

DiveCon said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not the way the Lefties do:
> 
> 
> Based on Spencer Ackerman's tactic:
> 
> _*If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game theyve put upon us, Ackerman wrote on the Journolist listserv in April 2008. Instead, take one of them  Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares  and call them racists.*_
> 
> Conservatives Karl Rove and Fred Barnes respond to Journolist racist post | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ohhhh, big bad dangerous statements.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> it is if you believe words mean things
> 
> for them to just take anyone and falsely portray them as racists
> yes that IS bad
Click to expand...


MY point was just saying stuff like that is rather meaningless, especially if in the context of an email exchange. They would first need some proof. And since it never happened, apparently they didn't.


----------



## DiveCon

MaggieMae said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, I'm sure the Obama family's taste for different foods has done wonders for organic farmers, just as the Bush family's taste for pretzels and pig ears has done wonders for Wise snack products.
> 
> 
> 
> pig ears?
> you mean pork rinds?
> 
> 
> btw, dont knock pork rinds if you havent tried em'
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> YES, thank you. I couldn't think what they were called. Now it's funny. And yes, I have tried them. Crunchy and tasteless.
Click to expand...

well then you had some bad pork rinds


----------



## DiveCon

MaggieMae said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ohhhh, big bad dangerous statements.
> 
> 
> 
> it is if you believe words mean things
> 
> for them to just take anyone and falsely portray them as racists
> yes that IS bad
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> MY point was just saying stuff like that is rather meaningless, especially if in the context of an email exchange. They would first need some proof. And since it never happened, apparently they didn't.
Click to expand...

it didnt happen?????
really?


----------



## Sky Dancer

LOL.  I've never tried pork rinds so I have no comment.


----------



## DiveCon

Sky Dancer said:


> LOL.  I've never tried pork rinds so I have no comment.


try em, they are good
and even the Atkins diet recommends them
they are almost a pure protein


----------



## boedicca

DiveCon said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> it is if you believe words mean things
> 
> for them to just take anyone and falsely portray them as racists
> yes that IS bad
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MY point was just saying stuff like that is rather meaningless, especially if in the context of an email exchange. They would first need some proof. And since it never happened, apparently they didn't.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> it didnt happen?????
> really?
Click to expand...



You need to put that in context of her little world of rainbows and sparkly unicorns.


----------



## MaggieMae

boedicca said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> Here's the difference:  I realize the mermaid is just a piece of artwork.
> 
> You actually believe that the leftwing ideology is good for people.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, I do. So I guess since I have something solid to believe in and you just admitted to taking refuge in fantasy, I think I win.
> 
> But I could be missing something with you. Could be you just drink too much.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You're even more deluded than you appear.  Having an Avatar is not a full representation of my beliefs.
> 
> You adhere to a philosophy that has resulted in millions of deaths at the hands of totalitarians.   You either have a defective moral core, or you're just plain stupid.
> 
> Which reminds me of Churchill, who would have said to you:  "I may be drunk, Miss, but in the morning I will be sober and you will still be stupid. "
Click to expand...


And you, my dear, are an idiot if you believe that today's "social" doctrine bears any resemblance to totalitarian Marxism _in practice_. You're nothing more than a wild-eyed reactionary making mountains out of molehills, literally, and you can't even make your case without sounding _illiterate_.

Churchill also said --

"A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on," and  "A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject." 

"


----------



## boedicca

You're a loon who doesn't understand the roots of her own belief system.


----------



## Charles_Main

MaggieMae said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, I do. So I guess since I have something solid to believe in and you just admitted to taking refuge in fantasy, I think I win.
> 
> But I could be missing something with you. Could be you just drink too much.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You're even more deluded than you appear.  Having an Avatar is not a full representation of my beliefs.
> 
> You adhere to a philosophy that has resulted in millions of deaths at the hands of totalitarians.   You either have a defective moral core, or you're just plain stupid.
> 
> Which reminds me of Churchill, who would have said to you:  "I may be drunk, Miss, but in the morning I will be sober and you will still be stupid. "
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And you, my dear, are an idiot if you believe that today's "social" doctrine bears any resemblance to totalitarian Marxism _in practice_.
Click to expand...


No Obama's Ideas bear resemblance to the Ideas Marx put forward. Which were taking by the Soviets, and others and corrupted into the "totalitarian Marxism you speak of"

That is kinda the point. That is why I call Obama a Marxist and not a communist. Because IMO he follows Marxist Ideas, and thinks he knows how to implement them with out them being corrupted into Totalitarianism. That is his Folly IMO, Because it can not be done.


----------



## boedicca

Of course it can't be done.

A little bit of totalitarian control always leads to the accretion of more totalitarian control.

Just look at the growth in the size of our government over the past 18 months and the expansion of power over areas that were formerly the private sector.  That's just a start.


----------



## Rinata

Kat said:


> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> Geez, did a bunch of 3rd graders take over this thread??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Obviously??
> 
> 
> 
> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> Blah, blah, blah. Should have saved yourself the trouble.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


Don't blame it on me. Grow up and talk like an adult and stop the childish insults.


----------



## Avatar4321

Rinata said:


> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> Geez, did a bunch of 3rd graders take over this thread??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Obviously??
> 
> 
> 
> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> Blah, blah, blah. Should have saved yourself the trouble.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Don't blame it on me. Grow up and talk like an adult and stop the childish insults.
Click to expand...


yeah, everyone needs to grow up except you


----------



## Rinata

Avatar4321 said:


> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> Obviously??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Don't blame it on me. Grow up and talk like an adult and stop the childish insults.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> yeah, everyone needs to grow up except you
Click to expand...


Really??? Why thank you. But I hope you included yourself in that group. You can be an obnoxious piece of work. Have a good evening.


----------



## Avatar4321

Rinata said:


> Avatar4321 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> Don't blame it on me. Grow up and talk like an adult and stop the childish insults.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yeah, everyone needs to grow up except you
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Really??? Why thank you. But I hope you included yourself in that group. You can be an obnoxious piece of work. Have a good evening.
Click to expand...


I freely admit I'm far too sarcastic.

But then I don't spend every post attacking people. Quite the opposite.


----------



## Kat

Rinata said:


> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> Geez, did a bunch of 3rd graders take over this thread??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Obviously??
> 
> 
> 
> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> Blah, blah, blah. Should have saved yourself the trouble.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Don't blame it on me. Grow up and talk like an adult and stop the childish insults.
Click to expand...



Where do I post childish insults? I may throw in one here and there, but from what I see, so do you. So hush.


----------



## PLYMCO_PILGRIM

Regardless of all the arguments made in the last 53 pages my original comment still stands.

This shows the outright dishonesty of the liberal media in their own words and shows they are willing to lie through the media to silence their opposition.

Kudos Journolist  LOL


----------



## Foxfyre

PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:


> Regardless of all the arguments made in the last 53 pages my original comment still stands.
> 
> This shows the outright dishonesty of the liberal media in their own words and shows they are willing to lie through the media to silence their opposition.
> 
> Kudos Journolist  LOL



Which again is why Fox News is the most successful news organization now--it does report all the news and provides honest perspective from left and right - that which is bad and good from both.   I know that is true because I am so often annoyed when they redeem that which I had already made up my mind to condemn.  

And that is why Fox News is so hated by the Left because it doesn't dishonestly give just one side or report in a way to justify demonization of conservatives or those on the right.  And it seems that being fair or reporting responsibly is the same thing as being infuriatingly biased to many on the left.


----------



## boedicca

PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:


> Regardless of all the arguments made in the last 53 pages my original comment still stands.
> 
> This shows the outright dishonesty of the liberal media in their own words and shows they are willing to lie through the media to silence their opposition.
> 
> Kudos Journolist  LOL




Indeed.  And true to form, they assume that everyone else follows their low standards of ethics.


----------



## MaggieMae

boedicca said:


> Of course it can't be done.
> 
> A little bit of totalitarian control always leads to the accretion of more totalitarian control.
> 
> Just look at the growth in the size of our government over the past 18 months and the expansion of power over areas that were formerly the private sector.  That's just a start.



Oh please...because he wants to level the playing field a little better? That's the only part of Marx's ideology that Obama embraces. It's hardly been a Democratic administration that has determined the expansion of the haves and the have-nots; ironically, by reverse Marxism, the rich have gotten richer and the poor have gotten poorer under Republican administrations. That you can't see that is pathetic.


----------



## boedicca

Level the playing field = lowering standards of living for everyone.

The proof is in the pudding, as they say.  And the Obamanomics Recipe is quite a noxious messy goo.


----------



## MaggieMae

PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:


> Regardless of all the arguments made in the last 53 pages my original comment still stands.
> 
> This shows the outright dishonesty of the liberal media in their own words and shows they are willing to lie through the media to silence their opposition.
> 
> Kudos Journolist  LOL



I guess all the people so dedicated to "fair and balanced" have forgotten this. Why is one liberal website whose members represent the so-called "liberal media" any worse than the members from the uber right who have their own agenda?

This includes a summary, and the cast of real characters many of whom are ex-Fox reporters/journalists:
Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism (2004)

You can watch the entire video here:
OUTFOXED : Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism

_Just sayin'... _


----------



## Foxfyre

MaggieMae said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course it can't be done.
> 
> A little bit of totalitarian control always leads to the accretion of more totalitarian control.
> 
> Just look at the growth in the size of our government over the past 18 months and the expansion of power over areas that were formerly the private sector.  That's just a start.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh please...because he wants to level the playing field a little better? That's the only part of Marx's ideology that Obama embraces. It's hardly been a Democratic administration that has determined the expansion of the haves and the have-nots; ironically, by reverse Marxism, the rich have gotten richer and the poor have gotten poorer under Republican administrations. That you can't see that is pathetic.
Click to expand...


He not only embraces Marx's concept of a level playing field but he embraces Marx's concept of using government to force commerce and industry and the more prosperous among us to level it.   In the process the government becomes bigger and more encompassing until it becomes the central power itself and the people are powerless to resist it.

The fact that he is aided and abetted by a far left leaning media only makes his agenda that much easier to carry out.

The problem that Marx never understood was that despite the most noble of motive initially, once total power is achieved, those who hold it never volunarily give it up.

Which is why we have a brewing war between the government and the majority of the people right now.  God willing, it will remain a battle of wills and the right values will win out.


----------



## Sky Dancer

FOX is newsinfotainment.  That's why I can't stand it.


----------



## Rinata

Avatar4321 said:


> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Avatar4321 said:
> 
> 
> 
> yeah, everyone needs to grow up except you
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really??? Why thank you. But I hope you included yourself in that group. You can be an obnoxious piece of work. Have a good evening.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I freely admit I'm far too sarcastic.
> 
> But then I don't spend every post attacking people. Quite the opposite.
Click to expand...


I am respectful to everyone that is respectful to me. People need to learn to explain their political views without name calling and cussing. How often do you see that on the right???


----------



## Lonestar_logic

Sky Dancer said:


> FOX is newsinfotainment.  That's why I can't stand it.



Then don't watch it.


----------



## Lonestar_logic

Rinata said:


> Avatar4321 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> Really??? Why thank you. But I hope you included yourself in that group. You can be an obnoxious piece of work. Have a good evening.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I freely admit I'm far too sarcastic.
> 
> But then I don't spend every post attacking people. Quite the opposite.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am respectful to everyone that is respectful to me. People need to learn to explain their political views without name calling and cussing. How often do you see that on the right???
Click to expand...


About as often as you see it on the left.


----------



## Rinata

Lonestar_logic said:


> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Avatar4321 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I freely admit I'm far too sarcastic.
> 
> But then I don't spend every post attacking people. Quite the opposite.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am respectful to everyone that is respectful to me. People need to learn to explain their political views without name calling and cussing. How often do you see that on the right???
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> About as often as you see it on the left.
Click to expand...


Bull.


----------



## Kat

Rinata said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am respectful to everyone that is respectful to me. People need to learn to explain their political views without name calling and cussing. How often do you see that on the right???
> 
> 
> 
> 
> About as often as you see it on the left.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Bull.
Click to expand...



If you believe that, then you are not reading this forum. It is on both sides. Period.


----------



## Immanuel

Kat said:


> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> About as often as you see it on the left.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bull.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> If you believe that, then you are not reading this forum. It is on both sides. Period.
Click to expand...


She is definitely not reading the left side of the forum.  That is for sure.

It goes both ways.

Immie


----------



## DiveCon

MaggieMae said:


> PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:
> 
> 
> 
> Regardless of all the arguments made in the last 53 pages my original comment still stands.
> 
> This shows the outright dishonesty of the liberal media in their own words and shows they are willing to lie through the media to silence their opposition.
> 
> Kudos Journolist  LOL
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I guess all the people so dedicated to "fair and balanced" have forgotten this. Why is one liberal website whose members represent the so-called "liberal media" any worse than the members from the uber right who have their own agenda?
> 
> This includes a summary, and the cast of real characters many of whom are ex-Fox reporters/journalists:
> Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism (2004)
> 
> You can watch the entire video here:
> OUTFOXED : Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism
> 
> _Just sayin'... _
Click to expand...

ROFLMAO
outfoxed was pure liberal propaganda and total BULLSHIT


----------



## DiveCon

Lonestar_logic said:


> Sky Dancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> FOX is newsinfotainment.  That's why I can't stand it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then don't watch it.
Click to expand...

she doesnt


makes me wonder how she can say ANYTHING about it


----------



## Lonestar_logic

Rinata said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am respectful to everyone that is respectful to me. People need to learn to explain their political views without name calling and cussing. How often do you see that on the right???
> 
> 
> 
> 
> About as often as you see it on the left.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Bull.
Click to expand...


Great comeback. Fact is both parties are guilty of the name calling and the cussing. I'd go so far as to say the left is worse.


----------



## Lonestar_logic

DiveCon said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sky Dancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> FOX is newsinfotainment.  That's why I can't stand it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then don't watch it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> she doesnt
> 
> 
> makes me wonder how she can say ANYTHING about it
Click to expand...


I wonder about that too. But then again, none the idiot leftist surprises me. They are in fact quite predictable.


----------



## boedicca

Here's the basic fact:   A cabal of leftwing journalist conspired to suppress news and accuse innocent people of racism as a diversionary tactic.

There is no equivalent incident on the right.


----------



## Foxfyre

Lonestar_logic said:


> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> About as often as you see it on the left.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bull.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Great comeback. Fact is both parties are guilty of the name calling and the cussing. I'd go so far as to say the left is worse.
Click to expand...


I don't know if the left is worse.  But sometimes I think that's all the left has.  Those on the right can articulate why they hold the opinions that they do and can defend them without name calling if they have to.   I'm not sure many on the left can do that.  Very few accept when challenged to do so.


----------



## boedicca

Foxfyre said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> Bull.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Great comeback. Fact is both parties are guilty of the name calling and the cussing. I'd go so far as to say the left is worse.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't know if the left is worse.  But sometimes I think that's all the left has.  Those on the right can articulate why they hold the opinions that they do and can defend them without name calling if they have to.   I'm not sure many on the left can do that.  Very few accept when challenged to do so.
Click to expand...



That's why the left developed the tactic of calling the opposition "Racists".


----------



## Sky Dancer

There's a reason people of color vote Democratic.


----------



## Foxfyre

boedicca said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Great comeback. Fact is both parties are guilty of the name calling and the cussing. I'd go so far as to say the left is worse.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know if the left is worse.  But sometimes I think that's all the left has.  Those on the right can articulate why they hold the opinions that they do and can defend them without name calling if they have to.   I'm not sure many on the left can do that.  Very few accept when challenged to do so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> That's why the left developed the tactic of calling the opposition "Racists".
Click to expand...


Well in their defense they often start out with delusional or close minded or advocates for the rich only or polluters/anti-environmental or religious fanatics or hateful or selfish or some such as that before they get to racist.  *RACIST* is the ultimate these days and is generally reserved for anybody who criticizes anything re the government or President Obama.


----------



## DiveCon

Sky Dancer said:


> There's a reason people of color vote Democratic.


and that reason IS?
please do elaborate


----------



## Sky Dancer

Foxfyre said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know if the left is worse.  But sometimes I think that's all the left has.  Those on the right can articulate why they hold the opinions that they do and can defend them without name calling if they have to.   I'm not sure many on the left can do that.  Very few accept when challenged to do so.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's why the left developed the tactic of calling the opposition "Racists".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well in their defense they often start out with delusional or close minded or advocates for the rich only or polluters/anti-environmental or religious fanatics or hateful or selfish or some such as that before they get to racist.  *RACIST* is the ultimate these days and is generally reserved for anybody who criticizes anything re the government or President Obama.
Click to expand...


What?

People of color vote mostly Democratic.  Why is that?

It has nothing to do with the label racist.  It has to do with the party's platform.


----------



## Sky Dancer

DiveCon said:


> Sky Dancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> There's a reason people of color vote Democratic.
> 
> 
> 
> and that reason IS?
> please do elaborate
Click to expand...

The Democratic platform.


----------



## Immanuel

Sky Dancer said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> That's why the left developed the tactic of calling the opposition "Racists".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well in their defense they often start out with delusional or close minded or advocates for the rich only or polluters/anti-environmental or religious fanatics or hateful or selfish or some such as that before they get to racist.  *RACIST* is the ultimate these days and is generally reserved for anybody who criticizes anything re the government or President Obama.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What?
> 
> People of color vote mostly Democratic.  Why is that?
> 
> It has nothing to do with the label racist.  It has to do with the party's platform.
Click to expand...


I can agree with that.

The Democrats cater to the poor, needy and the downtrodden.  They cater to them with promises and sometimes they even follow through.

I don't think they necessarily care any more for them than Conservatives/Republicans do, but I think the message is easier to sell coming from the liberal/Democrat perspective.  The Democrats believe that Welfare is the answer to saving the poor. Republicans believe it to be much of the problem.  Conservatives/Republicans believe in the hand up rather than the hand out.  Who is right?  Personally, I think the hand up is better in the long run.

But, how do you sell the Conservative/Republican message to the single mother of five who is struggling to make ends meet?  You don't.  Even if in the long run she would be better off being out from under Welfare.

Immie


----------



## DiveCon

Sky Dancer said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> That's why the left developed the tactic of calling the opposition "Racists".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well in their defense they often start out with delusional or close minded or advocates for the rich only or polluters/anti-environmental or religious fanatics or hateful or selfish or some such as that before they get to racist.  *RACIST* is the ultimate these days and is generally reserved for anybody who criticizes anything re the government or President Obama.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What?
> 
> People of color vote mostly Democratic.  Why is that?
> 
> It has nothing to do with the label racist.  It has to do with the party's platform.
Click to expand...

you don't think that falsely portraying republicans and conservatives in general as racist plays NO part in that?


----------



## Foxfyre

Immanuel said:


> Sky Dancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well in their defense they often start out with delusional or close minded or advocates for the rich only or polluters/anti-environmental or religious fanatics or hateful or selfish or some such as that before they get to racist.  *RACIST* is the ultimate these days and is generally reserved for anybody who criticizes anything re the government or President Obama.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What?
> 
> People of color vote mostly Democratic.  Why is that?
> 
> It has nothing to do with the label racist.  It has to do with the party's platform.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I can agree with that.
> 
> The Democrats cater to the poor, needy and the downtrodden.  They cater to them with promises and sometimes they even follow through.
> 
> I don't think they necessarily care any more for them than Conservatives/Republicans do, but I think the message is easier to sell coming from the liberal/Democrat perspective.  The Democrats believe that Welfare is the answer to saving the poor. Republicans believe it to be much of the problem.  Conservatives/Republicans believe in the hand up rather than the hand out.  Who is right?  Personally, I think the hand up is better in the long run.
> 
> But, how do you sell the Conservative/Republican message to the single mother of five who is struggling to make ends meet?  You don't.  Even if in the long run she would be better off being out from under Welfare.
> 
> Immie
Click to expand...


More importantly, those kids would benefit from seeing Mom (and/or preferably Dad) getting up, getting cleaned up, getting dressed, going to work, and bringing home a paycheck.

Welfare does help some people for sure, but in the process it has diminished and destroyed many wonderful private charities who were more effective and efficient in doing that and did it without destroying the black family etc.  The legacy of helping some is obvious in single mothers who have never been married, destruction of most of the nuclear family, making the men irrelevent or a detriment to the family, an abysmal school drop out rate, and whole neighborhoods so dangerous and crime ridden that life expectancyis significantly reduced.

And honest appraisal of government welfare has to look at those statistics with an open mind, and acknowledge that none of those conditions existed, except in rare incidents, before welfare went into effect.

Helping people sounds so wonderful and unselfish and noble and it's easy to get caught up in the semantics and ignore the results of unintended consequences.


----------



## Sky Dancer

DiveCon said:


> Sky Dancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well in their defense they often start out with delusional or close minded or advocates for the rich only or polluters/anti-environmental or religious fanatics or hateful or selfish or some such as that before they get to racist.  *RACIST* is the ultimate these days and is generally reserved for anybody who criticizes anything re the government or President Obama.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What?
> 
> People of color vote mostly Democratic.  Why is that?
> 
> It has nothing to do with the label racist.  It has to do with the party's platform.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> you don't think that falsely portraying republicans and conservatives in general as racist plays NO part in that?
Click to expand...


No, I don't.  I think people of color choose the Democratic platform because they agree with the party's direction on naitonal issues.


----------



## Sky Dancer

Foxfyre said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sky Dancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> What?
> 
> People of color vote mostly Democratic.  Why is that?
> 
> It has nothing to do with the label racist.  It has to do with the party's platform.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I can agree with that.
> 
> The Democrats cater to the poor, needy and the downtrodden.  They cater to them with promises and sometimes they even follow through.
> 
> I don't think they necessarily care any more for them than Conservatives/Republicans do, but I think the message is easier to sell coming from the liberal/Democrat perspective.  The Democrats believe that Welfare is the answer to saving the poor. Republicans believe it to be much of the problem.  Conservatives/Republicans believe in the hand up rather than the hand out.  Who is right?  Personally, I think the hand up is better in the long run.
> 
> But, how do you sell the Conservative/Republican message to the single mother of five who is struggling to make ends meet?  You don't.  Even if in the long run she would be better off being out from under Welfare.
> 
> Immie
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> More importantly, those kids would benefit from seeing Mom (and/or preferably Dad) getting up, getting cleaned up, getting dressed, going to work, and bringing home a paycheck.
> 
> Welfare does help some people for sure, but in the process it has diminished and destroyed many wonderful private charities who were more effective and efficient in doing that and did it without destroying the black family etc.  The legacy of helping some is obvious in single mothers who have never been married, destruction of most of the nuclear family, making the men irrelevent or a detriment to the family, an abysmal school drop out rate, and whole neighborhoods so dangerous and crime ridden that life expectancyis significantly reduced.
> 
> And honest appraisal of government welfare has to look at those statistics with an open mind, and acknowledge that none of those conditions existed, except in rare incidents, before welfare went into effect.
> 
> Helping people sounds so wonderful and unselfish and noble and it's easy to get caught up in the semantics and ignore the results of unintended consequences.
Click to expand...


With all due respect.  I have been a social worker my whole professional life.  Welfare is a temporary and needed helping hand for children and families. 

It's not the evil you portray.  It's not destroying families.  Poverty, drug abuse, domestic violence, and crime destroy families.


----------



## DiveCon

Sky Dancer said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sky Dancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> What?
> 
> People of color vote mostly Democratic.  Why is that?
> 
> It has nothing to do with the label racist.  It has to do with the party's platform.
> 
> 
> 
> you don't think that falsely portraying republicans and conservatives in general as racist plays NO part in that?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, I don't.  I think people of color choose the Democratic platform because they agree with the party's direction on naitonal issues.
Click to expand...

thats odd, because i've seen polls before where the outcome was they were more conservative and agreed more with the GOP platform
but i guess those polls must have been racist, right?


----------



## boedicca

Sky Dancer said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> 
> I can agree with that.
> 
> The Democrats cater to the poor, needy and the downtrodden.  They cater to them with promises and sometimes they even follow through.
> 
> I don't think they necessarily care any more for them than Conservatives/Republicans do, but I think the message is easier to sell coming from the liberal/Democrat perspective.  The Democrats believe that Welfare is the answer to saving the poor. Republicans believe it to be much of the problem.  Conservatives/Republicans believe in the hand up rather than the hand out.  Who is right?  Personally, I think the hand up is better in the long run.
> 
> But, how do you sell the Conservative/Republican message to the single mother of five who is struggling to make ends meet?  You don't.  Even if in the long run she would be better off being out from under Welfare.
> 
> Immie
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More importantly, those kids would benefit from seeing Mom (and/or preferably Dad) getting up, getting cleaned up, getting dressed, going to work, and bringing home a paycheck.
> 
> Welfare does help some people for sure, but in the process it has diminished and destroyed many wonderful private charities who were more effective and efficient in doing that and did it without destroying the black family etc.  The legacy of helping some is obvious in single mothers who have never been married, destruction of most of the nuclear family, making the men irrelevent or a detriment to the family, an abysmal school drop out rate, and whole neighborhoods so dangerous and crime ridden that life expectancyis significantly reduced.
> 
> And honest appraisal of government welfare has to look at those statistics with an open mind, and acknowledge that none of those conditions existed, except in rare incidents, before welfare went into effect.
> 
> Helping people sounds so wonderful and unselfish and noble and it's easy to get caught up in the semantics and ignore the results of unintended consequences.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> With all due respect.  I have been a social worker my whole professional life.  Welfare is a temporary and needed helping hand for children and families.
> 
> It's not the evil you portray.  It's not destroying families.  Poverty, drug abuse, domestic violence, and crime destroy families.
Click to expand...



Welfare is most certainly not temporary for many unfortunate, multi-generational families who are made government dependents by it.


----------



## Sky Dancer

DiveCon said:


> Sky Dancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> you don't think that falsely portraying republicans and conservatives in general as racist plays NO part in that?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, I don't.  I think people of color choose the Democratic platform because they agree with the party's direction on naitonal issues.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> thats odd, because i've seen polls before where the outcome was they were more conservative and agreed more with the GOP platform
> but* i guess those polls must have been racist, right*?
Click to expand...


No Republican presidential candidate has gotten more than 15 percent of the black vote since 1965.
http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/when_did_blacks_start_voting_democratic.html


----------



## boedicca

DiveCon said:


> Sky Dancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well in their defense they often start out with delusional or close minded or advocates for the rich only or polluters/anti-environmental or religious fanatics or hateful or selfish or some such as that before they get to racist.  *RACIST* is the ultimate these days and is generally reserved for anybody who criticizes anything re the government or President Obama.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What?
> 
> People of color vote mostly Democratic.  Why is that?
> 
> It has nothing to do with the label racist.  It has to do with the party's platform.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> you don't think that falsely portraying republicans and conservatives in general as racist plays NO part in that?
Click to expand...




Seeing conservative blacks reviled as Uncle Toms and not true People of Color most certainly has an impact.


----------



## Sky Dancer

boedicca said:


> Sky Dancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> 
> More importantly, those kids would benefit from seeing Mom (and/or preferably Dad) getting up, getting cleaned up, getting dressed, going to work, and bringing home a paycheck.
> 
> Welfare does help some people for sure, but in the process it has diminished and destroyed many wonderful private charities who were more effective and efficient in doing that and did it without destroying the black family etc.  The legacy of helping some is obvious in single mothers who have never been married, destruction of most of the nuclear family, making the men irrelevent or a detriment to the family, an abysmal school drop out rate, and whole neighborhoods so dangerous and crime ridden that life expectancyis significantly reduced.
> 
> And honest appraisal of government welfare has to look at those statistics with an open mind, and acknowledge that none of those conditions existed, except in rare incidents, before welfare went into effect.
> 
> Helping people sounds so wonderful and unselfish and noble and it's easy to get caught up in the semantics and ignore the results of unintended consequences.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> With all due respect.  I have been a social worker my whole professional life.  Welfare is a temporary and needed helping hand for children and families.
> 
> It's not the evil you portray.  It's not destroying families.  Poverty, drug abuse, domestic violence, and crime destroy families.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Welfare is most certainly not temporary for many unfortunate, multi-generational families who are made government dependents by it.
Click to expand...


Welfare to work changed that.


----------



## boedicca

For some - but not enough and not everyone.


----------



## Sky Dancer

boedicca said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sky Dancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> What?
> 
> People of color vote mostly Democratic.  Why is that?
> 
> It has nothing to do with the label racist.  It has to do with the party's platform.
> 
> 
> 
> you don't think that falsely portraying republicans and conservatives in general as racist plays NO part in that?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seeing conservative blacks reviled as Uncle Toms and not true People of Color most certainly has an impact.
Click to expand...


I don't think of them that way.  People vote their interests.  Not one Republican presidential candidate has recieived more than 15% of the black vote since 1965.


----------



## boedicca

Sky Dancer said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sky Dancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, I don't.  I think people of color choose the Democratic platform because they agree with the party's direction on naitonal issues.
> 
> 
> 
> thats odd, because i've seen polls before where the outcome was they were more conservative and agreed more with the GOP platform
> but* i guess those polls must have been racist, right*?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No Republican presidential candidate has gotten more than 15 percent of the black vote since 1965.
> FactCheck.org: When did blacks start voting Democratic?
Click to expand...



Gee Whiz.   The Dems tell blacks that the GOP is racist, and then gather up black voters into busses and take them to polling places.  One year, they even gave out fried chicken dinner coupons to their shepherded voters in Oakland.


----------



## DiveCon

Sky Dancer said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sky Dancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, I don't.  I think people of color choose the Democratic platform because they agree with the party's direction on naitonal issues.
> 
> 
> 
> thats odd, because i've seen polls before where the outcome was they were more conservative and agreed more with the GOP platform
> but* i guess those polls must have been racist, right*?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No Republican presidential candidate has gotten more than 15 percent of the black vote since 1965.
> FactCheck.org: When did blacks start voting Democratic?
Click to expand...

which is totally irrelevant to what i said


----------



## Sky Dancer

boedicca said:


> For some - but not enough and not everyone.



I work in the field as a social worker.  They people who don't get off welfare are multiply challenged by mental illness, substance abuse, domestic violence, crime and a host of other social problems.

You want to oversimplify the situation and say that everyone can succeed but you'd be wrong.


----------



## boedicca

Sky Dancer said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> For some - but not enough and not everyone.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I work in the field as a social worker.  They people who don't get off welfare are multiply challenged by mental illness, substance abuse, domestic violence, crime and a host of other social problems.
> 
> You want to oversimplify the situation and say that everyone can succeed but you'd be wrong.
Click to expand...



And what caused that host of social problems in the first place?   

The destruction of nuclear families wrought by giving teenage girls welfare to have babies out of wedlock certainly hasn't helped the situation.


----------



## DiveCon

Sky Dancer said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> you don't think that falsely portraying republicans and conservatives in general as racist plays NO part in that?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seeing conservative blacks reviled as Uncle Toms and not true People of Color most certainly has an impact.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't think of them that way.  People vote their interests.  Not one Republican presidential candidate has recieived more than 15% of the black vote since 1965.
Click to expand...

which again, has nothing to do with whats being said
in fact, it actually helps our point that portraying the GOP as racist DOES work


----------



## Sky Dancer

boedicca said:


> Sky Dancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> For some - but not enough and not everyone.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I work in the field as a social worker.  They people who don't get off welfare are multiply challenged by mental illness, substance abuse, domestic violence, crime and a host of other social problems.
> 
> You want to oversimplify the situation and say that everyone can succeed but you'd be wrong.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> And what caused that host of social problems in the first place?
> 
> The destruction of nuclear families wrought by giving teenage girls welfare to have babies out of wedlock certainly hasn't helped the situation.
Click to expand...


Let's talk about what the causes of those social problems are.  You're claiming that welfare caused the problems.

Welfare is a response to the problems.


----------



## Foxfyre

Sky Dancer said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> 
> I can agree with that.
> 
> The Democrats cater to the poor, needy and the downtrodden.  They cater to them with promises and sometimes they even follow through.
> 
> I don't think they necessarily care any more for them than Conservatives/Republicans do, but I think the message is easier to sell coming from the liberal/Democrat perspective.  The Democrats believe that Welfare is the answer to saving the poor. Republicans believe it to be much of the problem.  Conservatives/Republicans believe in the hand up rather than the hand out.  Who is right?  Personally, I think the hand up is better in the long run.
> 
> But, how do you sell the Conservative/Republican message to the single mother of five who is struggling to make ends meet?  You don't.  Even if in the long run she would be better off being out from under Welfare.
> 
> Immie
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More importantly, those kids would benefit from seeing Mom (and/or preferably Dad) getting up, getting cleaned up, getting dressed, going to work, and bringing home a paycheck.
> 
> Welfare does help some people for sure, but in the process it has diminished and destroyed many wonderful private charities who were more effective and efficient in doing that and did it without destroying the black family etc.  The legacy of helping some is obvious in single mothers who have never been married, destruction of most of the nuclear family, making the men irrelevent or a detriment to the family, an abysmal school drop out rate, and whole neighborhoods so dangerous and crime ridden that life expectancyis significantly reduced.
> 
> And honest appraisal of government welfare has to look at those statistics with an open mind, and acknowledge that none of those conditions existed, except in rare incidents, before welfare went into effect.
> 
> Helping people sounds so wonderful and unselfish and noble and it's easy to get caught up in the semantics and ignore the results of unintended consequences.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> With all due respect.  I have been a social worker my whole professional life.  Welfare is a temporary and needed helping hand for children and families.
> 
> It's not the evil you portray.  It's not destroying families.  Poverty, drug abuse, domestic violence, crime destroy families.
Click to expand...


In all due respect, I have been working with the poor and disadvantaged probably for a lot more years than you have.  And I've seen first hand some of the problems that exist.  And I also am a student of history who isn't afraid to look underneath the liberal veneer some use to gloss over the uglier truths.  I lived before welfare, and I have read the detailed analysis of black historians who have identified all the problems within it.  Welfare has encouraged and perpetuated the broken family and single parent syndrome among the poor and it is THAT syndrome that has created most of the poverty, drug abuse, domestic violence, and crime that we now have.



> The greatest danger to the liberal vision are facts about the consequences of liberalism itself and the laws, policies, and ways of life that the left has spawned.
> 
> *That the black family, which survived centuries of slavery and generations of discrimination, has disintegrated in the wake of the liberal welfare state is only one example.*
> 
> Liberals have been driven to the desperate expedient of attributing this and other social pathology in today's ghettos to "a legacy of slavery" -- even though black children grew up with two parents more often under slavery than today.
> 
> Blacks only a generation or two out of slavery also had higher rates of employment and lower rates of crime than today.
> 
> The illogic of the "legacy of slavery" argument only illustrates the desperate attempt to salvage the liberal vision.
> 
> The very people who argue this way would never be guilty of such illogic in discussing something that was not such a threat to their vision.
> 
> One of the most telling examples of the social destructiveness of the left's welfare-state vision can be found among the white slum dwellers in Britain described in the brilliant and insightful book "Life at the Bottom" by Theodore Dalrymple.
> 
> There it is not possible to blame social degeneracy on slavery, racism or any of the other things cited as causes of the behavior and consequences found among blacks in American slums. Yet the results are virtually identical, right down to children beating up classmates for trying to get an education.
> 
> The vision of the left, full of envy and resentment, takes its worst toll on those at the bottom -- whether black or white -- who find in that paranoid vision an excuse for counterproductive and ultimately self-destructive attitudes and behavior.
> --Thomas Sowell PhD
> Capitalism Magazine - Preserving a Vision--at the Expense of the Facts





> Most of the major problems that many black people face are not amendable to political solutions and government anti-poverty programs. Let's look at some. In 1940, 86 percent of black children were born inside marriage, and the illegitimacy rate among blacks was about 15 percent. Today, only 35 percent of black children are born inside marriage, and the illegitimacy rate hovers around 70 percent. Today's breakdown of the black family is unprecedented. It began in the 1960s with the War on Poverty and the harebrained ideas of the welfare state. In the mid-1960s, Daniel Moynihan sounded the alarm about the breakdown in the black family in his book "The Negro Family: The Case for National Action." At that time black illegitimacy was 26 percent. Moynihan said, "(A)t the heart of the deterioration of the fabric of the Negro society is the deterioration of the Negro family.
> --Walter Williams,PhD
> Townhall - Walter E. Williams - Politics and Blacks


----------



## Sky Dancer

DiveCon said:


> Sky Dancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> Seeing conservative blacks reviled as Uncle Toms and not true People of Color most certainly has an impact.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think of them that way.  People vote their interests.  Not one Republican presidential candidate has recieived more than 15% of the black vote since 1965.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> which again, has nothing to do with whats being said
> in fact, it actually helps our point that portraying the GOP as racist DOES work
Click to expand...


Who portrays the GOP as racist?  I don't.  I just see the Democratic platform as more socially progressive and social justice oriented.


----------



## Sky Dancer

Foxfyre said:


> Sky Dancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> 
> More importantly, those kids would benefit from seeing Mom (and/or preferably Dad) getting up, getting cleaned up, getting dressed, going to work, and bringing home a paycheck.
> 
> Welfare does help some people for sure, but in the process it has diminished and destroyed many wonderful private charities who were more effective and efficient in doing that and did it without destroying the black family etc.  The legacy of helping some is obvious in single mothers who have never been married, destruction of most of the nuclear family, making the men irrelevent or a detriment to the family, an abysmal school drop out rate, and whole neighborhoods so dangerous and crime ridden that life expectancyis significantly reduced.
> 
> And honest appraisal of government welfare has to look at those statistics with an open mind, and acknowledge that none of those conditions existed, except in rare incidents, before welfare went into effect.
> 
> Helping people sounds so wonderful and unselfish and noble and it's easy to get caught up in the semantics and ignore the results of unintended consequences.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> With all due respect.  I have been a social worker my whole professional life.  Welfare is a temporary and needed helping hand for children and families.
> 
> It's not the evil you portray.  It's not destroying families.  Poverty, drug abuse, domestic violence, crime destroy families.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> In all due respect, I have been working with the poor and disadvantaged probably for a lot more years than you have.  And I've seen first hand some of the problems that exist.  And I also am a student of history who isn't afraid to look underneath the liberal veneer some use to gloss over the uglier truths.  I lived before welfare, and I have read the detailed analysis of black historians who have identified all the problems within it.  Welfare has encouraged and perpetuated the broken family and single parent syndrome among the poor and it is THAT syndrome that has created most of the poverty, drug abuse, domestic violence, and crime that we now have.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The greatest danger to the liberal vision are facts about the consequences of liberalism itself and the laws, policies, and ways of life that the left has spawned.
> 
> *That the black family, which survived centuries of slavery and generations of discrimination, has disintegrated in the wake of the liberal welfare state is only one example.*
> 
> Liberals have been driven to the desperate expedient of attributing this and other social pathology in today's ghettos to "a legacy of slavery" -- even though black children grew up with two parents more often under slavery than today.
> 
> Blacks only a generation or two out of slavery also had higher rates of employment and lower rates of crime than today.
> 
> The illogic of the "legacy of slavery" argument only illustrates the desperate attempt to salvage the liberal vision.
> 
> The very people who argue this way would never be guilty of such illogic in discussing something that was not such a threat to their vision.
> 
> One of the most telling examples of the social destructiveness of the left's welfare-state vision can be found among the white slum dwellers in Britain described in the brilliant and insightful book "Life at the Bottom" by Theodore Dalrymple.
> 
> There it is not possible to blame social degeneracy on slavery, racism or any of the other things cited as causes of the behavior and consequences found among blacks in American slums. Yet the results are virtually identical, right down to children beating up classmates for trying to get an education.
> 
> The vision of the left, full of envy and resentment, takes its worst toll on those at the bottom -- whether black or white -- who find in that paranoid vision an excuse for counterproductive and ultimately self-destructive attitudes and behavior.
> --Thomas Sowell PhD
> Capitalism Magazine - Preserving a Vision--at the Expense of the Facts
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most of the major problems that many black people face are not amendable to political solutions and government anti-poverty programs. Let's look at some. In 1940, 86 percent of black children were born inside marriage, and the illegitimacy rate among blacks was about 15 percent. Today, only 35 percent of black children are born inside marriage, and the illegitimacy rate hovers around 70 percent. Today's breakdown of the black family is unprecedented. It began in the 1960s with the War on Poverty and the harebrained ideas of the welfare state. In the mid-1960s, Daniel Moynihan sounded the alarm about the breakdown in the black family in his book "The Negro Family: The Case for National Action." At that time black illegitimacy was 26 percent. Moynihan said, "(A)t the heart of the deterioration of the fabric of the Negro society is the deterioration of the Negro family.
> --Walter Williams,PhD
> Townhall - Walter E. Williams - Politics and Blacks
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


We see it differently.  In your view, those 'libruls' are evil.


----------



## boedicca

For starters, here's who:

The Spencer Ackerman Tactic:

*&#8220;If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game they&#8217;ve put upon us,&#8221; Ackerman wrote on the Journolist listserv in April 2008. &#8220;Instead, take one of them &#8212; Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares &#8212; and call them racists.&#8221;*


----------



## boedicca

Sky Dancer said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sky Dancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> I work in the field as a social worker.  They people who don't get off welfare are multiply challenged by mental illness, substance abuse, domestic violence, crime and a host of other social problems.
> 
> You want to oversimplify the situation and say that everyone can succeed but you'd be wrong.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And what caused that host of social problems in the first place?
> 
> The destruction of nuclear families wrought by giving teenage girls welfare to have babies out of wedlock certainly hasn't helped the situation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Let's talk about what the causes of those social problems are.  You're claiming that welfare caused the problems.
> 
> Welfare is a response to the problems.
Click to expand...




A cure that ended up worsening the disease.


----------



## DiveCon

boedicca said:


> For starters, here's who:
> 
> The Spencer Ackerman Tactic:
> 
> *&#8220;If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game they&#8217;ve put upon us,&#8221; Ackerman wrote on the Journolist listserv in April 2008. &#8220;Instead, take one of them &#8212; Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares &#8212; and call them racists.&#8221;*


Sky wants to pretend that didnt happen


----------



## Sky Dancer

boedicca said:


> Sky Dancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> And what caused that host of social problems in the first place?
> 
> The destruction of nuclear families wrought by giving teenage girls welfare to have babies out of wedlock certainly hasn't helped the situation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Let's talk about what the causes of those social problems are.  You're claiming that welfare caused the problems.
> 
> Welfare is a response to the problems.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A cure that ended up worsening the disease.
Click to expand...


In your opinion.


----------



## boedicca

Pandora's box is open.   She can't stuff the the evil of the leftwing falsely accusing innocent people on the right of Racism back into it.


----------



## boedicca

Sky Dancer said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sky Dancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Let's talk about what the causes of those social problems are.  You're claiming that welfare caused the problems.
> 
> Welfare is a response to the problems.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A cure that ended up worsening the disease.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> In your opinion.
Click to expand...



Given my experience with my own opinion and the poor representation your posts make of yours, I'm quite happy sticking with mine.

Just sayin'.


----------



## Foxfyre

Sky Dancer said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sky Dancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> With all due respect.  I have been a social worker my whole professional life.  Welfare is a temporary and needed helping hand for children and families.
> 
> It's not the evil you portray.  It's not destroying families.  Poverty, drug abuse, domestic violence, crime destroy families.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In all due respect, I have been working with the poor and disadvantaged probably for a lot more years than you have.  And I've seen first hand some of the problems that exist.  And I also am a student of history who isn't afraid to look underneath the liberal veneer some use to gloss over the uglier truths.  I lived before welfare, and I have read the detailed analysis of black historians who have identified all the problems within it.  Welfare has encouraged and perpetuated the broken family and single parent syndrome among the poor and it is THAT syndrome that has created most of the poverty, drug abuse, domestic violence, and crime that we now have.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most of the major problems that many black people face are not amendable to political solutions and government anti-poverty programs. Let's look at some. In 1940, 86 percent of black children were born inside marriage, and the illegitimacy rate among blacks was about 15 percent. Today, only 35 percent of black children are born inside marriage, and the illegitimacy rate hovers around 70 percent. Today's breakdown of the black family is unprecedented. It began in the 1960s with the War on Poverty and the harebrained ideas of the welfare state. In the mid-1960s, Daniel Moynihan sounded the alarm about the breakdown in the black family in his book "The Negro Family: The Case for National Action." At that time black illegitimacy was 26 percent. Moynihan said, "(A)t the heart of the deterioration of the fabric of the Negro society is the deterioration of the Negro family.
> --Walter Williams,PhD
> Townhall - Walter E. Williams - Politics and Blacks
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We see it differently.  In your view, those 'libruls' are evil.
Click to expand...


Do you think being wrong is the same thing as being evil?

I haven't said that anywhere, any place, at any time.  So would you like to defend what you say my view is?  Or retract it?

I presume you didn't read the excerpts of Dr. Sowell and Dr. William's essays.  Both are descendants of slaves and were born and grew up under segregation and have done a tremendous amount of research and writing on the condition of the black family.   Are you saying they are evil too?


----------



## Sky Dancer

boedicca said:


> Sky Dancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> A cure that ended up worsening the disease.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In your opinion.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Given my experience with my own opinion and the poor representation your posts make of yours, I'm quite happy sticking with mine.
> 
> Just sayin'.
Click to expand...


Fine.


----------



## Rinata

boedicca said:


> Sky Dancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> A cure that ended up worsening the disease.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In your opinion.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Given my experience with my own opinion and the poor representation your posts make of yours, I'm quite happy sticking with mine.
> 
> Just sayin'.
Click to expand...


Just sayin' again??? I don't know why you constantly add that phrase to your posts. It's stupid.


----------



## Sky Dancer

Foxfyre said:


> Sky Dancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> 
> In all due respect, I have been working with the poor and disadvantaged probably for a lot more years than you have.  And I've seen first hand some of the problems that exist.  And I also am a student of history who isn't afraid to look underneath the liberal veneer some use to gloss over the uglier truths.  I lived before welfare, and I have read the detailed analysis of black historians who have identified all the problems within it.  Welfare has encouraged and perpetuated the broken family and single parent syndrome among the poor and it is THAT syndrome that has created most of the poverty, drug abuse, domestic violence, and crime that we now have.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We see it differently.  In your view, those 'libruls' are evil.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Do you think being wrong is the same thing as being evil?
> 
> I haven't said that anywhere, any place, at any time.  So would you like to defend what you say my view is?  Or retract it?
Click to expand...


I retract it.  I mistated your position.  You blame liberalism for all the social problems you mentioned, poverty, drug abuse, domestic violence etc.  

Tell me how is liberalism responsible for domestic violence?

 I can't wait.

How is liberalism responsible for mental illness?


----------



## DiveCon

Sky Dancer said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sky Dancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> We see it differently.  In your view, those 'libruls' are evil.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do you think being wrong is the same thing as being evil?
> 
> I haven't said that anywhere, any place, at any time.  So would you like to defend what you say my view is?  Or retract it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I retract it.  I mistated your position.  You blame liberalism for all the social problems you mentioned, poverty, drug abuse, domestic violence etc.
> 
> Tell me how is liberalism responsible for domestic violence?
> 
> I can't wait.
> 
> How is liberalism responsible for mental illness?
Click to expand...

first, please show where anyone has said they were responsible for those things


----------



## Foxfyre

Sky Dancer said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sky Dancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> We see it differently.  In your view, those 'libruls' are evil.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do you think being wrong is the same thing as being evil?
> 
> I haven't said that anywhere, any place, at any time.  So would you like to defend what you say my view is?  Or retract it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I retract it.  I mistated your position.  You blame liberalism for all the social problems you mentioned, poverty, drug abuse, domestic violence etc.
> 
> Tell me how is liberalism responsible for domestic violence?
> 
> I can't wait.
Click to expand...


First you will have to defend your statement about who I blame for all the social problems I have mentioned.  You several times now have stated what I think, what I want, who I blame, etc. etc. etc.

For somebody who claims to be so open minded, you sure do have a tendency to label people or accuse them of things they never said.

Did you read the excerpts of Dr. Sowell and Dr. William's essays?  What did you think of them?   Is there any possibility that since they've both lived it, researched it, studied it, and looked at it from every possible angle, that they are right?

As for domestic violence, I do have a great deal of expertise and hands on experience working with victims and abusers, and it deserves its own thread due to the complexity of the subject.


----------



## Sky Dancer

Foxfyre said:


> Sky Dancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do you think being wrong is the same thing as being evil?
> 
> I haven't said that anywhere, any place, at any time.  So would you like to defend what you say my view is?  Or retract it?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I retract it.  I mistated your position.  You blame liberalism for all the social problems you mentioned, poverty, drug abuse, domestic violence etc.
> 
> Tell me how is liberalism responsible for domestic violence?
> 
> I can't wait.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> First you will have to defend your statement about who I blame for all the social problems I have mentioned.  You several times now have stated what I think, what I want, who I blame, etc. etc. etc.
> 
> For somebody who claims to be so open minded, you sure do have a tendency to label people or accuse them of things they never said.
> 
> Did you read the excerpts of Dr. Sowell and Dr. William's essays?  What did you think of them?   Is there any possibility that since they've both lived it, researched it, studied it, and looked at it from every possible angle, that they are right?
> 
> As for domestic violence, I do have a great deal of expertise and hands on experience working with victims and abusers, and it deserves its own thread due to the complexity of the subject.
Click to expand...


It the cart before the horse.  You claim welfare was the cause of the social problems and not a response to them. Has welfare created new problems?  Yes.

How is welfare causal in domestic violence?

My point is that some people get stuck on welfare because of the many problems they have; mental illness, substance abuse, domestic violence etc.  Welfare did not cause those problems.  They add to the complexity of trying to help someone get out of the culture of poverty.


----------



## boedicca

Rinata said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sky Dancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> In your opinion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Given my experience with my own opinion and the poor representation your posts make of yours, I'm quite happy sticking with mine.
> 
> Just sayin'.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Just sayin' again??? I don't know why you constantly add that phrase to your posts. It's stupid.
Click to expand...




Then it should resonate with you, dearie.


----------



## Foxfyre

Sky Dancer said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sky Dancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> I retract it.  I mistated your position.  You blame liberalism for all the social problems you mentioned, poverty, drug abuse, domestic violence etc.
> 
> Tell me how is liberalism responsible for domestic violence?
> 
> I can't wait.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> First you will have to defend your statement about who I blame for all the social problems I have mentioned.  You several times now have stated what I think, what I want, who I blame, etc. etc. etc.
> 
> For somebody who claims to be so open minded, you sure do have a tendency to label people or accuse them of things they never said.
> 
> Did you read the excerpts of Dr. Sowell and Dr. William's essays?  What did you think of them?   Is there any possibility that since they've both lived it, researched it, studied it, and looked at it from every possible angle, that they are right?
> 
> As for domestic violence, I do have a great deal of expertise and hands on experience working with victims and abusers, and it deserves its own thread due to the complexity of the subject.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It the cart before the horse.  You claim liberalism is the cause of the social problems and not a response to them.
> 
> How is liberalism causal in domestic violence?
Click to expand...


You're still doing it.  You're saying what I claim when I have made no such claim.  Try choosing something I actually said and discuss that please.  You might try a direct quote in context please.

I have said that liberalism has resulted in many unintended negative consequences and has a very poor track record for success that doesn't include unintended negative consequences.  That is a far sight from blaming liberalism for all social problems. 

Domestic violence results from many many factors and can and does occur in all races and all socioeconomic groups.  But poverty, drugs, alcoholism, crime are prevalent components that exist with a whole lot of domestic violence.  And as has already been expressed in previous posts, poverty, drugs, alcoholism, crime etc. are a component of some of the unintended legacy of some liberal programs.  Again to get into more detail, that deserves its own thread.

And just to clarify that since you have a strong tendency to read things into my posts that i did not say, I am not saying that liberalism is the cause of all domestic violence.

Did you read the excerpts of Dr. Sowell and Dr. William's essays?   What did you think of them.  Third time the question has been asked now.


----------



## Sky Dancer

Foxfyre said:


> Sky Dancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> 
> First you will have to defend your statement about who I blame for all the social problems I have mentioned.  You several times now have stated what I think, what I want, who I blame, etc. etc. etc.
> 
> For somebody who claims to be so open minded, you sure do have a tendency to label people or accuse them of things they never said.
> 
> Did you read the excerpts of Dr. Sowell and Dr. William's essays?  What did you think of them?   Is there any possibility that since they've both lived it, researched it, studied it, and looked at it from every possible angle, that they are right?
> 
> As for domestic violence, I do have a great deal of expertise and hands on experience working with victims and abusers, and it deserves its own thread due to the complexity of the subject.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It the cart before the horse.  You claim liberalism is the cause of the social problems and not a response to them.
> 
> How is liberalism causal in domestic violence?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You're still doing it.  You're saying what I claim when I have made no such claim.  Try choosing something I actually said and discuss that please.  You might try a direct quote in context please.
> 
> I have said that liberalism has resulted in many unintended negative consequences and has a very poor track record for success that doesn't include unintended negative consequences.  That is a far sight from blaming liberalism for all social problems.
> 
> Domestic violence results from many many factors and can and does occur in all races and all socioeconomic groups.  But poverty, drugs, alcoholism, crime are prevalent components that exist with a whole lot of domestic violence.  And as has already been expressed in previous posts, poverty, drugs, alcoholism, crime etc. are a component of some of the unintended legacy of some liberal programs.  Again to get into more detail, that deserves its own thread.
> 
> And just to clarify that since you have a strong tendency to read things into my posts that i did not say, I am not saying that liberalism is the cause of all domestic violence.
> 
> Did you read the excerpts of Dr. Sowell and Dr. William's essays?   What did you think of them.  Third time the question has been asked now.
Click to expand...


You're right.  There have been a few unintentioned negative consequences of some well meaning social problems.

Sowell and Williams make good points.

You win.  Uncle.  

If I have to choose between being right or being happy I choose to be happy.


----------



## Foxfyre

Sky Dancer said:


> You're right.  There have been a few unintentioned negative consequences of some well meaning social problems.
> 
> Sowell and Williams make good points.
> 
> You win.  Uncle.
> 
> Happy?



I wasn't looking to win anything.  I was having a discussion.  A discussion is never necessary if everybody agrees on everything or sees everything the same way.

A 'few unintentioned negative consequences'?   How many are a few?

You seemed to be saying earlier that welfare was in response to the negatives that Sowell and Williams think came mostly after welfare/social programs were initiated.  Do you still think that?   Or do you agree with Sowell and Williams that liberal social programs have been more detriment than help?


----------



## Sky Dancer

I'm through arguing.


----------



## Immanuel

Sky Dancer said:


> I'm through arguing.





How can we have a rational discussion if you won't participate?

Without you holding up your end of the bargain, who knows what radical lefty, we might get?

Immie


----------



## Sky Dancer

Immanuel said:


> Sky Dancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm through arguing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How can we have a rational discussion if you won't participate?
> 
> Without you holding up your end of the bargain, who knows what radical lefty, we might get?
> 
> Immie
Click to expand...


I'm tired of arguing.  You guys can do my part.


----------



## MaggieMae

Foxfyre said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course it can't be done.
> 
> A little bit of totalitarian control always leads to the accretion of more totalitarian control.
> 
> Just look at the growth in the size of our government over the past 18 months and the expansion of power over areas that were formerly the private sector.  That's just a start.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh please...because he wants to level the playing field a little better? That's the only part of Marx's ideology that Obama embraces. It's hardly been a Democratic administration that has determined the expansion of the haves and the have-nots; ironically, by reverse Marxism, the rich have gotten richer and the poor have gotten poorer under Republican administrations. That you can't see that is pathetic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> He not only embraces Marx's concept of a level playing field but he embraces Marx's concept of using government to force commerce and industry and the more prosperous among us to level it.   In the process the government becomes bigger and more encompassing until it becomes the central power itself and the people are powerless to resist it.
> 
> The fact that he is aided and abetted by a far left leaning media only makes his agenda that much easier to carry out.
> 
> The problem that Marx never understood was that despite the most noble of motive initially, once total power is achieved, those who hold it never volunarily give it up.
> 
> Which is why we have a brewing war between the government and the majority of the people right now.  God willing, it will remain a battle of wills and the right values will win out.
Click to expand...


You and others on the right continue to believe that you have a "majority" opinion. Step outside your tightly woven boxes for a change and realize that YOU DO NOT. At worst, the country continues to be divided roughly on a 50-50 basis, and unfortunately for you, the polls swing back and forth depending on the weekly economic news, this past week showing Democrats with a slight edge over Republicans.

Election 2010, Politics, Daily Election Tracking, Race for Congress, Generic Ballot

Tom Friedman hit the nail on the head the other day when he said _"I view every poll result now as a question of do you have a job or how is your 401k doing?"_


----------



## MaggieMae

DiveCon said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:
> 
> 
> 
> Regardless of all the arguments made in the last 53 pages my original comment still stands.
> 
> This shows the outright dishonesty of the liberal media in their own words and shows they are willing to lie through the media to silence their opposition.
> 
> Kudos Journolist  LOL
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I guess all the people so dedicated to "fair and balanced" have forgotten this. Why is one liberal website whose members represent the so-called "liberal media" any worse than the members from the uber right who have their own agenda?
> 
> This includes a summary, and the cast of real characters many of whom are ex-Fox reporters/journalists:
> Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism (2004)
> 
> You can watch the entire video here:
> OUTFOXED : Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism
> 
> _Just sayin'... _
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ROFLMAO
> outfoxed was pure liberal propaganda and total BULLSHIT
Click to expand...


Can you prove that? Among hundreds of contributors to the documentary, these were former Fox employees:

Frank O'Donnell, Former Fox News Producer, Washington DC
Dave Burnett, Former Fox News Reporter, Washington DC
Diana Winthrop, Former Fox News Producer
Larry C. Johnson, Former Fox News Contributor
Jon Du Pre, Former Fox News Anchor-West Coast Bureau
Clara Frenk, Former Fox News Producer
Dave Korb, Former Freelance Fox News Writer
David Hnatiuk, Former Fox Music Supervisor


----------



## MaggieMae

Lonestar_logic said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Then don't watch it.
> 
> 
> 
> she doesnt
> 
> 
> makes me wonder how she can say ANYTHING about it
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I wonder about that too. But then again, none the idiot leftist surprises me. They are in fact quite predictable.
Click to expand...


And you're not? Next you'll be calling us hypocrites, and you're not.


----------



## Immanuel

Sky Dancer said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sky Dancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm through arguing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How can we have a rational discussion if you won't participate?
> 
> Without you holding up your end of the bargain, who knows what radical lefty, we might get?
> 
> Immie
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm tired of arguing.  You guys can do my part.
Click to expand...


Ah, but not as good as you.  

I see Maggie's joined the discussion, but haven't read her post.

Maggie is an excellent relief pitcher when she doesn't start.  At least there is still hope to continue this discussion.

I do understand your frustration and desire to end the discussion.  There always becomes a point when you feel like a discussion is going around and around in circles and nothing gets accomplished.

Immie


----------



## Lonestar_logic

Sky Dancer said:


> There's a reason people of color vote Democratic.



Because the Democrats promise them entitlements, whereas the Republicans expect personal responsibility.


----------



## Sky Dancer

Immanuel said:


> Sky Dancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How can we have a rational discussion if you won't participate?
> 
> Without you holding up your end of the bargain, who knows what radical lefty, we might get?
> 
> Immie
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm tired of arguing.  You guys can do my part.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ah, but not as good as you.
> 
> I see Maggie's joined the discussion, but haven't read her post.
> 
> Maggie is an excellent relief pitcher when she doesn't start.  At least there is still hope of continue this discussion.
> 
> I do understand your frustration and desire to end the discussion.  There always becomes a point when you feel like a discussion is going around and around in circles and nothing gets accomplished.
> 
> Immie
Click to expand...


I won't be back.


----------



## Lonestar_logic

Sky Dancer said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> 
> I can agree with that.
> 
> The Democrats cater to the poor, needy and the downtrodden.  They cater to them with promises and sometimes they even follow through.
> 
> I don't think they necessarily care any more for them than Conservatives/Republicans do, but I think the message is easier to sell coming from the liberal/Democrat perspective.  The Democrats believe that Welfare is the answer to saving the poor. Republicans believe it to be much of the problem.  Conservatives/Republicans believe in the hand up rather than the hand out.  Who is right?  Personally, I think the hand up is better in the long run.
> 
> But, how do you sell the Conservative/Republican message to the single mother of five who is struggling to make ends meet?  You don't.  Even if in the long run she would be better off being out from under Welfare.
> 
> Immie
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More importantly, those kids would benefit from seeing Mom (and/or preferably Dad) getting up, getting cleaned up, getting dressed, going to work, and bringing home a paycheck.
> 
> Welfare does help some people for sure, but in the process it has diminished and destroyed many wonderful private charities who were more effective and efficient in doing that and did it without destroying the black family etc.  The legacy of helping some is obvious in single mothers who have never been married, destruction of most of the nuclear family, making the men irrelevent or a detriment to the family, an abysmal school drop out rate, and whole neighborhoods so dangerous and crime ridden that life expectancyis significantly reduced.
> 
> And honest appraisal of government welfare has to look at those statistics with an open mind, and acknowledge that none of those conditions existed, except in rare incidents, before welfare went into effect.
> 
> Helping people sounds so wonderful and unselfish and noble and it's easy to get caught up in the semantics and ignore the results of unintended consequences.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> With all due respect.  I have been a social worker my whole professional life.  Welfare is a temporary and needed helping hand for children and families.
> 
> It's not the evil you portray.  It's not destroying families.  Poverty, drug abuse, domestic violence, and crime destroy families.
Click to expand...


Explain generational welfare.


----------



## boedicca

Immanuel said:


> Sky Dancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm through arguing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How can we have a rational discussion if you won't participate?
> 
> Without you holding up your end of the bargain, who knows what radical lefty, we might get?
> 
> Immie
Click to expand...




Well, it looks like the one we got is Maggie.

Sky!  Come back!


----------



## Lonestar_logic

MaggieMae said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> she doesnt
> 
> 
> makes me wonder how she can say ANYTHING about it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I wonder about that too. But then again, none the idiot leftist surprises me. They are in fact quite predictable.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And you're not? Next you'll be calling us hypocrites, and you're not.
Click to expand...


No I'm not predictable.


----------



## DiveCon

MaggieMae said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> I guess all the people so dedicated to "fair and balanced" have forgotten this. Why is one liberal website whose members represent the so-called "liberal media" any worse than the members from the uber right who have their own agenda?
> 
> This includes a summary, and the cast of real characters many of whom are ex-Fox reporters/journalists:
> Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism (2004)
> 
> You can watch the entire video here:
> OUTFOXED : Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism
> 
> _Just sayin'... _
> 
> 
> 
> ROFLMAO
> outfoxed was pure liberal propaganda and total BULLSHIT
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Can you prove that? Among hundreds of contributors to the documentary, these were former Fox employees:
> 
> Frank O'Donnell, Former Fox News Producer, Washington DC
> Dave Burnett, Former Fox News Reporter, Washington DC
> Diana Winthrop, Former Fox News Producer
> Larry C. Johnson, Former Fox News Contributor
> Jon Du Pre, Former Fox News Anchor-West Coast Bureau
> Clara Frenk, Former Fox News Producer
> Dave Korb, Former Freelance Fox News Writer
> David Hnatiuk, Former Fox Music Supervisor
Click to expand...

yeah, and you've never heard of disgruntled former employees bashing the former employer
LOL


----------



## MaggieMae

boedicca said:


> Here's the basic fact:   A cabal of leftwing journalist conspired to suppress news and accuse innocent people of racism as a diversionary tactic.
> 
> There is no equivalent incident on the right.



Ya think?

On the team: The stunning hypocrisy of Journolist's critics - Joe Conason - Salon.com


> Specific, orderly, disciplined, ideological coordination -- and not the freewheeling blather to be found on Journolist -- has been proceeding every week for nearly two decades at the "Wednesday meetings" convened by lobbyist Grover Norquist in the Washington offices of Americans for Tax Reform.
> 
> As David Brock, who had attended those meetings, explained a few years ago in the Republican Noise Machine:
> 
> *Every Wednesday morning in Norquist's Washington offices, the leaders of more than eighty conservative organizations -- including major right-wing media outlets and top Bush White House aides -- convene to set movement priorities, plan strategy, and adopt talking points. Norquist seems a cross between a Communist Party boss and a Mafia don as he presides over these strategy sessions ...*
> 
> Conservative media turned out in full force for the weekly strategy meetings convened by right-wing activist Grover Norquist -- Peggy Noonan and John Fund of the Journal, representatives from National Review and the Washington Times, and a researcher for Bob Novak all checked in. The right-wing writers considered themselves part of the conservative movement "team," as Norquist put it ...



_And then, from the conservative "American Spectator" regarding Journolist:_



> Perhaps it is appropriate to give the last word to the American Spectator's John Tabin, who has written a striking dissent from the right-wing hysterics over Journolist:
> 
> Since 1993, Grover Norquist has held an off-the-record meeting every Wednesday where conservative activists, policy wonks, and government officials exchange ideas about policy and politics. Sometimes journalists attend. Depending on a particular journalist's ideological and partisan disposition -- which can vary quite a lot given the state of our media landscape, which includes both 'straight news' reporters (i.e. people who attempt to hide the almost-always-left-of-center opinions that shape their journalistic choices) and opinion journalists with various worldviews and temperaments -- journalists may be there to get ideas that will influence how they think about issues, or they may just be there to get perspective on how conservatives are thinking about the issues of the day.
> 
> The Wednesday Meeting has periodically been the source of breathless fear-mongering on the left about the all-powerful conservative conspiracy to control media narratives. This is, of course, absurd. Much of the hyperventilating over Journolist is equally absurd ...


----------



## MaggieMae

Foxfyre said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> Bull.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Great comeback. Fact is both parties are guilty of the name calling and the cussing. I'd go so far as to say the left is worse.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't know if the left is worse.  But sometimes I think that's all the left has.  Those on the right can articulate why they hold the opinions that they do and can defend them without name calling if they have to.   I'm not sure many on the left can do that.  Very few accept when challenged to do so.
Click to expand...


So it's okay when someone like Boedicca, when she runs out of debate points, decides to call me Maggie Maggot. I suggest you not make sweeping assessments if you haven't actually read some of the insulting remarks made by members of your own club.


----------



## DiveCon

MaggieMae said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> Here's the basic fact:   A cabal of leftwing journalist conspired to suppress news and accuse innocent people of racism as a diversionary tactic.
> 
> There is no equivalent incident on the right.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ya think?
> 
> On the team: The stunning hypocrisy of Journolist's critics - Joe Conason - Salon.com
> 
> 
> 
> Specific, orderly, disciplined, ideological coordination -- and not the freewheeling blather to be found on Journolist -- has been proceeding every week for nearly two decades at the "Wednesday meetings" convened by lobbyist Grover Norquist in the Washington offices of Americans for Tax Reform.
> 
> As David Brock, who had attended those meetings, explained a few years ago in the Republican Noise Machine:
> 
> *Every Wednesday morning in Norquist's Washington offices, the leaders of more than eighty conservative organizations -- including major right-wing media outlets and top Bush White House aides -- convene to set movement priorities, plan strategy, and adopt talking points. Norquist seems a cross between a Communist Party boss and a Mafia don as he presides over these strategy sessions ...*
> 
> Conservative media turned out in full force for the weekly strategy meetings convened by right-wing activist Grover Norquist -- Peggy Noonan and John Fund of the Journal, representatives from National Review and the Washington Times, and a researcher for Bob Novak all checked in. The right-wing writers considered themselves part of the conservative movement "team," as Norquist put it ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> _And then, from the conservative "American Spectator" regarding Journolist:_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps it is appropriate to give the last word to the American Spectator's John Tabin, who has written a striking dissent from the right-wing hysterics over Journolist:
> 
> Since 1993, Grover Norquist has held an off-the-record meeting every Wednesday where conservative activists, policy wonks, and government officials exchange ideas about policy and politics. Sometimes journalists attend. Depending on a particular journalist's ideological and partisan disposition -- which can vary quite a lot given the state of our media landscape, which includes both 'straight news' reporters (i.e. people who attempt to hide the almost-always-left-of-center opinions that shape their journalistic choices) and opinion journalists with various worldviews and temperaments -- journalists may be there to get ideas that will influence how they think about issues, or they may just be there to get perspective on how conservatives are thinking about the issues of the day.
> 
> *The Wednesday Meeting has periodically been the source of breathless fear-mongering on the left about the all-powerful conservative conspiracy to control media narratives. This is, of course, absurd.* Much of the hyperventilating over Journolist is equally absurd ...
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


yeah
and i agree that any hyperventilating is absurd
i dont see much of that over the journolist so much as showing the utter hypocrisy of it


----------



## MaggieMae

Foxfyre said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know if the left is worse.  But sometimes I think that's all the left has.  Those on the right can articulate why they hold the opinions that they do and can defend them without name calling if they have to.   I'm not sure many on the left can do that.  Very few accept when challenged to do so.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's why the left developed the tactic of calling the opposition "Racists".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well in their defense they often start out with delusional or close minded or advocates for the rich only or polluters/anti-environmental or religious fanatics or hateful or selfish or some such as that before they get to racist.  *RACIST* is the ultimate these days and is generally reserved for anybody who criticizes anything re the government or President Obama.
Click to expand...


Only from your perspective, and only because that's been hammered into your subconscience. It simply isn't true on a large scale.


----------



## Immanuel

MaggieMae said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Great comeback. Fact is both parties are guilty of the name calling and the cussing. I'd go so far as to say the left is worse.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know if the left is worse.  But sometimes I think that's all the left has.  Those on the right can articulate why they hold the opinions that they do and can defend them without name calling if they have to.   I'm not sure many on the left can do that.  Very few accept when challenged to do so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So it's okay when someone like Boedicca, when she runs out of debate points, decides to call me Maggie Maggot. I suggest you not make sweeping assessments if you haven't actually read some of the insulting remarks made by members of your own club.
Click to expand...


You are not still angry at me for my remark a few days ago about thinking you were "older than dirt," are you?

I thought for sure that you would know I only thought you were half the age of dirt.  

Immie


----------



## MaggieMae

Immanuel said:


> Sky Dancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well in their defense they often start out with delusional or close minded or advocates for the rich only or polluters/anti-environmental or religious fanatics or hateful or selfish or some such as that before they get to racist.  *RACIST* is the ultimate these days and is generally reserved for anybody who criticizes anything re the government or President Obama.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What?
> 
> People of color vote mostly Democratic.  Why is that?
> 
> It has nothing to do with the label racist.  It has to do with the party's platform.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I can agree with that.
> 
> The Democrats cater to the poor, needy and the downtrodden.  They cater to them with promises and sometimes they even follow through.
> 
> I don't think they necessarily care any more for them than Conservatives/Republicans do, but I think the message is easier to sell coming from the liberal/Democrat perspective.  The Democrats believe that Welfare is the answer to saving the poor. Republicans believe it to be much of the problem.  Conservatives/Republicans believe in the hand up rather than the hand out.  Who is right?  Personally, I think the hand up is better in the long run.
> 
> But, how do you sell the Conservative/Republican message to the single mother of five who is struggling to make ends meet?  You don't.  Even if in the long run she would be better off being out from under Welfare.
> 
> Immie
Click to expand...


Conservatives with a conscience do; conservative politicans most assuredly do NOT offer a "hand up." Ever. They may go along with some of the social umbrella policies, but I can't think of a single one that they have actually sponsored independent of Democrats.


----------



## Immanuel

MaggieMae said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sky Dancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> What?
> 
> People of color vote mostly Democratic.  Why is that?
> 
> It has nothing to do with the label racist.  It has to do with the party's platform.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I can agree with that.
> 
> The Democrats cater to the poor, needy and the downtrodden.  They cater to them with promises and sometimes they even follow through.
> 
> I don't think they necessarily care any more for them than Conservatives/Republicans do, but I think the message is easier to sell coming from the liberal/Democrat perspective.  The Democrats believe that Welfare is the answer to saving the poor. Republicans believe it to be much of the problem.  Conservatives/Republicans believe in the hand up rather than the hand out.  Who is right?  Personally, I think the hand up is better in the long run.
> 
> But, how do you sell the Conservative/Republican message to the single mother of five who is struggling to make ends meet?  You don't.  Even if in the long run she would be better off being out from under Welfare.
> 
> Immie
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Conservatives with a conscience do; conservative politicans most assuredly do NOT offer a "hand up." Ever. They may go along with some of the social umbrella policies, but I can't think of a single one that they have actually sponsored independent of Democrats.
Click to expand...


Is there such a thing as conservative politician these days?

If so, name one please.

Immie


----------



## Lonestar_logic

Immanuel said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> 
> I can agree with that.
> 
> The Democrats cater to the poor, needy and the downtrodden.  They cater to them with promises and sometimes they even follow through.
> 
> I don't think they necessarily care any more for them than Conservatives/Republicans do, but I think the message is easier to sell coming from the liberal/Democrat perspective.  The Democrats believe that Welfare is the answer to saving the poor. Republicans believe it to be much of the problem.  Conservatives/Republicans believe in the hand up rather than the hand out.  Who is right?  Personally, I think the hand up is better in the long run.
> 
> But, how do you sell the Conservative/Republican message to the single mother of five who is struggling to make ends meet?  You don't.  Even if in the long run she would be better off being out from under Welfare.
> 
> Immie
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Conservatives with a conscience do; conservative politicans most assuredly do NOT offer a "hand up." Ever. They may go along with some of the social umbrella policies, but I can't think of a single one that they have actually sponsored independent of Democrats.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Is there such a thing as conservative politician these days?
> 
> If so, name one please.
> 
> Immie
Click to expand...


Newt Gingrich


----------



## Immanuel

Lonestar_logic said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> Conservatives with a conscience do; conservative politicans most assuredly do NOT offer a "hand up." Ever. They may go along with some of the social umbrella policies, but I can't think of a single one that they have actually sponsored independent of Democrats.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is there such a thing as conservative politician these days?
> 
> If so, name one please.
> 
> Immie
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Newt Gingrich
Click to expand...


Newt's not really politicking these days though is he.

I can think of one who appears to be conservative, but I don't think he is well known outside of this district.  He is my rep, Adam Putnam.  Seems to be relatively conservative as far as I can tell.

Immie


----------



## DiveCon

Immanuel said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is there such a thing as conservative politician these days?
> 
> If so, name one please.
> 
> Immie
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Newt Gingrich
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Newt's not really politicking these days though is he.
> 
> I can think of one who appears to be conservative, but I don't think he is well known outside of this district.  He is my rep, Adam Putnam.  Seems to be relatively conservative as far as I can tell.
> 
> Immie
Click to expand...

there are hints he might get back in a race for something


----------



## Lonestar_logic

Immanuel said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is there such a thing as conservative politician these days?
> 
> If so, name one please.
> 
> Immie
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Newt Gingrich
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Newt's not really politicking these days though is he.
> 
> I can think of one who appears to be conservative, but I don't think he is well known outside of this district.  He is my rep, Adam Putnam.  Seems to be relatively conservative as far as I can tell.
> 
> Immie
Click to expand...


He's thinking about running for POTUS in 2012.


----------



## MaggieMae

boedicca said:


> Sky Dancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> thats odd, because i've seen polls before where the outcome was they were more conservative and agreed more with the GOP platform
> but* i guess those polls must have been racist, right*?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No Republican presidential candidate has gotten more than 15 percent of the black vote since 1965.
> FactCheck.org: When did blacks start voting Democratic?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Gee Whiz.   The Dems tell blacks that the GOP is racist, and then gather up black voters into busses and take them to polling places.  One year, they even gave out fried chicken dinner coupons to their shepherded voters in Oakland.
Click to expand...


I don't believe for a moment that all blacks think all GOP (what's that, anyway?) is racist, but I must say it's comments LIKE YOURS^ that make them believers.


----------



## Lonestar_logic

MaggieMae said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sky Dancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> No Republican presidential candidate has gotten more than 15 percent of the black vote since 1965.
> FactCheck.org: When did blacks start voting Democratic?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gee Whiz.   The Dems tell blacks that the GOP is racist, and then gather up black voters into busses and take them to polling places.  One year, they even gave out fried chicken dinner coupons to their shepherded voters in Oakland.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't believe for a moment that all blacks think all GOP (what's that, anyway?) is racist, but I must say it's comments LIKE YOURS^ that make them believers.
Click to expand...


You don't know what GOP stands for? Or are you being facetious? GOP stands for Grand Ol' Party, which is the Republican party.


----------



## DiveCon

MaggieMae said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sky Dancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> No Republican presidential candidate has gotten more than 15 percent of the black vote since 1965.
> FactCheck.org: When did blacks start voting Democratic?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gee Whiz.   The Dems tell blacks that the GOP is racist, and then gather up black voters into busses and take them to polling places.  One year, they even gave out fried chicken dinner coupons to their shepherded voters in Oakland.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't believe for a moment that all blacks think all GOP (what's that, anyway?) is racist, but I must say it's comments LIKE YOURS^ that make them believers.
Click to expand...

i dont know about what she claims in oakland, but i do know what the dems did in St Louis in 2000
they had the polls open 2.5 hours after they were supposed to be closed while they were busing people to them to vote


----------



## Immanuel

DiveCon said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Newt Gingrich
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Newt's not really politicking these days though is he.
> 
> I can think of one who appears to be conservative, but I don't think he is well known outside of this district.  He is my rep, Adam Putnam.  Seems to be relatively conservative as far as I can tell.
> 
> Immie
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> there are hints he might get back in a race for something
Click to expand...




Lonestar_logic said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Newt Gingrich
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Newt's not really politicking these days though is he.
> 
> I can think of one who appears to be conservative, but I don't think he is well known outside of this district.  He is my rep, Adam Putnam.  Seems to be relatively conservative as far as I can tell.
> 
> Immie
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> He's thinking about running for POTUS in 2012.
Click to expand...


I have heard that as well, but nothing solid on it.

If you ask me, I'd say he's crazy for even considering it.  I always liked him and was sorry to see him get involved in the scandal he did, but, I don't know why anyone would want to put themselves through the wringer he would end up going through.

Immie


----------



## boedicca

DiveCon said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> Gee Whiz.   The Dems tell blacks that the GOP is racist, and then gather up black voters into busses and take them to polling places.  One year, they even gave out fried chicken dinner coupons to their shepherded voters in Oakland.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't believe for a moment that all blacks think all GOP (what's that, anyway?) is racist, but I must say it's comments LIKE YOURS^ that make them believers.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> i dont know about what she claims in oakland, but i do know what the dems did in St Louis in 2000
> they had the polls open 2.5 hours after they were supposed to be closed while they were busing people to them to vote
Click to expand...




Oakland Mayor Elihu Harris promised free fried chicken to Oaklanders who showed their "proof of voting" at supermarkets in largely black neighborhoods.  I remember it well, having moved to Oakland a couple of years earlier.  The backlash was quite negative, even in the liberal Bay Area media.


----------



## DiveCon

boedicca said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't believe for a moment that all blacks think all GOP (what's that, anyway?) is racist, but I must say it's comments LIKE YOURS^ that make them believers.
> 
> 
> 
> i dont know about what she claims in oakland, but i do know what the dems did in St Louis in 2000
> they had the polls open 2.5 hours after they were supposed to be closed while they were busing people to them to vote
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oakland Mayor Elihu Harris promised free fried chicken to Oaklanders who showed their "proof of voting" at supermarkets in largely black neighborhoods.  I remember it well, having moved to Oakland a couple of years earlier.  The backlash was quite negative, even in the liberal Bay Area media.
Click to expand...

you'll be asked for it anyway, but do you have a link for that?


----------



## MaggieMae

Sky Dancer said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sky Dancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> With all due respect.  I have been a social worker my whole professional life.  Welfare is a temporary and needed helping hand for children and families.
> 
> It's not the evil you portray.  It's not destroying families.  Poverty, drug abuse, domestic violence, crime destroy families.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In all due respect, I have been working with the poor and disadvantaged probably for a lot more years than you have.  And I've seen first hand some of the problems that exist.  And I also am a student of history who isn't afraid to look underneath the liberal veneer some use to gloss over the uglier truths.  I lived before welfare, and I have read the detailed analysis of black historians who have identified all the problems within it.  Welfare has encouraged and perpetuated the broken family and single parent syndrome among the poor and it is THAT syndrome that has created most of the poverty, drug abuse, domestic violence, and crime that we now have.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most of the major problems that many black people face are not amendable to political solutions and government anti-poverty programs. Let's look at some. In 1940, 86 percent of black children were born inside marriage, and the illegitimacy rate among blacks was about 15 percent. Today, only 35 percent of black children are born inside marriage, and the illegitimacy rate hovers around 70 percent. Today's breakdown of the black family is unprecedented. It began in the 1960s with the War on Poverty and the harebrained ideas of the welfare state. In the mid-1960s, Daniel Moynihan sounded the alarm about the breakdown in the black family in his book "The Negro Family: The Case for National Action." At that time black illegitimacy was 26 percent. Moynihan said, "(A)t the heart of the deterioration of the fabric of the Negro society is the deterioration of the Negro family.
> --Walter Williams,PhD
> Townhall - Walter E. Williams - Politics and Blacks
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We see it differently.  In your view, those 'libruls' are evil.
Click to expand...


I actually agree that by simply funding welfare programs year after year and not addressing the underlying cause, which is the lack of proper education (including sex education) especially in high crime urban areas, has exacerbated the problem. That said, we've talked and talked and talked about the here and now, but fail to talk about how to deal with it going forward, and to fix this problem once and for all. 

I'm delighted that Arne Duncan pushes hard to get communities involved in promoting their own charter schools, and hope this is a step in the right direction to improving the educational opportunities of all financially depressed areas that serve both black and white. Harlem's Promise Academy Project has sparked enormous interest by other groups forming like partnerships to get these kids off the streets and into classrooms where they actually learn from teachers who actually want to teach.


----------



## MaggieMae

boedicca said:


> For starters, here's who:
> 
> The Spencer Ackerman Tactic:
> 
> *If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game theyve put upon us, Ackerman wrote on the Journolist listserv in April 2008. Instead, take one of them  Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares  and call them racists.*



How many times you gonna post that one quote from one individual out of 600? In how many threads? The bone has been picked clean, yet you continue to salivate as if it were fresh meat. Pretty sick.


----------



## MaggieMae

Immanuel said:


> Sky Dancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm through arguing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How can we have a rational discussion if you won't participate?
> 
> Without you holding up your end of the bargain, who knows what radical lefty, we might get?
> 
> Immie
Click to expand...


I don't think she's being "radical" at all. She simply sees the situation from a totally different perspective. I'm willing to bet there are a whole lot more people who once looked down their noses at welfare recipients but who are now very thankful that those social umbrellas were in place if they have been caught between that proverbial rock and a hard place of being unexpectedly unemployed for any length of time. _Being there _changes ones perspective. Greatly.


----------



## MaggieMae

Immanuel said:


> Sky Dancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How can we have a rational discussion if you won't participate?
> 
> Without you holding up your end of the bargain, who knows what radical lefty, we might get?
> 
> Immie
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm tired of arguing.  You guys can do my part.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ah, but not as good as you.
> 
> I see Maggie's joined the discussion, but haven't read her post.
> 
> Maggie is an excellent relief pitcher when she doesn't start.  At least there is still hope to continue this discussion.
> 
> I do understand your frustration and desire to end the discussion.  There always becomes a point when you feel like a discussion is going around and around in circles and nothing gets accomplished.
> 
> Immie
Click to expand...


Thanks, but I've only got about another good half-hour left in me too. It's almost time for the night shift anyway!


----------



## MaggieMae

Sky Dancer said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sky Dancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm tired of arguing.  You guys can do my part.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ah, but not as good as you.
> 
> I see Maggie's joined the discussion, but haven't read her post.
> 
> Maggie is an excellent relief pitcher when she doesn't start.  At least there is still hope of continue this discussion.
> 
> I do understand your frustration and desire to end the discussion.  There always becomes a point when you feel like a discussion is going around and around in circles and nothing gets accomplished.
> 
> Immie
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I won't be back.
Click to expand...


I hope that doesn't mean forever. Don't let them intimidate you.


----------



## MaggieMae

DiveCon said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> ROFLMAO
> outfoxed was pure liberal propaganda and total BULLSHIT
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can you prove that? Among hundreds of contributors to the documentary, these were former Fox employees:
> 
> Frank O'Donnell, Former Fox News Producer, Washington DC
> Dave Burnett, Former Fox News Reporter, Washington DC
> Diana Winthrop, Former Fox News Producer
> Larry C. Johnson, Former Fox News Contributor
> Jon Du Pre, Former Fox News Anchor-West Coast Bureau
> Clara Frenk, Former Fox News Producer
> Dave Korb, Former Freelance Fox News Writer
> David Hnatiuk, Former Fox Music Supervisor
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> yeah, and you've never heard of disgruntled former employees bashing the former employer
> LOL
Click to expand...


Now how did I *KNOW* you were going to say that?!  In fact, I almost added it when I posted the list.


----------



## MaggieMae

DiveCon said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> Here's the basic fact:   A cabal of leftwing journalist conspired to suppress news and accuse innocent people of racism as a diversionary tactic.
> 
> There is no equivalent incident on the right.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ya think?
> 
> On the team: The stunning hypocrisy of Journolist's critics - Joe Conason - Salon.com
> _And then, from the conservative "American Spectator" regarding Journolist:_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps it is appropriate to give the last word to the American Spectator's John Tabin, who has written a striking dissent from the right-wing hysterics over Journolist:
> 
> Since 1993, Grover Norquist has held an off-the-record meeting every Wednesday where conservative activists, policy wonks, and government officials exchange ideas about policy and politics. Sometimes journalists attend. Depending on a particular journalist's ideological and partisan disposition -- which can vary quite a lot given the state of our media landscape, which includes both 'straight news' reporters (i.e. people who attempt to hide the almost-always-left-of-center opinions that shape their journalistic choices) and opinion journalists with various worldviews and temperaments -- journalists may be there to get ideas that will influence how they think about issues, or they may just be there to get perspective on how conservatives are thinking about the issues of the day.
> 
> *The Wednesday Meeting has periodically been the source of breathless fear-mongering on the left about the all-powerful conservative conspiracy to control media narratives. This is, of course, absurd.* Much of the hyperventilating over Journolist is equally absurd ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> yeah
> and i agree that any hyperventilating is absurd
> i dont see much of that over the journolist so much as showing the utter hypocrisy of it
Click to expand...


So does that mean you agree that posting the content of Journolist NOW was overreaction?


----------



## DiveCon

MaggieMae said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> Can you prove that? Among hundreds of contributors to the documentary, these were former Fox employees:
> 
> Frank O'Donnell, Former Fox News Producer, Washington DC
> Dave Burnett, Former Fox News Reporter, Washington DC
> Diana Winthrop, Former Fox News Producer
> Larry C. Johnson, Former Fox News Contributor
> Jon Du Pre, Former Fox News Anchor-West Coast Bureau
> Clara Frenk, Former Fox News Producer
> Dave Korb, Former Freelance Fox News Writer
> David Hnatiuk, Former Fox Music Supervisor
> 
> 
> 
> yeah, and you've never heard of disgruntled former employees bashing the former employer
> LOL
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Now how did I *KNOW* you were going to say that?!  In fact, I almost added it when I posted the list.
Click to expand...

because its LOGICAL


----------



## DiveCon

MaggieMae said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ya think?
> 
> On the team: The stunning hypocrisy of Journolist's critics - Joe Conason - Salon.com
> _And then, from the conservative "American Spectator" regarding Journolist:_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yeah
> and i agree that any hyperventilating is absurd
> i dont see much of that over the journolist so much as showing the utter hypocrisy of it
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So does that mean you agree that posting the content of Journolist NOW was overreaction?
Click to expand...

no, i think it needed to be exposed

SOME might be over reacting, but i dont see so much of that in this thread
its just proof that they planed to just call anyone a racist and they did


----------



## MaggieMae

Immanuel said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know if the left is worse.  But sometimes I think that's all the left has.  Those on the right can articulate why they hold the opinions that they do and can defend them without name calling if they have to.   I'm not sure many on the left can do that.  Very few accept when challenged to do so.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So it's okay when someone like Boedicca, when she runs out of debate points, decides to call me Maggie Maggot. I suggest you not make sweeping assessments if you haven't actually read some of the insulting remarks made by members of your own club.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are not still angry at me for my remark a few days ago about thinking you were "older than dirt," are you?
> 
> I thought for sure that you would know I only thought you were half the age of dirt.
> 
> Immie
Click to expand...


No, I often refer to myself as "older than dirt." I sometimes FEEL older than dirt. But with age comes wisdom and I'm a very happy person because of it.


----------



## MaggieMae

Immanuel said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> 
> I can agree with that.
> 
> The Democrats cater to the poor, needy and the downtrodden.  They cater to them with promises and sometimes they even follow through.
> 
> I don't think they necessarily care any more for them than Conservatives/Republicans do, but I think the message is easier to sell coming from the liberal/Democrat perspective.  The Democrats believe that Welfare is the answer to saving the poor. Republicans believe it to be much of the problem.  Conservatives/Republicans believe in the hand up rather than the hand out.  Who is right?  Personally, I think the hand up is better in the long run.
> 
> But, how do you sell the Conservative/Republican message to the single mother of five who is struggling to make ends meet?  You don't.  Even if in the long run she would be better off being out from under Welfare.
> 
> Immie
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Conservatives with a conscience do; conservative politicans most assuredly do NOT offer a "hand up." Ever. They may go along with some of the social umbrella policies, but I can't think of a single one that they have actually sponsored independent of Democrats.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Is there such a thing as conservative politician these days?
> 
> If so, name one please.
> 
> Immie
Click to expand...


A true conservative, one with a conscience, and one whom I greatly admire is Tom Coburn. He not only truly believes in his convictions, is always willing to listen and study opposing viewpoints, but he isn't afraid to call out his fellow "conservative" lawmakers who fake it all the way.


----------



## MaggieMae

Lonestar_logic said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> Conservatives with a conscience do; conservative politicans most assuredly do NOT offer a "hand up." Ever. They may go along with some of the social umbrella policies, but I can't think of a single one that they have actually sponsored independent of Democrats.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is there such a thing as conservative politician these days?
> 
> If so, name one please.
> 
> Immie
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Newt Gingrich
Click to expand...


There are more than a few things I could find fault with Newt about, but he is another one who is at least willing to sit down and compromise.


----------



## MaggieMae

Immanuel said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is there such a thing as conservative politician these days?
> 
> If so, name one please.
> 
> Immie
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Newt Gingrich
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Newt's not really politicking these days though is he.
> 
> I can think of one who appears to be conservative, but I don't think he is well known outside of this district.  He is my rep, Adam Putnam.  Seems to be relatively conservative as far as I can tell.
> 
> Immie
Click to expand...


Gingrich is sounding more and more like he will run. He has said he will make a decision by the end of August, and has been making public appearances for months now. A final matchup between Romney and Gingrich would be wonderful to watch, as the GOP would finally have two viable candidates with a ton of experience backing them up.


----------



## MaggieMae

Lonestar_logic said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> Gee Whiz.   The Dems tell blacks that the GOP is racist, and then gather up black voters into busses and take them to polling places.  One year, they even gave out fried chicken dinner coupons to their shepherded voters in Oakland.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't believe for a moment that all blacks think all GOP (what's that, anyway?) is racist, but I must say it's comments LIKE YOURS^ that make them believers.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You don't know what GOP stands for? Or are you being facetious? GOP stands for Grand Ol' Party, which is the Republican party.
Click to expand...


I was being sarcastic. In my opinion, the Grand Old Party has been hijacked by the extreme right.


----------



## MaggieMae

DiveCon said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> Gee Whiz.   The Dems tell blacks that the GOP is racist, and then gather up black voters into busses and take them to polling places.  One year, they even gave out fried chicken dinner coupons to their shepherded voters in Oakland.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't believe for a moment that all blacks think all GOP (what's that, anyway?) is racist, but I must say it's comments LIKE YOURS^ that make them believers.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> i dont know about what she claims in oakland, but i do know what the dems did in St Louis in 2000
> they had the polls open 2.5 hours after they were supposed to be closed while they were busing people to them to vote
Click to expand...


And what happened in Ohio in 2004?


----------



## boedicca

DiveCon said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> i dont know about what she claims in oakland, but i do know what the dems did in St Louis in 2000
> they had the polls open 2.5 hours after they were supposed to be closed while they were busing people to them to vote
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oakland Mayor Elihu Harris promised free fried chicken to Oaklanders who showed their "proof of voting" at supermarkets in largely black neighborhoods.  I remember it well, having moved to Oakland a couple of years earlier.  The backlash was quite negative, even in the liberal Bay Area media.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> you'll be asked for it anyway, but do you have a link for that?
Click to expand...



It was a bit before the web became the source of all human knowledge.  

The incidence appears in his bio on wiki:

Elihu Harris - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And here:

The return of Audie Bock | Political Blotter


----------



## MaggieMae

Immanuel said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> 
> Newt's not really politicking these days though is he.
> 
> I can think of one who appears to be conservative, but I don't think he is well known outside of this district.  He is my rep, Adam Putnam.  Seems to be relatively conservative as far as I can tell.
> 
> Immie
> 
> 
> 
> there are hints he might get back in a race for something
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> 
> Newt's not really politicking these days though is he.
> 
> I can think of one who appears to be conservative, but I don't think he is well known outside of this district.  He is my rep, Adam Putnam.  Seems to be relatively conservative as far as I can tell.
> 
> Immie
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> He's thinking about running for POTUS in 2012.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I have heard that as well, but nothing solid on it.
> 
> If you ask me, I'd say he's crazy for even considering it.  I always liked him and was sorry to see him get involved in the scandal he did, but, I don't know why anyone would want to put themselves through the wringer he would end up going through.
> 
> Immie
Click to expand...


Politicians having affairs is so _passe_. Who cares?


----------



## WillowTree

Sky Dancer said:


> FOX is newsinfotainment.  That's why I can't stand it.



well if that's all it is why is obie wan obsessed with shutting it down doyathink?


----------



## DiveCon

boedicca said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oakland Mayor Elihu Harris promised free fried chicken to Oaklanders who showed their "proof of voting" at supermarkets in largely black neighborhoods.  I remember it well, having moved to Oakland a couple of years earlier.  The backlash was quite negative, even in the liberal Bay Area media.
> 
> 
> 
> you'll be asked for it anyway, but do you have a link for that?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> It was a bit before the web became the source of all human knowledge.
> 
> The incidence appears in his bio on wiki:
> 
> Elihu Harris - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> And here:
> 
> The return of Audie Bock | Political Blotter
Click to expand...

thanks


----------



## MaggieMae

DiveCon said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> yeah
> and i agree that any hyperventilating is absurd
> i dont see much of that over the journolist so much as showing the utter hypocrisy of it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So does that mean you agree that posting the content of Journolist NOW was overreaction?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no, i think it needed to be exposed
> 
> SOME might be over reacting, but i dont see so much of that in this thread
> its just proof that they planed to just call anyone a racist and they did
Click to expand...


They did? Ackerman publicly called Fred Barnes and Karl Rove racists? When was that published? Or was it just a comment exchanged within the Journolist website? See what I mean? Just having discussions on a website means squat.


----------



## DiveCon

MaggieMae said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> there are hints he might get back in a race for something
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> He's thinking about running for POTUS in 2012.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I have heard that as well, but nothing solid on it.
> 
> If you ask me, I'd say he's crazy for even considering it.  I always liked him and was sorry to see him get involved in the scandal he did, but, I don't know why anyone would want to put themselves through the wringer he would end up going through.
> 
> Immie
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Politicians having affairs is so _passe_. Who cares?
Click to expand...

well, it seems some only care when the person has an (R) after their name, but its passe if they have a (D)

not that i'm saying YOU are one of those some


----------



## DiveCon

MaggieMae said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> So does that mean you agree that posting the content of Journolist NOW was overreaction?
> 
> 
> 
> no, i think it needed to be exposed
> 
> SOME might be over reacting, but i dont see so much of that in this thread
> its just proof that they planed to just call anyone a racist and they did
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They did? Ackerman publicly called Fred Barnes and Karl Rove racists? When was that published? Or was it just a comment exchanged within the Journolist website? See what I mean? Just having discussions on a website means squat.
Click to expand...

Barnes and Rove were only an example
but they did call anyone that opposed Obama racist


----------



## The Infidel

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l5gRklaVG6U]YouTube - Rep. Steve King on Ben Shapiro Show[/ame]


----------



## MaggieMae

DiveCon said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have heard that as well, but nothing solid on it.
> 
> If you ask me, I'd say he's crazy for even considering it.  I always liked him and was sorry to see him get involved in the scandal he did, but, I don't know why anyone would want to put themselves through the wringer he would end up going through.
> 
> Immie
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Politicians having affairs is so _passe_. Who cares?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> well, it seems some only care when the person has an (R) after their name, but its passe if they have a (D)
> 
> not that i'm saying YOU are one of those some
Click to expand...


Thank you. No, I haven't been critical unless they happened to be a person who was loudly vocal about the sanctity of marriage, for example, then we find out he's been screwing around all the time. I've forgotten the S.C. governor's name, but I thought he was a good governor and completely honest in his feelings with regard to his love affair. It's too bad it ruined his career.

I should add that it took me a long time to get past Bill Clinton's sexcapades. I think I would have been more understanding if he hadn't been so _blase'_ about where he carried on. I think it must be extremely difficult, especially for a man, to be constantly in the presence of beautiful women, some of whom throw themselves at them hoping for their own self-gratification in having 'done a politician.'


----------



## Immanuel

MaggieMae said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sky Dancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm through arguing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How can we have a rational discussion if you won't participate?
> 
> Without you holding up your end of the bargain, who knows what radical lefty, we might get?
> 
> Immie
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't think she's being "radical" at all. She simply sees the situation from a totally different perspective. I'm willing to bet there are a whole lot more people who once looked down their noses at welfare recipients but who are now very thankful that those social umbrellas were in place if they have been caught between that proverbial rock and a hard place of being unexpectedly unemployed for any length of time. _Being there _changes ones perspective. Greatly.
Click to expand...


Whoa, whoa, whoa!  Is there something wrong with the bandwidth tonight and full messages are not getting through?  I did not say she was radical.  I said "who knows what radical lefty we might get"... hmmm, and then you showed up.  



MaggieMae said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sky Dancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm tired of arguing.  You guys can do my part.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ah, but not as good as you.
> 
> I see Maggie's joined the discussion, but haven't read her post.
> 
> Maggie is an excellent relief pitcher when she doesn't start.  At least there is still hope to continue this discussion.
> 
> I do understand your frustration and desire to end the discussion.  There always becomes a point when you feel like a discussion is going around and around in circles and nothing gets accomplished.
> 
> Immie
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Thanks, but I've only got about another good half-hour left in me too. It's almost time for the night shift anyway!
Click to expand...


But you can come back and play later, right?

Immie


----------



## Immanuel

MaggieMae said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> Conservatives with a conscience do; conservative politicans most assuredly do NOT offer a "hand up." Ever. They may go along with some of the social umbrella policies, but I can't think of a single one that they have actually sponsored independent of Democrats.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is there such a thing as conservative politician these days?
> 
> If so, name one please.
> 
> Immie
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> A true conservative, one with a conscience, and one whom I greatly admire is Tom Coburn. He not only truly believes in his convictions, is always willing to listen and study opposing viewpoints, but he isn't afraid to call out his fellow "conservative" lawmakers who fake it all the way.
Click to expand...


Hmm, don't think I have ever heard of him.

Is he up to running in 2012?

Immie


----------



## Immanuel

MaggieMae said:


> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> there are hints he might get back in a race for something
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> He's thinking about running for POTUS in 2012.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I have heard that as well, but nothing solid on it.
> 
> If you ask me, I'd say he's crazy for even considering it.  I always liked him and was sorry to see him get involved in the scandal he did, but, I don't know why anyone would want to put themselves through the wringer he would end up going through.
> 
> Immie
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Politicians having affairs is so _passe_. Who cares?
Click to expand...


Those who don't want them to win an election.

Immie


----------



## DiveCon

The Infidel said:


> YouTube - Rep. Steve King on Ben Shapiro Show


thanks
very interesting


----------



## DiveCon

MaggieMae said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> Politicians having affairs is so _passe_. Who cares?
> 
> 
> 
> well, it seems some only care when the person has an (R) after their name, but its passe if they have a (D)
> 
> not that i'm saying YOU are one of those some
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Thank you. No, I haven't been critical unless they happened to be a person who was loudly vocal about the sanctity of marriage, for example, then we find out he's been screwing around all the time. I've forgotten the S.C. governor's name, but I thought he was a good governor and completely honest in his feelings with regard to his love affair. It's too bad it ruined his career.
> 
> I should add that it took me a long time to get past Bill Clinton's sexcapades. I think I would have been more understanding if he hadn't been so _blase'_ about where he carried on. I think it must be extremely difficult, especially for a man, to be constantly in the presence of beautiful women, some of whom throw themselves at them hoping for their own self-gratification in having 'done a politician.'
Click to expand...

Mark Sanford

and i had people telling me he would make a good presidential run
i told them i didn't know enough about him yet and that i would reserve judgment till i did

i'm not one to jump on ANY bandwagon


----------



## William Joyce

Truthmatters said:


> The right will not be able to force the admin to react to these manufacctured stroies anymore.
> 
> This last case will make it impossible for them to FORCE immediate action from the WH.
> 
> You guys screwed your pooch of false outrage.
> 
> Now people will be required (even you righties) to examine these cases slowly and get all the imfo.
> 
> 
> I think this is a sign that the right is desperate to negatively effect the midterms because they know they are not going to be able to claim they have a mandate with the few seats they gain.


----------



## PLYMCO_PILGRIM

William Joyce said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> The right will not be able to force the admin to react to these manufacctured stroies anymore.
> 
> This last case will make it impossible for them to FORCE immediate action from the WH.
> 
> You guys screwed your pooch of false outrage.
> 
> Now people will be required (even you righties) to examine these cases slowly and get all the imfo.
> 
> 
> I think this is a sign that the right is desperate to negatively effect the midterms because they know they are not going to be able to claim they have a mandate with the few seats they gain.
Click to expand...


Hahahaha  thats a good one


----------



## Sky Dancer

Frankly, I'm sick of the whole right/left divisions.  I want to talk about bi-partisanship.  I want to talk about places of agreement, national priorties.


----------



## PLYMCO_PILGRIM

Sky Dancer said:


> Frankly, I'm sick of the whole right/left divisions.  I want to talk about bi-partisanship.  I want to talk about places of agreement, national priorties.



I think we need a 3rd party for all the sane center/left (you) and center/right (me) people out there.

I think the vast majority of americans would fit into such a political party.


----------



## Sky Dancer

At the very least, we can lead in our discussions and refuse to get side tracked or pulled into polar extremes.  How to interrupt that cycle of action/reaction, tit for tat? It would be an interesting exercise to share stories that are fact based and without opinion or editorial.


----------



## MaggieMae

Immanuel said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Immanuel said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is there such a thing as conservative politician these days?
> 
> If so, name one please.
> 
> Immie
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A true conservative, one with a conscience, and one whom I greatly admire is Tom Coburn. He not only truly believes in his convictions, is always willing to listen and study opposing viewpoints, but he isn't afraid to call out his fellow "conservative" lawmakers who fake it all the way.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hmm, don't think I have ever heard of him.
> 
> Is he up to running in 2012?
> 
> Immie
Click to expand...


Well, he's not *THAT* compromising. Coburn has deep-seated conservative beliefs, but he also recognizes that all of them are impossible to abide in such a vastly diverse nation (that's the part I like). I also like to listen to him slam fellow lawmakers for wasting time on small stuff, grandstanding for C-Span, and spinning their wheels in general.


----------



## MaggieMae

William Joyce said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> The right will not be able to force the admin to react to these manufacctured stroies anymore.
> 
> This last case will make it impossible for them to FORCE immediate action from the WH.
> 
> You guys screwed your pooch of false outrage.
> 
> Now people will be required (even you righties) to examine these cases slowly and get all the imfo.
> 
> 
> I think this is a sign that the right is desperate to negatively effect the midterms because they know they are not going to be able to claim they have a mandate with the few seats they gain.
Click to expand...


Somebody's race baiting.


----------



## MaggieMae

PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:


> Sky Dancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Frankly, I'm sick of the whole right/left divisions.  I want to talk about bi-partisanship.  I want to talk about places of agreement, national priorties.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think we need a 3rd party for all the sane center/left (you) and center/right (me) people out there.
> 
> I think the vast majority of americans would fit into such a political party.
Click to expand...


Independents have no organization, thus no money, therefore they will have no presidential candidate unless there is a massive write-in.

And it seems there's never a "good time" to get a new campaign finance bill on the floor for debate, which might alleviate that headache for good people who really could make a difference. The Senate has already nix'd the proposed redo until AFTER the November election.


----------



## MaggieMae

Sky Dancer said:


> At the very least, we can lead in our discussions and refuse to get side tracked or pulled into polar extremes.  How to interrupt that cycle of action/reaction, tit for tat? It would be an interesting exercise to share stories that are fact based and without opinion or editorial.



There are only a few people who post here that I can have those kinds of discussions with. It's an "us versus them" environment, unfortunately.


----------



## Foxfyre

PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:


> Sky Dancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Frankly, I'm sick of the whole right/left divisions.  I want to talk about bi-partisanship.  I want to talk about places of agreement, national priorties.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think we need a 3rd party for all the sane center/left (you) and center/right (me) people out there.
> 
> I think the vast majority of americans would fit into such a political party.
Click to expand...


So give us an example of what that might look like.  Any example.

The Tea Partiers and 9/12ers for instance have refused to be drawn into any social issues and rather have focused on demands for less government spending, lower taxes, and a balanced budget.

But when they promote those three main issues, they are accused of not caring about the poor or disadvantaged, wanting to snatch food from the mouths of children, wanting to throw old folks out on the street, of caring only for the rich, and. . .of course. . .of being racist.

Can we get anybody on the left to objectively discuss the merits or lack thereof of those three items?   We haven't been able to yet.   Most of those on the left not only reject the concepts but do so by digging up every figure they can think of from the past, insisting that 'trickle down' doesn't work, etc. etc. etc. and do everything else they can to divert any in depth discussion from the concepts themselves.

I no longer believe that most of those on the Left even WANT to discuss the issues.  And I am convinced that to them, bipartisanship means that we don't look at anything in any way other than they way they see it.

And if we even try to argue a different point of view we're just being partisan or extreme or hateful or. . .racist.


----------



## Lonestar_logic

MaggieMae said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't believe for a moment that all blacks think all GOP (what's that, anyway?) is racist, but I must say it's comments LIKE YOURS^ that make them believers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You don't know what GOP stands for? Or are you being facetious? GOP stands for Grand Ol' Party, which is the Republican party.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I was being sarcastic. In my opinion, the Grand Old Party has been hijacked by the extreme right.
Click to expand...


Define the "extreme right".


----------



## Sky Dancer

MaggieMae said:


> Sky Dancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> At the very least, we can lead in our discussions and refuse to get side tracked or pulled into polar extremes.  How to interrupt that cycle of action/reaction, tit for tat? It would be an interesting exercise to share stories that are fact based and without opinion or editorial.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There are only a few people who post here that I can have those kinds of discussions with. It's an "us versus them" environment, unfortunately.
Click to expand...


That is soooo boring, Maggie.  I'm at the point now where I'm considering only talking to the posters who are willing to drop the us vs them mentality.


----------



## Sky Dancer

Foxfyre said:


> PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sky Dancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Frankly, I'm sick of the whole right/left divisions.  I want to talk about bi-partisanship.  I want to talk about places of agreement, national priorties.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think we need a 3rd party for all the sane center/left (you) and center/right (me) people out there.
> 
> I think the vast majority of americans would fit into such a political party.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So give us an example of what that might look like.  Any example.
> 
> The Tea Partiers and 9/12ers for instance have refused to be drawn into any social issues and rather have focused on demands for less government spending, lower taxes, and a balanced budget.
> 
> But when they promote those three main issues, they are accused of not caring about the poor or disadvantaged, wanting to snatch food from the mouths of children, wanting to throw old folks out on the street, of caring only for the rich, and. . .of course. . .of being racist.
> 
> Can we get anybody on the left to objectively discuss the merits or lack thereof of those three items?   We haven't been able to yet.   Most of those on the left not only reject the concepts but do so by digging up every figure they can think of from the past, insisting that 'trickle down' doesn't work, etc. etc. etc. and do everything else they can to divert any in depth discussion from the concepts themselves.
> 
> I no longer believe that most of those on the Left even WANT to discuss the issues.  And I am convinced that to them, bipartisanship means that we don't look at anything in any way other than they way they see it.
> 
> And if we even try to argue a different point of view we're just being partisan or extreme or hateful or. . .racist.
Click to expand...


Really?

Just today I shared the same view as you on a post and I told you so. 

 I'm into dropping the labels, left/right, liberal/conservative.

Let's discuss the issues without it.


----------



## Lonestar_logic

Lonestar_logic said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> You don't know what GOP stands for? Or are you being facetious? GOP stands for Grand Ol' Party, which is the Republican party.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was being sarcastic. In my opinion, the Grand Old Party has been hijacked by the extreme right.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Define the "extreme right".
Click to expand...


Still waiting on your definition.


----------



## MaggieMae

Lonestar_logic said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> You don't know what GOP stands for? Or are you being facetious? GOP stands for Grand Ol' Party, which is the Republican party.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was being sarcastic. In my opinion, the Grand Old Party has been hijacked by the extreme right.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Define the "extreme right".
Click to expand...


Those who would eliminate all social umbrellas because they have no empathy for people living in poverty. They don't believe most people _don't_ choose to live in poverty.

Those who believe we should act like an imperialist superpower, running all over the world blowing up other countries.

Those who are intolerant of non-white, non-Christian people/countries.

Those who are locked and loaded ready to do battle with those who don't agree with the above tactics.


----------



## MaggieMae

Lonestar_logic said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> I was being sarcastic. In my opinion, the Grand Old Party has been hijacked by the extreme right.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Define the "extreme right".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Still waiting on your definition.
Click to expand...


Geezus, I posted that yesterday about this time and had other things to do in the meantime. Can't you tell when someone has gone offline? So I just saw your question five minutes ago and answered it, briefly. Unfortunately, there's no RED ALERT format to advise someone that so-and-so demands an answer POST-HASTE! I'm sure Gunny will advise when that becomes available, and you won't need to wait 24 hours anymore.


----------



## boedicca

MaggieMae said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> I was being sarcastic. In my opinion, the Grand Old Party has been hijacked by the extreme right.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Define the "extreme right".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Those who would eliminate all social umbrellas because they have no empathy for people living in poverty. They don't believe most people _don't_ choose to live in poverty.
> 
> Those who believe we should act like an imperialist superpower, running all over the world blowing up other countries.
> 
> Those who are intolerant of non-white, non-Christian people/countries.
> 
> Those who are locked and loaded ready to do battle with those who don't agree with the above tactics.
Click to expand...




Why do you assume that the only solution to helping unfortunate people is Big Government?


----------



## Kat

MaggieMae said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> I was being sarcastic. In my opinion, the Grand Old Party has been hijacked by the extreme right.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Define the "extreme right".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Those who would eliminate all social umbrellas because they have no empathy for people living in poverty. They don't believe most people _don't_ choose to live in poverty.
> 
> Those who believe we should act like an imperialist superpower, running all over the world blowing up other countries.
> 
> Those who are intolerant of non-white, non-Christian people/countries.
> 
> Those who are locked and loaded ready to do battle with those who don't agree with the above tactics.
Click to expand...




What a bunch of hogwash.


----------



## Rinata

boedicca said:


> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> Given my experience with my own opinion and the poor representation your posts make of yours, I'm quite happy sticking with mine.
> 
> Just sayin'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just sayin' again??? I don't know why you constantly add that phrase to your posts. It's stupid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then it should resonate with you, dearie.
Click to expand...


It does not resonate with me, missy. But what difference would it make who it resonates with?? It's still stupid.


----------



## Rinata

Kat said:


> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> About as often as you see it on the left.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bull.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> If you believe that, then you are not reading this forum. It is on both sides. Period.
Click to expand...


I'm sorry, but you're wrong. The most abusive people on this site are right wingers. And don't accuse me of saying there are none on the left. There are, but nowhere near as many. Let's see if I can name some off the top of my head. California Girl, Si modo, Dive Con, curvelght, Stephanie, Frank, Meister, boedicca, mudwhistle, Dave. There are so many!!!


----------



## Lonestar_logic

MaggieMae said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> I was being sarcastic. In my opinion, the Grand Old Party has been hijacked by the extreme right.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Define the "extreme right".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Those who would eliminate all social umbrellas because they have no empathy for people living in poverty. They don't believe most people _don't_ choose to live in poverty.
> 
> Those who believe we should act like an imperialist superpower, running all over the world blowing up other countries.
> 
> Those who are intolerant of non-white, non-Christian people/countries.
> 
> Those who are locked and loaded ready to do battle with those who don't agree with the above tactics.
Click to expand...


So expecting people to support themselves and be responsible for themselves and their families is an "extreme right" tenet?

The rest of your rant is plain gibberish and doesn't deserve a response.


----------



## Lonestar_logic

MaggieMae said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Define the "extreme right".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Still waiting on your definition.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Geezus, I posted that yesterday about this time and had other things to do in the meantime. Can't you tell when someone has gone offline? So I just saw your question five minutes ago and answered it, briefly. Unfortunately, there's no RED ALERT format to advise someone that so-and-so demands an answer POST-HASTE! I'm sure Gunny will advise when that becomes available, and you won't need to wait 24 hours anymore.
Click to expand...


Want some cheese to go with that whine?


----------



## Lonestar_logic

Rinata said:


> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> Bull.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you believe that, then you are not reading this forum. It is on both sides. Period.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm sorry, but you're wrong. The most abusive people on this site are right wingers. And don't accuse me of saying there are none on the left. There are, but nowhere near as many. Let's see if I can name some off the top of my head. California Girl, Si modo, Dive Con, curvelght, Stephanie, Frank, Meister, boedicca, mudwhistle, Dave. There are so many!!!
Click to expand...


You still whining?


----------



## PLYMCO_PILGRIM

MaggieMae said:


> PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sky Dancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Frankly, I'm sick of the whole right/left divisions.  I want to talk about bi-partisanship.  I want to talk about places of agreement, national priorties.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think we need a 3rd party for all the sane center/left (you) and center/right (me) people out there.
> 
> I think the vast majority of americans would fit into such a political party.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Independents have no organization, thus no money, therefore they will have no presidential candidate unless there is a massive write-in.
> 
> And it seems there's never a "good time" to get a new campaign finance bill on the floor for debate, which might alleviate that headache for good people who really could make a difference. The Senate has already nix'd the proposed redo until AFTER the November election.
Click to expand...


I dont think the people i described above are really "independants" as much as they are just the normal, average american citizen.   

The majority of us dont subscribe to far left/right ideologies and I feel its time for us, the majority, to rise up and destroy the 2 parties that we have since they seem to only be representing the 2 extremes.


----------



## PLYMCO_PILGRIM

Sky Dancer said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think we need a 3rd party for all the sane center/left (you) and center/right (me) people out there.
> 
> I think the vast majority of americans would fit into such a political party.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So give us an example of what that might look like.  Any example.
> 
> The Tea Partiers and 9/12ers for instance have refused to be drawn into any social issues and rather have focused on demands for less government spending, lower taxes, and a balanced budget.
> 
> But when they promote those three main issues, they are accused of not caring about the poor or disadvantaged, wanting to snatch food from the mouths of children, wanting to throw old folks out on the street, of caring only for the rich, and. . .of course. . .of being racist.
> 
> Can we get anybody on the left to objectively discuss the merits or lack thereof of those three items?   We haven't been able to yet.   Most of those on the left not only reject the concepts but do so by digging up every figure they can think of from the past, insisting that 'trickle down' doesn't work, etc. etc. etc. and do everything else they can to divert any in depth discussion from the concepts themselves.
> 
> I no longer believe that most of those on the Left even WANT to discuss the issues.  And I am convinced that to them, bipartisanship means that we don't look at anything in any way other than they way they see it.
> 
> And if we even try to argue a different point of view we're just being partisan or extreme or hateful or. . .racist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Really?
> 
> Just today I shared the same view as you on a post and I told you so.
> 
> I'm into dropping the labels, left/right, liberal/conservative.
> 
> Let's discuss the issues without it.
Click to expand...


Discussing the issues based on the issues themselves and not based on party ideology? 

OMG its a revolutionary idea I tell ya (just dont read my sig line )


In case my post doesn't translate well I was totally agreeing with you skydancer


----------



## Nonelitist

MaggieMae said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> I was being sarcastic. In my opinion, the Grand Old Party has been hijacked by the extreme right.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Define the "extreme right".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Those who would eliminate all social umbrellas because they have no empathy for people living in poverty. They don't believe most people _don't_ choose to live in poverty.  Most people do choose to live in poverty or make decisions that don't allow them to get out of poverty.  That can't be argued.
> 
> Those who believe we should act like an imperialist superpower, running all over the world blowing up other countries.  Conservatives dont' believe that.  They do  believe in killing terrorists.
> Those who are intolerant of non-white, non-Christian people/countries.  Prove it.
> 
> Those who are locked and loaded ready to do battle with those who don't agree with the above tactics.
Click to expand...

  What should we do?  Sacrifice our principles just to get along with you? 

No... our goal isnt' to get along with you.... our goal is to defeat you and your idiotic ideas that harm human beings.


----------



## Kat

Rinata said:


> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> Bull.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you believe that, then you are not reading this forum. It is on both sides. Period.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm sorry, but you're wrong. The most abusive people on this site are right wingers. And don't accuse me of saying there are none on the left. There are, but nowhere near as many. Let's see if I can name some off the top of my head. California Girl, Si modo, Dive Con, curvelght, Stephanie, Frank, Meister, boedicca, mudwhistle, Dave. There are so many!!!
Click to expand...




Define abusive. Are you abusive by calling out people, naming names of those YOU feel are abusive? I could make a list of libs I consider abusive..and could match name for name, but why would I lower myself to that level? 
And honestly, if you REALLY feel that way...why would you be posting here? Seriously.


----------



## MaggieMae

boedicca said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Define the "extreme right".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Those who would eliminate all social umbrellas because they have no empathy for people living in poverty. They don't believe most people _don't_ choose to live in poverty.
> 
> Those who believe we should act like an imperialist superpower, running all over the world blowing up other countries.
> 
> Those who are intolerant of non-white, non-Christian people/countries.
> 
> Those who are locked and loaded ready to do battle with those who don't agree with the above tactics.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why do you assume that the only solution to helping unfortunate people is Big Government?
Click to expand...


I didn't assume that. The question was what defines the "extreme right." It wasn't meant to be a conversation about the pros and cons of "big" government, _per se_. YOUR problem is you need to stop "assuming." Period.


----------



## MaggieMae

Kat said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Define the "extreme right".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Those who would eliminate all social umbrellas because they have no empathy for people living in poverty. They don't believe most people _don't_ choose to live in poverty.
> 
> Those who believe we should act like an imperialist superpower, running all over the world blowing up other countries.
> 
> Those who are intolerant of non-white, non-Christian people/countries.
> 
> Those who are locked and loaded ready to do battle with those who don't agree with the above tactics.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What a bunch of hogwash.
Click to expand...


Translation: I got nuthin.


----------



## Kat

MaggieMae said:


> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> Those who would eliminate all social umbrellas because they have no empathy for people living in poverty. They don't believe most people _don't_ choose to live in poverty.
> 
> Those who believe we should act like an imperialist superpower, running all over the world blowing up other countries.
> 
> Those who are intolerant of non-white, non-Christian people/countries.
> 
> Those who are locked and loaded ready to do battle with those who don't agree with the above tactics.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What a bunch of hogwash.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Translation: I got nuthin.
Click to expand...



Well, I know you don't...wasn't sure if you knew though.


----------



## MaggieMae

Rinata said:


> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> Bull.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you believe that, then you are not reading this forum. It is on both sides. Period.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm sorry, but you're wrong. The most abusive people on this site are right wingers. And don't accuse me of saying there are none on the left. There are, but nowhere near as many. Let's see if I can name some off the top of my head. California Girl, Si modo, Dive Con, curvelght, Stephanie, Frank, Meister, boedicca, mudwhistle, Dave. There are so many!!!
Click to expand...


guatama
namvet
Liability
C.Mike
Dr. House
Dude
The Rabbi
Mr. T
AllieBaba
WillowTree
Conhog

Next?


----------



## MaggieMae

Lonestar_logic said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Define the "extreme right".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Those who would eliminate all social umbrellas because they have no empathy for people living in poverty. They don't believe most people _don't_ choose to live in poverty.
> 
> Those who believe we should act like an imperialist superpower, running all over the world blowing up other countries.
> 
> Those who are intolerant of non-white, non-Christian people/countries.
> 
> Those who are locked and loaded ready to do battle with those who don't agree with the above tactics.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So expecting people to support themselves and be responsible for themselves and their families is an "extreme right" tenet?
> 
> The rest of your rant is plain gibberish and doesn't deserve a response.
Click to expand...


I should have added "Extreme comprehension problem." You are presuming something I did not think, nor say.


----------



## MaggieMae

PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:


> Sky Dancer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> 
> So give us an example of what that might look like.  Any example.
> 
> The Tea Partiers and 9/12ers for instance have refused to be drawn into any social issues and rather have focused on demands for less government spending, lower taxes, and a balanced budget.
> 
> But when they promote those three main issues, they are accused of not caring about the poor or disadvantaged, wanting to snatch food from the mouths of children, wanting to throw old folks out on the street, of caring only for the rich, and. . .of course. . .of being racist.
> 
> Can we get anybody on the left to objectively discuss the merits or lack thereof of those three items?   We haven't been able to yet.   Most of those on the left not only reject the concepts but do so by digging up every figure they can think of from the past, insisting that 'trickle down' doesn't work, etc. etc. etc. and do everything else they can to divert any in depth discussion from the concepts themselves.
> 
> I no longer believe that most of those on the Left even WANT to discuss the issues.  And I am convinced that to them, bipartisanship means that we don't look at anything in any way other than they way they see it.
> 
> And if we even try to argue a different point of view we're just being partisan or extreme or hateful or. . .racist.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really?
> 
> Just today I shared the same view as you on a post and I told you so.
> 
> I'm into dropping the labels, left/right, liberal/conservative.
> 
> Let's discuss the issues without it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Discussing the issues based on the issues themselves and not based on party ideology?
> 
> OMG its a revolutionary idea I tell ya (just dont read my sig line )
> 
> 
> In case my post doesn't translate well I was totally agreeing with you skydancer
Click to expand...


Well there ya go. It's really only been in the last decade that the two parties have been literally at each others throats and acting like extremists unwilling to discuss the issues like adults. That comment in response to yours here:



> The majority of us dont subscribe to far left/right ideologies and I feel its time for us, the majority, to rise up and destroy the 2 parties that we have since they seem to only be representing the 2 extremes.



When our own elected lawmakers stop projecting their own hatred down to their constituents, expect attitude adjustments among the rest of us.


----------



## MaggieMae

Nonelitist said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Define the "extreme right".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Those who would eliminate all social umbrellas because they have no empathy for people living in poverty. They don't believe most people _don't_ choose to live in poverty.  Most people do choose to live in poverty or make decisions that don't allow them to get out of poverty.  That can't be argued.
> 
> Those who believe we should act like an imperialist superpower, running all over the world blowing up other countries.  Conservatives dont' believe that.  They do  believe in killing terrorists.
> Those who are intolerant of non-white, non-Christian people/countries.  Prove it.
> 
> Those who are locked and loaded ready to do battle with those who don't agree with the above tactics.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What should we do?  Sacrifice our principles just to get along with you?
> 
> No... our goal isnt' to get along with you.... our goal is to defeat you and your idiotic ideas that harm human beings.
Click to expand...


Likewise. Bring it on.


----------



## boedicca

How cute.  A couple of Moonbats have start Another List!

Huggy has competition.


----------



## MaggieMae

Kat said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> What a bunch of hogwash.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Translation: I got nuthin.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Well, I know you don't...wasn't sure if you knew though.
Click to expand...


Ask a simple question (define extreme right) and he got a simple answer. If you people want more, then start a new thread or join the plethora of others on the same subject.


----------



## Kat

MaggieMae said:


> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> Translation: I got nuthin.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, I know you don't...wasn't sure if you knew though.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ask a simple question (define extreme right) and he got a simple answer. If you people want more, then start a new thread or join the plethora of others on the same subject.
Click to expand...



Nope. I just found the answer to be hogwash. And I meant hogwash...so that was something..not nothing.


----------



## MaggieMae

boedicca said:


> How cute.  A couple of Moonbats have start Another List!
> 
> Huggy has competition.



Aww, you're hurt, I can tell.


----------



## Lonestar_logic

MaggieMae said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> Those who would eliminate all social umbrellas because they have no empathy for people living in poverty. They don't believe most people _don't_ choose to live in poverty.
> 
> Those who believe we should act like an imperialist superpower, running all over the world blowing up other countries.
> 
> Those who are intolerant of non-white, non-Christian people/countries.
> 
> Those who are locked and loaded ready to do battle with those who don't agree with the above tactics.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So expecting people to support themselves and be responsible for themselves and their families is an "extreme right" tenet?
> 
> The rest of your rant is plain gibberish and doesn't deserve a response.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I should have added "Extreme comprehension problem." You are presuming something I did not think, nor say.
Click to expand...


I presume nothing, the fact is you support government cheese, I support personal responsibility. You can't feed a family with empathy. I say we should abolish all welfare programs and then you will see people either starve to death or go to work. It's funny how you liberals speak of empathy but have no qualms about killing an unborn child.


----------



## Rinata

Lonestar_logic said:


> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you believe that, then you are not reading this forum. It is on both sides. Period.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm sorry, but you're wrong. The most abusive people on this site are right wingers. And don't accuse me of saying there are none on the left. There are, but nowhere near as many. Let's see if I can name some off the top of my head. California Girl, Si modo, Dive Con, curvelght, Stephanie, Frank, Meister, boedicca, mudwhistle, Dave, Lonestar. There are so many!!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You still whining?
Click to expand...


That's a cop out you bagheads love to use when you have nothing intelligent to say.


----------



## Rinata

Lonestar_logic said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Define the "extreme right".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Those who would eliminate all social umbrellas because they have no empathy for people living in poverty. They don't believe most people _don't_ choose to live in poverty.
> 
> Those who believe we should act like an imperialist superpower, running all over the world blowing up other countries.
> 
> Those who are intolerant of non-white, non-Christian people/countries.
> 
> Those who are locked and loaded ready to do battle with those who don't agree with the above tactics.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So expecting people to support themselves and be responsible for themselves and their families is an "extreme right" tenet?
> 
> The rest of your rant is plain gibberish and doesn't deserve a response.
Click to expand...


Another cop out!!! Big as day!!!


----------



## Rinata

Lonestar_logic said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Still waiting on your definition.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Geezus, I posted that yesterday about this time and had other things to do in the meantime. Can't you tell when someone has gone offline? So I just saw your question five minutes ago and answered it, briefly. Unfortunately, there's no RED ALERT format to advise someone that so-and-so demands an answer POST-HASTE! I'm sure Gunny will advise when that becomes available, and you won't need to wait 24 hours anymore.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Want some cheese to go with that whine?
Click to expand...


Poor thing!!! You're making such a fool of yourself!!!


----------



## Lonestar_logic

Rinata said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm sorry, but you're wrong. The most abusive people on this site are right wingers. And don't accuse me of saying there are none on the left. There are, but nowhere near as many. Let's see if I can name some off the top of my head. California Girl, Si modo, Dive Con, curvelght, Stephanie, Frank, Meister, boedicca, mudwhistle, Dave, Lonestar. There are so many!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You still whining?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That's a cop out you bagheads love to use when you have nothing intelligent to say.
Click to expand...


No, it's a valid question after observing your incessant whining.


Oh and what is a "baghead"? Sounds a little racist to me.


----------



## Lonestar_logic

Rinata said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> Those who would eliminate all social umbrellas because they have no empathy for people living in poverty. They don't believe most people _don't_ choose to live in poverty.
> 
> Those who believe we should act like an imperialist superpower, running all over the world blowing up other countries.
> 
> Those who are intolerant of non-white, non-Christian people/countries.
> 
> Those who are locked and loaded ready to do battle with those who don't agree with the above tactics.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So expecting people to support themselves and be responsible for themselves and their families is an "extreme right" tenet?
> 
> The rest of your rant is plain gibberish and doesn't deserve a response.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Another cop out!!! Big as day!!!
Click to expand...


Why do you view a valid question as a "cop out"? A cop out is not answering the question, which is what you've done.


----------



## Rinata

Kat said:


> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you believe that, then you are not reading this forum. It is on both sides. Period.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm sorry, but you're wrong. The most abusive people on this site are right wingers. And don't accuse me of saying there are none on the left. There are, but nowhere near as many. Let's see if I can name some off the top of my head. California Girl, Si modo, Dive Con, curvelght, Stephanie, Frank, Meister, boedicca, mudwhistle, Dave. There are so many!!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Define abusive. Are you abusive by calling out people, naming names of those YOU feel are abusive? I could make a list of libs I consider abusive..and could match name for name, but why would I lower myself to that level?
> And honestly, if you REALLY feel that way...why would you be posting here? Seriously.
Click to expand...


Look, when I started posting here I was a little naive. I thought it was okay to say that I was an Obama supporter and that I voted for him. Wrong!!! I got called a bitch, ass, stupid, you name it. So I started giving it right back. As I said, when people are nice to me, I am nice to them.

Lumpy is a conservative and he's a doll. Our politics are totally opposite. He does not have to be mean or crude or unkind to state his politics. I like to hear what he has to say.

And I post here because there are people that I really like and the freaks keep me constantly entertained.


----------



## Lonestar_logic

Rinata said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> Geezus, I posted that yesterday about this time and had other things to do in the meantime. Can't you tell when someone has gone offline? So I just saw your question five minutes ago and answered it, briefly. Unfortunately, there's no RED ALERT format to advise someone that so-and-so demands an answer POST-HASTE! I'm sure Gunny will advise when that becomes available, and you won't need to wait 24 hours anymore.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Want some cheese to go with that whine?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Poor thing!!! You're making such a fool of yourself!!!
Click to expand...


Poor? Not hardly. And a fool? Yea I suppose so, if you think success is a fool's game.


----------



## Kat

Rinata said:


> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm sorry, but you're wrong. The most abusive people on this site are right wingers. And don't accuse me of saying there are none on the left. There are, but nowhere near as many. Let's see if I can name some off the top of my head. California Girl, Si modo, Dive Con, curvelght, Stephanie, Frank, Meister, boedicca, mudwhistle, Dave. There are so many!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Define abusive. Are you abusive by calling out people, naming names of those YOU feel are abusive? I could make a list of libs I consider abusive..and could match name for name, but why would I lower myself to that level?
> And honestly, if you REALLY feel that way...why would you be posting here? Seriously.
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Look, when I started posting here I was a little naive. I thought it was okay to say that I was an Obama supporter and that I voted for him. Wrong!!! I got called a bitch, ass, stupid, you name it. So I started giving it right back. As I said, when people are nice to me, I am nice to them.
> 
> Lumpy is a conservative and he's a doll. Our politics are totally opposite. He does not have to be mean or crude or unkind to state his politics. I like to hear what he has to say.
> 
> And I post here because there are people that I really like and the freaks keep me constantly entertained.
Click to expand...


Well gee, I have been called those things and I DIDN'T vote for, or support Obama.
As I said, it goes both ways. You need thicker skin....and honestly to ..


----------



## Foxfyre

Kat said:


> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> Define abusive. Are you abusive by calling out people, naming names of those YOU feel are abusive? I could make a list of libs I consider abusive..and could match name for name, but why would I lower myself to that level?
> And honestly, if you REALLY feel that way...why would you be posting here? Seriously.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Look, when I started posting here I was a little naive. I thought it was okay to say that I was an Obama supporter and that I voted for him. Wrong!!! I got called a bitch, ass, stupid, you name it. So I started giving it right back. As I said, when people are nice to me, I am nice to them.
> 
> Lumpy is a conservative and he's a doll. Our politics are totally opposite. He does not have to be mean or crude or unkind to state his politics. I like to hear what he has to say.
> 
> And I post here because there are people that I really like and the freaks keep me constantly entertained.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well gee, I have been called those things and I DIDN'T vote for, or support Obama.
> As I said, it goes both ways. You need thicker skin....
Click to expand...


Yep me too.  I should have been writing down all the unflattering adjectives used to describe me and all the creative epithets that I have been called since getting active on USMB.  There are some members on USMB on both sides of the political spectrum who don't seem to have the language skills to communicate any other way.

I do try not to be overly judgmental, but it is really difficult to see folks who can't communicate any other way as being intelligent.  That should not be interpreted that I think everybody who loses his/her cool and gets into an insulting rant is an idiot.

And I know some of the food fights are just for fun.  I just wish they would limit those to threads intended to be food fights.

And honestly.  Aren't there a few poor souls that you have a hard time as seeing as anything but idiots?


----------



## boedicca

The misuse and abuse of the Racist epithet towards those who oppose Obama's policies are the worst sort of insult I've seen on this board, and elsewhere.

It really is inexcusable.


----------



## Sky Dancer

boedicca said:


> The misuse and abuse of the Racist epithet towards those who oppose Obama's policies are the worst sort of insult I've seen on this board, and elsewhere.
> 
> It really is inexcusable.



What I think is inexcusable is resorting to racist epithets toward the President because you oppose his policies.


----------



## boedicca

You won't find any such epithets being used by the vast majority of those who do oppose Obama's policies.


----------



## Foxfyre

boedicca said:


> You won't find any such epithets being used by the vast majority of those who do oppose Obama's policies.



In fact, racial epithets being use by those who have a clue what they are objecting to are statistically insignificant.

But a very large percentage of Obama supporters seem to think any criticism of him is because he is black.  It is mostly THEY who are focused on his color and not those who oppose his policies.


----------



## drsmith1072

What is sad is that this is just another example of the right and their desperate need to make something out of nothing. 

Let's see, you have a group of people and the right is taking the comments of a few and trying to apply it to the whole in an attempt to condemn the whole. Really?? But wasn't the right complaining about that and attacking the left as they accused them of doing the same with the tea party?? Seriously?? Are you actually telling me that the right is really that hypocritical?


----------



## Kat

drsmith1072 said:


> What is sad is that this is just another example of the right and their desperate need to make something out of nothing.
> 
> Let's see, you have a group of people and the right is taking the comments of a few and trying to apply it to the whole in an attempt to condemn the whole. Really?? But wasn't the right complaining about that and attacking the left as they accused them of doing the same with the tea party?? Seriously?? Are you actually telling me that the right is really that hypocritical?


----------



## drsmith1072

Kat said:


> drsmith1072 said:
> 
> 
> 
> What is sad is that this is just another example of the right and their desperate need to make something out of nothing.
> 
> Let's see, you have a group of people and the right is taking the comments of a few and trying to apply it to the whole in an attempt to condemn the whole. Really?? But wasn't the right complaining about that and attacking the left as they accused them of doing the same with the tea party?? Seriously?? Are you actually telling me that the right is really that hypocritical?
Click to expand...


Yeah, if I were you, I would try to make light of and ignore my own hypocrisy too. 

You can't HONESTLY tell me that you don't see the contradiction between the rants of the right in defense of the tea party about how the actions of the few don't define the whole and their tactic of doing just that in this instance. Maybe that's why you avoided providing a real response, because you couldn't think of one? LOL


----------



## Kat

drsmith1072 said:


> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drsmith1072 said:
> 
> 
> 
> What is sad is that this is just another example of the right and their desperate need to make something out of nothing.
> 
> Let's see, you have a group of people and the right is taking the comments of a few and trying to apply it to the whole in an attempt to condemn the whole. Really?? But wasn't the right complaining about that and attacking the left as they accused them of doing the same with the tea party?? Seriously?? Are you actually telling me that the right is really that hypocritical?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah, if I were you, I would try to make light of and ignore my own hypocrisy too.
> 
> You can't HONESTLY tell me that you don't see the contradiction between the rants of the right in defense of the tea party about how the actions of the few don't define the whole and their tactic of doing just that in this instance. Maybe that's why you avoided providing a real response, because you couldn't think of one? LOL
Click to expand...



Read through the whole thread. You will see plenty of posts I made. I am bored with it, you beat that dead horse, and yes, I will yawn.


----------



## drsmith1072

Kat said:


> drsmith1072 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, if I were you, I would try to make light of and ignore my own hypocrisy too.
> 
> You can't HONESTLY tell me that you don't see the contradiction between the rants of the right in defense of the tea party about how the actions of the few don't define the whole and their tactic of doing just that in this instance. Maybe that's why you avoided providing a real response, because you couldn't think of one? LOL
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Read through the whole thread. You will see plenty of posts I made. I am bored with it, you beat that dead horse, and yes, I will yawn.
Click to expand...


If you are bored with it then why pretend to respond??

Either way it is a contradiction that is quite common in right wingers on this board so yawn if you want to it won't change a thing.


----------



## Kat

drsmith1072 said:


> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drsmith1072 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, if I were you, I would try to make light of and ignore my own hypocrisy too.
> 
> You can't HONESTLY tell me that you don't see the contradiction between the rants of the right in defense of the tea party about how the actions of the few don't define the whole and their tactic of doing just that in this instance. Maybe that's why you avoided providing a real response, because you couldn't think of one? LOL
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Read through the whole thread. You will see plenty of posts I made. I am bored with it, you beat that dead horse, and yes, I will yawn.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you are bored with it then why pretend to respond??
> 
> Either way it is a contradiction that is quite common in right wingers on this board so yawn if you want to it won't change a thing.
Click to expand...


And neither will you.


----------



## drsmith1072

Kat said:


> drsmith1072 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> Read through the whole thread. You will see plenty of posts I made. I am bored with it, you beat that dead horse, and yes, I will yawn.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you are bored with it then why pretend to respond??
> 
> Either way it is a contradiction that is quite common in right wingers on this board so yawn if you want to it won't change a thing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And neither will you.
Click to expand...


Oh well, thanks for the usual limited bumper sticker mentality of the right. It's not like I actually expected anything else. So at least I wasn't disappointed or surprised.


----------



## Rinata

Kat said:


> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> Define abusive. Are you abusive by calling out people, naming names of those YOU feel are abusive? I could make a list of libs I consider abusive..and could match name for name, but why would I lower myself to that level?
> And honestly, if you REALLY feel that way...why would you be posting here? Seriously.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Look, when I started posting here I was a little naive. I thought it was okay to say that I was an Obama supporter and that I voted for him. Wrong!!! I got called a bitch, ass, stupid, you name it. So I started giving it right back. As I said, when people are nice to me, I am nice to them.
> 
> Lumpy is a conservative and he's a doll. Our politics are totally opposite. He does not have to be mean or crude or unkind to state his politics. I like to hear what he has to say.
> 
> And I post here because there are people that I really like and the freaks keep me constantly entertained.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well gee, I have been called those things and I DIDN'T vote for, or support Obama.
> As I said, it goes both ways. You need thicker skin....and honestly to ..
Click to expand...


No, it doesn't go both ways. When a new poster comes on board they are going to be attacked right off the bat if they are a lib. Guaranteed.

And I don't need thicker skin. You tell that to people that can't take it when people are mean and hateful. Like you and your friends!!! I was just pointing out that that is what you do. I never said it hurt my feelings. I think it's stupid and amusing. And I am not going to be polite to any of you.


----------



## Rinata

Lonestar_logic said:


> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> So expecting people to support themselves and be responsible for themselves and their families is an "extreme right" tenet?
> 
> The rest of your rant is plain gibberish and doesn't deserve a response.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Another cop out!!! Big as day!!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why do you view a valid question as a "cop out"? A cop out is not answering the question, which is what you've done.
Click to expand...


Oh, save it. You haven't asked a valid question the whole time. But you did learn very well how to make your questions APPEAR valid when they most certainly are not. Just like Mr. Beck. Gotta give you credit for that. Very good.


----------



## Kat

Rinata said:


> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> Look, when I started posting here I was a little naive. I thought it was okay to say that I was an Obama supporter and that I voted for him. Wrong!!! I got called a bitch, ass, stupid, you name it. So I started giving it right back. As I said, when people are nice to me, I am nice to them.
> 
> Lumpy is a conservative and he's a doll. Our politics are totally opposite. He does not have to be mean or crude or unkind to state his politics. I like to hear what he has to say.
> 
> And I post here because there are people that I really like and the freaks keep me constantly entertained.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well gee, I have been called those things and I DIDN'T vote for, or support Obama.
> As I said, it goes both ways. You need thicker skin....and honestly to ..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, it doesn't go both ways. When a new poster comes on board they are going to be attacked right off the bat if they are a lib. Guaranteed.
> 
> And I don't need thicker skin. You tell that to people that can't take it when people are mean and hateful. Like you and your friends!!! I was just pointing out that that is what you do. I never said it hurt my feelings. I think it's stupid and amusing. And I am not going to be polite to any of you.
Click to expand...


Me and my friends?? LOL
Ooookie..

Oh...where have I attacked you? Show me one attack.


----------



## Rinata

boedicca said:


> The misuse and abuse of the Racist epithet towards those who oppose Obama's policies are the worst sort of insult I've seen on this board, and elsewhere.
> 
> It really is inexcusable.



That's not what it's about and you know it. All of the hate is spewed under the guise of "not liking Obama's policies". You don't accuse him of not being born here, of being a muslim, calling him the n word, and a million other things that are despicable, because you don't like his policies!!! Who do you people think you're kidding????


----------



## Rinata

boedicca said:


> You won't find any such epithets being used by the vast majority of those who do oppose Obama's policies.



Yes, that's exactly right. But you will find them being used by the right wing fanatics that will never, ever accept a black president. They hide behind his policy issues as an excuse for their hateful words and behavor.


----------



## boedicca

Rinata said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> The misuse and abuse of the Racist epithet towards those who oppose Obama's policies are the worst sort of insult I've seen on this board, and elsewhere.
> 
> It really is inexcusable.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's not what it's about and you know it. All of the hate is spewed under the guise of "not liking Obama's policies". You don't accuse him of not being born here, of being a muslim, calling him the n word, and a million other things that are despicable, because you don't like his policies!!! Who do you people think you're kidding????
Click to expand...



If your post isn't a satire, you are providing proof positive that the Left uses the Racist accusation to quell criticism of Obama's policies.


----------



## boedicca

Rinata said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> You won't find any such epithets being used by the vast majority of those who do oppose Obama's policies.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, that's exactly right. But you will find them being used by the right wing fanatics that will never, ever accept a black president. They hide behind his policy issues as an excuse for their hateful words and behavor.
Click to expand...




There are always freaks on both fringes.   You, however, are trying to paint the vast majority who are not fringe freaks with a broad brush of being Racist.

It's disgusting.


----------



## Rinata

boedicca said:


> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> The misuse and abuse of the Racist epithet towards those who oppose Obama's policies are the worst sort of insult I've seen on this board, and elsewhere.
> 
> It really is inexcusable.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's not what it's about and you know it. All of the hate is spewed under the guise of "not liking Obama's policies". You don't accuse him of not being born here, of being a muslim, calling him the n word, and a million other things that are despicable, because you don't like his policies!!! Who do you people think you're kidding????
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> If your post isn't a satire, you are providing proof positive that the Left uses the Racist accusation to quell criticism of Obama's policies.
Click to expand...


I swear to God you don't understand anything. I've explained this over and over. And you again come back with some off the wall, stupid comment.


----------



## boedicca

No, you're full of it.  You keep accusing anyone who disagrees with Obama's policies of being a racist.

We're not falling for it, boopsie-poo.


----------



## Rinata

boedicca said:


> No, you're full of it.  You keep accusing anyone who disagrees with Obama's policies of being a racist.
> We're not falling for it, boopsie-poo.



No, I do not. But I am not explaining it again. Think what you like. You don't count anyway, thank God.


----------



## Kat

Rinata said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, you're full of it.  You keep accusing anyone who disagrees with Obama's policies of being a racist.
> We're not falling for it, boopsie-poo.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, I do not. But I am not explaining it again. Think what you like. You don't count anyway, thank God.
Click to expand...


You couldn't be more wrong. boe counts for plenty.

And I am still waiting for the proof that I have attacked you. Bring it, or you owe an apology.


----------



## DiveCon

Rinata said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, you're full of it.  You keep accusing anyone who disagrees with Obama's policies of being a racist.
> We're not falling for it, boopsie-poo.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, I do not. But I am not explaining it again. Think what you like. You don't count anyway, thank God.
Click to expand...

you dont need to explain it, its in your posts
the only thing you think people disagree with is the fact he is black and everyone is racist that disagrees with him


----------



## Kat

DiveCon said:


> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, you're full of it.  You keep accusing anyone who disagrees with Obama's policies of being a racist.
> We're not falling for it, boopsie-poo.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, I do not. But I am not explaining it again. Think what you like. You don't count anyway, thank God.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> you dont need to explain it, its in your posts
> the only thing you think people disagree with is the fact he is black and everyone is racist that disagrees with him
Click to expand...


I feel sorry for anyone that thinks only in racial terms. I think of Obama as a man...a human being. Rinata thinks of him as a black man. So who is the REAL racist?


----------



## DiveCon

Kat said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, I do not. But I am not explaining it again. Think what you like. You don't count anyway, thank God.
> 
> 
> 
> you dont need to explain it, its in your posts
> the only thing you think people disagree with is the fact he is black and everyone is racist that disagrees with him
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I feel sorry for anyone that thinks only in racial terms. I think of Obama as a man...a human being. Rinata thinks of him as a black man. So who is the REAL racist?
Click to expand...

its clear that SOME people only see ethnicity


----------



## Kat

DiveCon said:


> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> you dont need to explain it, its in your posts
> the only thing you think people disagree with is the fact he is black and everyone is racist that disagrees with him
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I feel sorry for anyone that thinks only in racial terms. I think of Obama as a man...a human being. Rinata thinks of him as a black man. So who is the REAL racist?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> its clear that SOME people only see ethnicity
Click to expand...


Yeah, well it gets old. Wonder if the Bush hater's hate(d) him because he was white, or was it his politics?


----------



## DiveCon

Kat said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> I feel sorry for anyone that thinks only in racial terms. I think of Obama as a man...a human being. Rinata thinks of him as a black man. So who is the REAL racist?
> 
> 
> 
> its clear that SOME people only see ethnicity
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah, well it gets old. Wonder if the Bush hater's hate(d) him because he was white, or was it his politics?
Click to expand...

i'm sure to SOME it was his ethnicity


----------



## Dr Grump

boedicca said:


> The Daily Caller's "JournoList" expose has finally resolved the matter:
> 
> Based on Spencer Ackerman's tactic:
> 
> _*If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game theyve put upon us, Ackerman wrote on the Journolist listserv in April 2008. Instead, take one of them  Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares  and call them racists.*_
> 
> Conservatives Karl Rove and Fred Barnes respond to Journolist racist post | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment
> 
> 
> It's out in the open now.  The Left uses the racist accusation against the Right, the Tea Party, Conservatives, the GOP...  Anyone who critiques prominent lefties or their programs will be falsely attacked as a racist as a diversionary tactic.
> 
> More evidence is Sherrod's hateful comment regarding the GOP to Media Matters.
> 
> So here's the thing you lefties should understand:  we're not falling for it.



LOL the Daily Caller was founded by Tucker Carlson and somebody who used to be on Cheney's staff...Can anybody say "credibility problem"?


----------



## Modbert

Anyone who trusts what comes out of Karl Rove's mouth at this point needs to reexamine just what exactly why.


----------



## DiveCon

Modbert said:


> Anyone who trusts what comes out of Karl Rove's mouth at this point needs to reexamine just what exactly why.


that goes for just about anyone in politics
unless you are a partisan hack
'


----------



## Kat

Modbert said:


> Anyone who trusts what comes out of Karl Rove's mouth at this point needs to reexamine just what exactly why.




What's wrong with Rove??


----------



## Modbert

Kat said:


> What's wrong with Rove??



Plenty.

Republican Party (United States) presidential primaries, 2000 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



> *Allegations were made that Karl Rove was responsible for a South Carolina push poll that used racist innuendo intended to undermine support for McCain: "Would you be more likely or less likely to vote for John McCain for president if you knew he had fathered an illegitimate black child?*"[1] McCain campaign manager Richard Davis said he "had no idea who had made those calls, who paid for them, or how many were made," *but in the 2004 film "Bush's Brain" John Weaver, political director for McCain's 2000 campaign bid, stated "I believe I know where that decision was made; it was at the top of the Bush campaign.*"



Bush White House e-mail controversy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



> The Bush White House e-mail controversy surfaced in 2007, during the controversy involving the dismissal of eight U.S. attorneys. Congressional requests for administration documents while investigating the dismissals of the U.S. attorneys required the Bush administration to reveal that not all internal White House emails were available, because they were sent via a non-government domain hosted on an e-mail server not controlled by the federal government. Conducting governmental business in this manner is a possible violation of the Presidential Records Act of 1978, and the Hatch Act.[1] Over 5 million e-mails may have been lost or deleted.[2][3] Greg Palast claims to have come up with 500 of the Karl Rove lost emails, leading to damaging allegations.[4] In 2009, it was announced that as many as 22 million emails may have been deleted.[5]



Karl Rove was at the forefront of this, the dismissal of the U.S Attorneys and of course the Valerie Plame scandal.

Plame affair - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



> In his grand jury testimony, Karl Rove testified he learned of Plame's CIA affiliation from journalists and not from government officials. Rove testified that Novak called him in July 2003 to discuss a story unrelated to Plame or Wilson.





> On July 2, 2005, Karl Rove's lawyer, Robert Luskin, confirmed that Rove spoke to Time reporter Matt Cooper "three or four days" before Plame's identity was first revealed in print by commentator Robert Novak.





> Initially, Rove failed to tell the grand jury about his conversations with Cooper.





> On July 11, 2006, Robert Novak confirmed that Rove was his second source* for his article that revealed the identity of Valerie Plame as a CIA agent, the source who confirmed what Armitage had told him.*[77]



Basically, he did the dirty work of Bush's behind the scenes. I'm willing to bet that Bush probably didn't have some knowledge of some of the dirty things because that way he could always testify later that he had no clue.


----------



## Modbert

DiveCon said:


> that goes for just about anyone in politics
> unless you are a partisan hack
> '



Sure. However, that doesn't deny the fact that Rove is untrustworthy slime.


----------



## Kat

Modbert said:


> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> What's wrong with Rove??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Plenty.
> 
> Republican Party (United States) presidential primaries, 2000 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Allegations were made that Karl Rove was responsible for a South Carolina push poll that used racist innuendo intended to undermine support for McCain: "Would you be more likely or less likely to vote for John McCain for president if you knew he had fathered an illegitimate black child?*"[1] McCain campaign manager Richard Davis said he "had no idea who had made those calls, who paid for them, or how many were made," *but in the 2004 film "Bush's Brain" John Weaver, political director for McCain's 2000 campaign bid, stated "I believe I know where that decision was made; it was at the top of the Bush campaign.*"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Bush White House e-mail controversy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> Karl Rove was at the forefront of this, the dismissal of the U.S Attorneys and of course the Valerie Plame scandal.
> 
> Plame affair - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Initially, Rove failed to tell the grand jury about his conversations with Cooper.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On July 11, 2006, Robert Novak confirmed that Rove was his second source* for his article that revealed the identity of Valerie Plame as a CIA agent, the source who confirmed what Armitage had told him.*[77]
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Basically, he did the dirty work of Bush's behind the scenes. I'm willing to bet that Bush probably didn't have some knowledge of some of the dirty things because that way he could always testify later that he had no clue.
Click to expand...



Th thing about WIKI...especially with politics, is I have found it leans left, not to mention it can be added to and taken from. (edited)


----------



## Modbert

Kat said:


> Th thing about WIKI...especially with politics, is I have found it leans left, not to mention it can be added to and taken from. (edited)



Maybe, but there is plenty of other sources out there that only confirm what's there. I just find Karl Rove to be a very untrustworthy person. He took part in some of the nastiest mud slinging in the history of our politics and is very likely the person who was behind it.

I could be wrong, but once a person keeps finding themselves at the forefront of scandal after scandal, one has to ask themselves a couple things.


----------



## DiveCon

Modbert said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> that goes for just about anyone in politics
> unless you are a partisan hack
> '
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sure. However, that doesn't deny the fact that Rove is untrustworthy slime.
Click to expand...

is he any worse than Carville or begala?
i say no
the thing that pisses you off more is the fact he didnt work for the DEMS
if he did, you would sing his praise
i know you will deny it, but that is a fact


----------



## DiveCon

Modbert said:


> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> Th thing about WIKI...especially with politics, is I have found it leans left, not to mention it can be added to and taken from. (edited)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe, but there is plenty of other sources out there that only confirm what's there. I just find Karl Rove to be a very untrustworthy person. He took part in some of the nastiest mud slinging in the history of our politics and is very likely the person who was behind it.
> 
> I could be wrong, but once a person keeps finding themselves at the forefront of scandal after scandal, one has to ask themselves a couple things.
Click to expand...

and a lot of that mud slinging, is pure BULLSHIT
like the Plame stuff
he was totally and completely CLEARED
yet partisan you doesnt accept that


----------



## Modbert

DiveCon said:


> is he any worse than Carville or begala?
> i say no
> the thing that pisses you off more is the fact he didnt work for the DEMS
> if he did, you would sing his praise
> i know you will deny it, but that is a fact



No, it's not a fact. What illegal activity did Carville or Begala take part in?

I don't care whether he worked for the Democrats or the Republicans. I know either way I would not want a man of his caliber working on my campaign if I ever ran for anything.


----------



## Modbert

DiveCon said:


> and a lot of that mud slinging, is pure BULLSHIT
> *like the Plame stuff
> he was totally and completely CLEARED*
> yet partisan you doesnt accept that



Link?

You say a lot of that "mud slinging" is pure bullshit. Not willing to go out on a limb and say all of it is Dive? Even if half of the allegations against Karl Rove were true, that would paint his character as being very poor if not some actions that were illegal.


----------



## DiveCon

Modbert said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> and a lot of that mud slinging, is pure BULLSHIT
> *like the Plame stuff
> he was totally and completely CLEARED*
> yet partisan you doesnt accept that
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Link?
> 
> You say a lot of that "mud slinging" is pure bullshit. Not willing to go out on a limb and say all of it is Dive? Even if half of the allegations against Karl Rove were true, that would paint his character as being very poor if not some actions that were illegal.
Click to expand...

i cant say all of it is because i dont know
but you are easily swayed by partisan assholes to hate rove
and you've proved it once again


----------



## DiveCon

Modbert said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> is he any worse than Carville or begala?
> i say no
> the thing that pisses you off more is the fact he didnt work for the DEMS
> if he did, you would sing his praise
> i know you will deny it, but that is a fact
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, it's not a fact. What illegal activity did Carville or Begala take part in?
> 
> I don't care whether he worked for the Democrats or the Republicans. I know either way I would not want a man of his caliber working on my campaign if I ever ran for anything.
Click to expand...

what actual illegal activity did Rove engage in
NONE
thats proof you are a partisan hack


----------



## Kat

Modbert said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> and a lot of that mud slinging, is pure BULLSHIT
> *like the Plame stuff
> he was totally and completely CLEARED*
> yet partisan you doesnt accept that
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Link?
> 
> You say a lot of that "mud slinging" is pure bullshit. Not willing to go out on a limb and say all of it is Dive? Even if half of the allegations against Karl Rove were true, that would paint his character as being very poor if not some actions that were illegal.
Click to expand...




You didn't know he was cleared of that??? hmm


----------



## Modbert

DiveCon said:


> i cant say all of it is because i dont know
> but you are easily swayed by partisan assholes to hate rove
> and you've proved it once again



Wrong. I read what's taken place and come to my own conclusion. I told Kat the following:



> Maybe, but there is plenty of other sources out there that only confirm what's there. I just find Karl Rove to be a very untrustworthy person. He took part in some of the nastiest mud slinging in the history of our politics and is very likely the person who was behind it.
> 
> *I could be wrong, but once a person keeps finding themselves at the forefront of scandal after scandal, one has to ask themselves a couple things.*



I didn't say everything is fact and it's all 100% for sure information. You're the one acting like I am however. Once again you're trying to twist what I said.

I could easily also say that you're easily swayed by partisan assholes who like Rove. I mean after all, you did vote for Bush twice.


----------



## Modbert

Kat said:


> You didn't know he was cleared of that??? hmm



No. I'm referring to the words totally and completely cleared that Divecon used. Being cleared and being totally innocent in the matter are two different things.


----------



## Modbert

DiveCon said:


> what actual illegal activity did Rove engage in
> NONE
> thats proof you are a partisan hack



So wait, you just said one post ago that you had no idea whether every allegation was untrue.

I said:



> You say a lot of that "mud slinging" is pure bullshit. Not willing to go out on a limb and say all of it is Dive?



You said the post right before that:



> i cant say all of it is because i dont know



So did you make a phone call in between those posts and find out some information that you didn't know previously?


----------



## DiveCon

Modbert said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> what actual illegal activity did Rove engage in
> NONE
> thats proof you are a partisan hack
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So wait, you just said one post ago that you had no idea whether every allegation was untrue.
> 
> I said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You say a lot of that "mud slinging" is pure bullshit. Not willing to go out on a limb and say all of it is Dive?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You said the post right before that:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i cant say all of it is because i dont know
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So did you make a phone call in between those posts and find out some information that you didn't know previously?
Click to expand...

stop twisting words
not everything you posted was ILLEGAL

you DO know the difference, right?


----------



## Modbert

DiveCon said:


> stop twisting words
> not everything you posted was ILLEGAL
> 
> you DO know the difference, right?



Of course. Everything but one thing (the McCain incident) has implications of illegal action taking place.


----------



## DiveCon

Modbert said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> stop twisting words
> not everything you posted was ILLEGAL
> 
> you DO know the difference, right?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course. Everything but one thing (the McCain incident) has implications of illegal action taking place.
Click to expand...

and that has never been proven


yet another FAIL


----------



## Modbert

DiveCon said:


> and that has never been proven
> 
> 
> yet another FAIL



So is everything untrue then Divecon? Because I just talked to the Divecon of *checks watch* 24 minutes ago and he disagrees.


----------



## DiveCon

Modbert said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> and that has never been proven
> 
> 
> yet another FAIL
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So is everything untrue then Divecon? Because I just talked to the Divecon of *checks watch* 24 minutes ago and he disagrees.
Click to expand...

the stuff you bring up is nothing but partisan hackery and nothing actually illegal like you claimed

another FAIL

you called something illegal that wasnt
check your watch again
that is if your partisan hackery isnt in the way


----------



## Modbert

DiveCon said:


> the stuff you bring up is nothing but partisan hackery and nothing actually illegal like you claimed
> 
> another FAIL
> 
> you called something illegal that wasnt
> check your watch again
> that is if your partisan hackery isnt in the way



Just checked my watch, still works!

The stuff I bring up is partisan hackery? How so? I'm pretty sure someone was convicted in the Valerie Plame case and others were made to resign in the U.S attorneys case. Also, I'm pretty sure McCain not being friendly in 2000 sure is proof that he blames Bush for the push poll.

Unless you seem to think some of those incidents weren't illegal. Sure, the push poll one wasn't, it was just a real scumbag move.


----------



## DiveCon

Modbert said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> the stuff you bring up is nothing but partisan hackery and nothing actually illegal like you claimed
> 
> another FAIL
> 
> you called something illegal that wasnt
> check your watch again
> that is if your partisan hackery isnt in the way
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just checked my watch, still works!
> 
> The stuff I bring up is partisan hackery? How so? I'm pretty sure someone was convicted in the Valerie Plame case and others were made to resign in the U.S attorneys case. Also, I'm pretty sure McCain not being friendly in 2000 sure is proof that he blames Bush for the push poll.
> 
> Unless you seem to think some of those incidents weren't illegal. Sure, the push poll one wasn't, it was just a real scumbag move.
Click to expand...

yes, someone was convicted in the plame case, but it wasnt rove, and it wasnt for "outing her"

LOL
you fail once again

and again, that "push poll" wasnt proven to be something rove did

another FAIL


----------



## Flaylo

blastoff said:


> LOL...all this outrage because a totally inept administration forced the resignation of a USDA employee for no reason at all.
> 
> Next time you clowns should look for a little more substance from a candidate than just hope and change.




So the administration is at fault but not the lying piece of shit who started in the first place? Great, the Teabastards are all of the sudden on Sherrod's side because of the wicked actions of the White House when they at first condemed her and Briebart is not fault for anything. Not one media outlet on the right has run scathing attacks on Broebart for his part. They're spinning on their broke dicks like I expected.


----------



## DiveCon

Flaylo said:


> blastoff said:
> 
> 
> 
> LOL...all this outrage because a totally inept administration forced the resignation of a USDA employee for no reason at all.
> 
> Next time you clowns should look for a little more substance from a candidate than just hope and change.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So the administration is at fault but not the lying piece of shit who started in the first place? Great, the Teabastards are all of the sudden on Sherrod's side because of the wicked actions of the White House when they at first condemed her and Briebart is not fault for anything. Not one media outlet on the right has run scathing attacks on Broebart for his part. They're spinning on their broke dicks like I expected.
Click to expand...

Breitbart isnt the one that fired her


----------



## Modbert

DiveCon said:


> yes, someone was convicted in the plame case, but it wasnt rove, and it wasnt for "outing her"
> 
> LOL
> you fail once again
> 
> and again, that "push poll" wasnt proven to be something rove did
> 
> another FAIL



So Karl Rove has never done anything illegal or immoral as relating to politics in your opinion?


----------



## DiveCon

Modbert said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> yes, someone was convicted in the plame case, but it wasnt rove, and it wasnt for "outing her"
> 
> LOL
> you fail once again
> 
> and again, that "push poll" wasnt proven to be something rove did
> 
> another FAIL
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So Karl Rove has never done anything illegal or immoral as relating to politics in your opinion?
Click to expand...

i never said that
i said nothing illegal has ever been proven
and it hasnt
no matter how hard you try to twist it

and carville and begala have done just as many slimy things


----------



## Flaylo

blastoff said:


> LOL...all this outrage because a totally inept administration forced the resignation of a USDA employee for no reason at all.
> 
> Next time you clowns should look for a little more substance from a candidate than just hope and change.




So the administration is at fault but not the lying piece of shit who started in the first place? Great, the Teabastards are all of the sudden on Sherrod's side because of the wicked actions of the White House when they at first condemed her and Briebart is not fault for anything. Not one media outlet on the right has run scathing attacks on Broebart for his part. They're spinning on their broke dicks like I expected.


----------



## DiveCon

Flaylo said:


> blastoff said:
> 
> 
> 
> LOL...all this outrage because a totally inept administration forced the resignation of a USDA employee for no reason at all.
> 
> Next time you clowns should look for a little more substance from a candidate than just hope and change.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So the administration is at fault but not the lying piece of shit who started in the first place? Great, the Teabastards are all of the sudden on Sherrod's side because of the wicked actions of the White House when they at first condemed her and Briebart is not fault for anything. Not one media outlet on the right has run scathing attacks on Broebart for his part. They're spinning on their broke dicks like I expected.
Click to expand...

Breitbart is not the one that fired her

and he didnt lie
you are just another partisan hack


----------



## Flaylo

DiveCon said:


> Flaylo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> blastoff said:
> 
> 
> 
> LOL...all this outrage because a totally inept administration forced the resignation of a USDA employee for no reason at all.
> 
> Next time you clowns should look for a little more substance from a candidate than just hope and change.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So the administration is at fault but not the lying piece of shit who started in the first place? Great, the Teabastards are all of the sudden on Sherrod's side because of the wicked actions of the White House when they at first condemed her and Briebart is not fault for anything. Not one media outlet on the right has run scathing attacks on Broebart for his part. They're spinning on their broke dicks like I expected.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Breitbart isnt the one that fired her
Click to expand...


Briebart was the fucktard that sparked it all, so how can anyone not hold him accountable? He wasn't just some innocent guy who didn't do shit, he tried to smear the NAACP and in the process Sherrod was collateral damage that he didn't give a shit about , that is until the NAACP and White House overreacted, then sh ehad some value. You are fucking dishonest.


----------



## Modbert

DiveCon said:


> i never said that
> i said nothing illegal has ever been proven
> and it hasnt
> no matter how hard you try to twist it
> 
> and carville and begala have done just as many slimy things



So wait, why do you believe he hasn't done anything illegal or immoral as relating to politics if nothing illegal has ever been proven? 

And they have? Care to list them. I suppose in this case I will have to admit that I haven't really heard much about them since they are rarely mentioned on USMB in their previous roles.


----------



## Flaylo

DiveCon said:


> and he didnt lie
> you are just another partisan hack



He purposely distorted and posted an edited video that didn't tell the whole truth and anything less than the whole truth is a lie, so yes, he lied and is a liar, quit wiping his ass for him.


----------



## sitarro

Flaylo said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> and he didnt lie
> you are just another partisan hack
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He purposely distorted and posted an edited video that didn't tell the whole truth and anything less than the whole truth is a lie, so yes, he lied and is a liar, quit wiping his ass for him.
Click to expand...


I've unfortunately had the displeasure of reading more than enough posts of yours to come to the conclusion that........... 
a.  You are an imbecile.
b.  There is no way the Army would allow you to be a part of it's organization.
c.  You are a naive twat.
d.  You are a hack clown that has so little knowledge of anything worth knowing that your                                                  
skull must be a black hole of bullshit regressive propaganda.
e.  That you make even a dumb ass child like Dildobert seem intelligent....... and that take a lot of effort.
f. You could be a poster boy for the "Lick Obammy's Ass Hole Club", hell, you could be President of it.


----------



## Flaylo

sitarro said:


> Flaylo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> and he didnt lie
> you are just another partisan hack
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He purposely distorted and posted an edited video that didn't tell the whole truth and anything less than the whole truth is a lie, so yes, he lied and is a liar, quit wiping his ass for him.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I've unfortunately had the displeasure of reading more than enough posts of yours to come to the conclusion that...........
> a.  You are an imbecile.
> b.  There is no way the Army would allow you to be a part of it's organization.
> c.  You are a naive twat.
> d.  You are a hack clown that has so little knowledge of anything worth knowing that your
> skull must be a black hole of bullshit regressive propaganda.
> e.  That you make even a dumb ass child like Dildobert seem intelligent....... and that take a lot of effort.
> f. You could be a poster boy for the "Lick Obammy's Ass Hole Club", hell, you could be President of it.
Click to expand...


Shit for brains is what you have bud, I tell it like it is the hard way because you rightwing cowards don't get it any other way.


----------



## IanC

she admitted to wrongdoing in the video. just because the context of the speech was against racism that doesn't change the fact that she admitted to being a racist at that particular time of her life.

if Sarah Palin gave a speech on the importance of getting married before having sex and getting pregnant, and it turned out one of her kids had turned out to be an unwed mother.....wait, never mind.


----------



## Flaylo

IanC said:


> she admitted to wrongdoing in the video. just because the context of the speech was against racism that doesn't change the fact that she admitted to being a racist at that particular time of her life.
> 
> if Sarah Palin gave a speech on the importance of getting married before having sex and getting pregnant, and it turned out one of her kids had turned out to be an unwed mother.....wait, never mind.




She didn't admit to wrongdoing, she admitted to having bad feelings towards a farmer who was acting superior towards her. She helped the farmer save his farm in end but the fucktards on the right keep focusing their attention elsewhere, why?


----------



## Lonestar_logic

IanC said:


> she admitted to wrongdoing in the video. just because the context of the speech was against racism that doesn't change the fact that she admitted to being a racist at that particular time of her life.
> 
> if Sarah Palin gave a speech on the importance of getting married before having sex and getting pregnant, and it turned out one of her kids had turned out to be an unwed mother.....wait, never mind.



Do you have children?


----------



## IanC

Lonestar_logic said:


> IanC said:
> 
> 
> 
> she admitted to wrongdoing in the video. just because the context of the speech was against racism that doesn't change the fact that she admitted to being a racist at that particular time of her life.
> 
> if Sarah Palin gave a speech on the importance of getting married before having sex and getting pregnant, and it turned out one of her kids had turned out to be an unwed mother.....wait, never mind.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do you have children?
Click to expand...



lol, I was trying to point out how hypocritical public opinion is. a black woman admits to racism but ends the speech with 'don't be racist' and she is a hero. a white woman extolls the virtues of family values and because one of her own family doesn't live up to those standards, she is vilified.


----------



## Flaylo

IanC said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IanC said:
> 
> 
> 
> she admitted to wrongdoing in the video. just because the context of the speech was against racism that doesn't change the fact that she admitted to being a racist at that particular time of her life.
> 
> if Sarah Palin gave a speech on the importance of getting married before having sex and getting pregnant, and it turned out one of her kids had turned out to be an unwed mother.....wait, never mind.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do you have children?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> lol, I was trying to point out how hypocritical public opinion is. a black woman admits to racism but ends the speech with 'don't be racist' and she is a hero. a white woman extolls the virtues of family values and because one of her own family doesn't live up to those standards, she is vilified.
Click to expand...


Palin is different, she goes around judging other people's families trying to force her bullshit far right religious hypocrisy on people and gets called on her own bullshit. Sherrod was never racist against white people, she pointed out one incident when a man came in acting superior and talked about her feelings and you shitheads are trying to make her into a black KKK member. The religious far right talks a good fucking game about morals and never follows them.


----------



## IanC

Flaylo said:


> IanC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do you have children?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> lol, I was trying to point out how hypocritical public opinion is. a black woman admits to racism but ends the speech with 'don't be racist' and she is a hero. a white woman extolls the virtues of family values and because one of her own family doesn't live up to those standards, she is vilified.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Palin is different, she goes around judging other people's families trying to force her bullshit far right religious hypocrisy on people and gets called on her own bullshit. Sherrod was never racist against white people, she pointed out one incident when a man came in acting superior and talked about her feelings and you shitheads are trying to make her into a black KKK member. The religious far right talks a good fucking game about morals and never follows them.
Click to expand...



you have a right to your opinions, I have a right to mine. the Sherrods have a whole body of work behind them that speaks for itself. Personally I don't see how Palin's religion is any worse than Obama's but who cares? its just a popularity contest.


----------



## Flaylo

IanC said:


> you have a right to your opinions, I have a right to mine. the Sherrods have a whole body of work behind them that speaks for itself. Personally I don't see how Palin's religion is any worse than Obama's but who cares? its just a popularity contest.




A whole body of work like fucking what bud?


----------



## ConHog

Kat said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, I do not. But I am not explaining it again. Think what you like. You don't count anyway, thank God.
> 
> 
> 
> you dont need to explain it, its in your posts
> the only thing you think people disagree with is the fact he is black and everyone is racist that disagrees with him
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I feel sorry for anyone that thinks only in racial terms. I think of Obama as a man...a human being. Rinata thinks of him as a black man. So who is the REAL racist?
Click to expand...


Actually, she thinks of him as an infallible black man. She's pathetic. He's a failure , regardless of color.


----------



## Flaylo

ConHog said:


> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> you dont need to explain it, its in your posts
> the only thing you think people disagree with is the fact he is black and everyone is racist that disagrees with him
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I feel sorry for anyone that thinks only in racial terms. I think of Obama as a man...a human being. Rinata thinks of him as a black man. So who is the REAL racist?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually, she thinks of him as an infallible black man. She's pathetic. He's a failure , regardless of color.
Click to expand...



And you think of my CINC as the worst black man in America, there should be a law against saying slanderous things against the CINC, thats makes you and even bigger pathetic asshole.


----------



## MaggieMae

boedicca said:


> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> The misuse and abuse of the Racist epithet towards those who oppose Obama's policies are the worst sort of insult I've seen on this board, and elsewhere.
> 
> It really is inexcusable.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's not what it's about and you know it. All of the hate is spewed under the guise of "not liking Obama's policies". You don't accuse him of not being born here, of being a muslim, calling him the n word, and a million other things that are despicable, because you don't like his policies!!! Who do you people think you're kidding????
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> If your post isn't a satire, you are providing proof positive that the Left uses the Racist accusation to quell criticism of Obama's policies.
Click to expand...


What complete bullshit. I have written exhaustively about Obama's policies regarding the stimulus, financial reform, health care, Afghanistan, Iran, and a myriad lesser important issues, and never once mentioned his "race" while doing so, AND, when adults are having conversations about those important issues, it is also RARE for anyone with an opposing view to bring up race. Other than you and YOUR ilk, that is...

I just remembered who started this thread. Too funny!


----------



## MaggieMae

boedicca said:


> No, you're full of it.  You keep accusing anyone who disagrees with Obama's policies of being a racist.
> 
> We're not falling for it, boopsie-poo.



She's pointing out the obvious--that it's people who hate Obama that can't help inject his race and all the cute little references to his middle name, etc., into a conversation. To say this doesn't happen only proves your head is _waaaaaaaaaaaay_ up your ass.


----------



## MaggieMae

Modbert said:


> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> What's wrong with Rove??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Plenty.
> 
> Republican Party (United States) presidential primaries, 2000 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Allegations were made that Karl Rove was responsible for a South Carolina push poll that used racist innuendo intended to undermine support for McCain: "Would you be more likely or less likely to vote for John McCain for president if you knew he had fathered an illegitimate black child?*"[1] McCain campaign manager Richard Davis said he "had no idea who had made those calls, who paid for them, or how many were made," *but in the 2004 film "Bush's Brain" John Weaver, political director for McCain's 2000 campaign bid, stated "I believe I know where that decision was made; it was at the top of the Bush campaign.*"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Bush White House e-mail controversy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> Karl Rove was at the forefront of this, the dismissal of the U.S Attorneys and of course the Valerie Plame scandal.
> 
> Plame affair - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Initially, Rove failed to tell the grand jury about his conversations with Cooper.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On July 11, 2006, Robert Novak confirmed that Rove was his second source* for his article that revealed the identity of Valerie Plame as a CIA agent, the source who confirmed what Armitage had told him.*[77]
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Basically, he did the dirty work of Bush's behind the scenes. I'm willing to bet that Bush probably didn't have some knowledge of some of the dirty things because that way he could always testify later that he had no clue.
Click to expand...


Rove was a student of Lee Atwater's tactics. Historically, the Father of Dirty Politics.


----------



## MaggieMae

Kat said:


> Modbert said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> What's wrong with Rove??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Plenty.
> 
> Republican Party (United States) presidential primaries, 2000 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> Bush White House e-mail controversy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> Karl Rove was at the forefront of this, the dismissal of the U.S Attorneys and of course the Valerie Plame scandal.
> 
> Plame affair - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On July 11, 2006, Robert Novak confirmed that Rove was his second source* for his article that revealed the identity of Valerie Plame as a CIA agent, the source who confirmed what Armitage had told him.*[77]
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Basically, he did the dirty work of Bush's behind the scenes. I'm willing to bet that Bush probably didn't have some knowledge of some of the dirty things because that way he could always testify later that he had no clue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Th thing about WIKI...especially with politics, is I have found it leans left, not to mention it can be added to and taken from. (edited)
Click to expand...


Yep, no one can use Wikipedia 'cep the cons. Newsflash: Wikipedia is the most reliable online encyclopedia used by everyone of every social, financial, political level worldwide. It now clearly posts if an entry requires editing. Plus, if you think it is biased, then go to their sourced material at the bottom of every page and do your own research.


----------



## MaggieMae

DiveCon said:


> Modbert said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> that goes for just about anyone in politics
> unless you are a partisan hack
> '
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sure. However, that doesn't deny the fact that Rove is untrustworthy slime.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> is he any worse than Carville or begala?
> i say no
> the thing that pisses you off more is the fact he didnt work for the DEMS
> if he did, you would sing his praise
> i know you will deny it, but that is a fact
Click to expand...


It's unfortunate that the Democrats have ever found a person like Karl Rove. Too bad, because we've become wimps at mudslinging and need someone to be our own voice of slime. After all, slime is what passes for truth and gets implanted in a gullible America these days.


----------



## MaggieMae

DiveCon said:


> Modbert said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> Th thing about WIKI...especially with politics, is I have found it leans left, not to mention it can be added to and taken from. (edited)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe, but there is plenty of other sources out there that only confirm what's there. I just find Karl Rove to be a very untrustworthy person. He took part in some of the nastiest mud slinging in the history of our politics and is very likely the person who was behind it.
> 
> I could be wrong, but once a person keeps finding themselves at the forefront of scandal after scandal, one has to ask themselves a couple things.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> and a lot of that mud slinging, is pure BULLSHIT
> like the Plame stuff
> he was totally and completely CLEARED
> yet partisan you doesnt accept that
Click to expand...


Karl Rove wasn't cleared. He simply escaped prosecution because Scooter Libby took the fall and it wasn't necessary to pursue Rove.


----------



## MaggieMae

DiveCon said:


> Modbert said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> what actual illegal activity did Rove engage in
> NONE
> thats proof you are a partisan hack
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So wait, you just said one post ago that you had no idea whether every allegation was untrue.
> 
> I said:
> 
> You said the post right before that:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i cant say all of it is because i dont know
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So did you make a phone call in between those posts and find out some information that you didn't know previously?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> stop twisting words
> not everything you posted was ILLEGAL
> 
> you DO know the difference, right?
Click to expand...


What WAS illegal, however, was Rove's involvement in the US attorney firings. Although he verbally admitted to destruction of thousands of emails, he then refused to testify after being subpoenaed in the case, based on Executive Office privilege. Fortunately for Rove, that issue too died with the 2006 election, and Rove's resignation.


----------



## MaggieMae

sitarro said:


> Flaylo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> and he didnt lie
> you are just another partisan hack
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He purposely distorted and posted an edited video that didn't tell the whole truth and anything less than the whole truth is a lie, so yes, he lied and is a liar, quit wiping his ass for him.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I've unfortunately had the displeasure of reading more than enough posts of yours to come to the conclusion that...........
> a.  You are an imbecile.
> b.  There is no way the Army would allow you to be a part of it's organization.
> c.  You are a naive twat.
> d.  You are a hack clown that has so little knowledge of anything worth knowing that your
> skull must be a black hole of bullshit regressive propaganda.
> e.  That you make even a dumb ass child like Dildobert seem intelligent....... and that take a lot of effort.
> f. You could be a poster boy for the "Lick Obammy's Ass Hole Club", hell, you could be President of it.
Click to expand...


 And this basement dweller probably thinks his own postings are "pleasurable."


----------



## MaggieMae

IanC said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IanC said:
> 
> 
> 
> she admitted to wrongdoing in the video. just because the context of the speech was against racism that doesn't change the fact that she admitted to being a racist at that particular time of her life.
> 
> if Sarah Palin gave a speech on the importance of getting married before having sex and getting pregnant, and it turned out one of her kids had turned out to be an unwed mother.....wait, never mind.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do you have children?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> lol, I was trying to point out how hypocritical public opinion is. a black woman admits to racism but ends the speech with 'don't be racist' and she is a hero. a white woman extolls the virtues of family values and because one of her own family doesn't live up to those standards, she is vilified.
Click to expand...


Aww, poor Sarah. She's gotten a lot of mileage out of her predicament, and I would put her current income against Sherrod's and say Sarah is probably laughing all the way to the bank.


----------



## MaggieMae

Flaylo said:


> IanC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do you have children?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> lol, I was trying to point out how hypocritical public opinion is. a black woman admits to racism but ends the speech with 'don't be racist' and she is a hero. a white woman extolls the virtues of family values and because one of her own family doesn't live up to those standards, she is vilified.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Palin is different, she goes around judging other people's families trying to force her bullshit far right religious hypocrisy on people and gets called on her own bullshit. Sherrod was never racist against white people, she pointed out one incident when a man came in acting superior and talked about her feelings and you shitheads are trying to make her into a black KKK member. The religious far right talks a good fucking game about morals and never follows them.
Click to expand...


For one thing, the advocacy group that Sherrod worked for at the time raised money for BLACK farmers, not WHITE farmers.


----------



## DiveCon

Flaylo said:


> ConHog said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> I feel sorry for anyone that thinks only in racial terms. I think of Obama as a man...a human being. Rinata thinks of him as a black man. So who is the REAL racist?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, she thinks of him as an infallible black man. She's pathetic. He's a failure , regardless of color.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> And you think of my CINC as the worst black man in America, there should be a law against saying slanderous things against the CINC, thats makes you and even bigger pathetic asshole.
Click to expand...

yeah  i'm sure you gave Reagan and both Bush's that much respect, and if you say you did you are a liar and that can be shown in your sig line


----------



## DiveCon

MaggieMae said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Modbert said:
> 
> 
> 
> So wait, you just said one post ago that you had no idea whether every allegation was untrue.
> 
> I said:
> 
> You said the post right before that:
> 
> So did you make a phone call in between those posts and find out some information that you didn't know previously?
> 
> 
> 
> stop twisting words
> not everything you posted was ILLEGAL
> 
> you DO know the difference, right?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What WAS illegal, however, was Rove's involvement in the US attorney firings. Although he verbally admitted to destruction of thousands of emails, he then refused to testify after being subpoenaed in the case, based on Executive Office privilege. Fortunately for Rove, that issue too died with the 2006 election, and Rove's resignation.
Click to expand...

again, unproven charges


----------



## DiveCon

MaggieMae said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Modbert said:
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe, but there is plenty of other sources out there that only confirm what's there. I just find Karl Rove to be a very untrustworthy person. He took part in some of the nastiest mud slinging in the history of our politics and is very likely the person who was behind it.
> 
> I could be wrong, but once a person keeps finding themselves at the forefront of scandal after scandal, one has to ask themselves a couple things.
> 
> 
> 
> and a lot of that mud slinging, is pure BULLSHIT
> like the Plame stuff
> he was totally and completely CLEARED
> yet partisan you doesnt accept that
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Karl Rove wasn't cleared. He simply escaped prosecution because Scooter Libby took the fall and it wasn't necessary to pursue Rove.
Click to expand...

that is not true


----------



## Truthmatters

The bush people refused to testify


----------



## daveman

Flaylo said:


> And you think of my CINC as the worst black man in America, there should be a law against saying slanderous things against the CINC, thats makes you and even bigger pathetic asshole.


Yeah!  SCREW the First Amendment!


----------



## MaggieMae

DiveCon said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> stop twisting words
> not everything you posted was ILLEGAL
> 
> you DO know the difference, right?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What WAS illegal, however, was Rove's involvement in the US attorney firings. Although he verbally admitted to destruction of thousands of emails, he then refused to testify after being subpoenaed in the case, based on Executive Office privilege. Fortunately for Rove, that issue too died with the 2006 election, and Rove's resignation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> again, unproven charges
Click to expand...


Of course they were, because of Rove's diversion tactics. Destruction of emails is a clear violation of the Presidential Records Act.


----------



## MaggieMae

DiveCon said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> and a lot of that mud slinging, is pure BULLSHIT
> like the Plame stuff
> he was totally and completely CLEARED
> yet partisan you doesnt accept that
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Karl Rove wasn't cleared. He simply escaped prosecution because Scooter Libby took the fall and it wasn't necessary to pursue Rove.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> that is not true
Click to expand...


Believe whatever you want. The facts are abundant.


----------



## DiveCon

MaggieMae said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> Karl Rove wasn't cleared. He simply escaped prosecution because Scooter Libby took the fall and it wasn't necessary to pursue Rove.
> 
> 
> 
> that is not true
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Believe whatever you want. The facts are abundant.
Click to expand...

yeah, they are
and you dont have them


----------



## Kat

MaggieMae said:


> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Modbert said:
> 
> 
> 
> Plenty.
> 
> Republican Party (United States) presidential primaries, 2000 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> Bush White House e-mail controversy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> Karl Rove was at the forefront of this, the dismissal of the U.S Attorneys and of course the Valerie Plame scandal.
> 
> Plame affair - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Basically, he did the dirty work of Bush's behind the scenes. I'm willing to bet that Bush probably didn't have some knowledge of some of the dirty things because that way he could always testify later that he had no clue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Th thing about WIKI...especially with politics, is I have found it leans left, not to mention it can be added to and taken from. (edited)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yep, no one can use Wikipedia 'cep the cons. Newsflash: Wikipedia is the most reliable online encyclopedia used by everyone of every social, financial, political level worldwide. It now clearly posts if an entry requires editing. Plus, if you think it is biased, then go to their sourced material at the bottom of every page and do your own research.
Click to expand...



''Wake up Maggie I think I got something to say to youuuuuuuu...''

Again. I do NOT trust Wiki for *political* issues. If you want to, go for it, but let's not be telling ME what to do, mmk?


----------



## Rinata

DiveCon said:


> Flaylo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> blastoff said:
> 
> 
> 
> LOL...all this outrage because a totally inept administration forced the resignation of a USDA employee for no reason at all.
> 
> Next time you clowns should look for a little more substance from a candidate than just hope and change.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So the administration is at fault but not the lying piece of shit who started in the first place? Great, the Teabastards are all of the sudden on Sherrod's side because of the wicked actions of the White House when they at first condemed her and Briebart is not fault for anything. Not one media outlet on the right has run scathing attacks on Broebart for his part. They're spinning on their broke dicks like I expected.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Breitbart is not the one that fired her
> 
> and he didnt lie
> you are just another partisan hack
Click to expand...


Is your needle stuck????


----------



## Rinata

ConHog said:


> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> you dont need to explain it, its in your posts
> the only thing you think people disagree with is the fact he is black and everyone is racist that disagrees with him
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I feel sorry for anyone that thinks only in racial terms. I think of Obama as a man...a human being. Rinata thinks of him as a black man. So who is the REAL racist?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually, she thinks of him as an infallible black man. She's pathetic. He's a failure , regardless of color.
Click to expand...


Neither one of you knows or understands what I think. Your minds are too closed. For the last fucking time. If people criticized Obama because they don't like his policies, they would not have to say he's a racist and hates white people, carry signs portraying him as a witch doctor, and so on!!! They would just talk about his policies. But with some people it is not his policies they are against. It's him because he is black!!! What is so damn hard about understanding that??


----------



## DiveCon

Rinata said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Flaylo said:
> 
> 
> 
> So the administration is at fault but not the lying piece of shit who started in the first place? Great, the Teabastards are all of the sudden on Sherrod's side because of the wicked actions of the White House when they at first condemed her and Briebart is not fault for anything. Not one media outlet on the right has run scathing attacks on Broebart for his part. They're spinning on their broke dicks like I expected.
> 
> 
> 
> Breitbart is not the one that fired her
> 
> and he didnt lie
> you are just another partisan hack
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Is your needle stuck????
Click to expand...

the truth hurts, doesn't it?


----------



## drsmith1072

boedicca said:


> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> The misuse and abuse of the Racist epithet towards those who oppose Obama's policies are the worst sort of insult I've seen on this board, and elsewhere.
> 
> It really is inexcusable.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's not what it's about and you know it. All of the hate is spewed under the guise of "not liking Obama's policies". You don't accuse him of not being born here, of being a muslim, calling him the n word, and a million other things that are despicable, because you don't like his policies!!! Who do you people think you're kidding????
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> If your post isn't a satire, you are providing proof positive that the Left uses the Racist accusation to quell criticism of Obama's policies.
Click to expand...


He was pretty specific as to who he was referring to so why did you fail to see that?? 

Furthermore, if you don't meet those qualifications then he is not referring to valid criticism of obama just he one who try to hide their hate behind false claims and then expose themselves by engaging in accusing "him of not being born here, of being a muslim, calling him the n word, and a million other things that are despicable".

Did you not see how he was being specific or were you only interested in the attack as you took what was said out of context to score points?


----------



## Kat

Rinata said:


> ConHog said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> I feel sorry for anyone that thinks only in racial terms. I think of Obama as a man...a human being. Rinata thinks of him as a black man. So who is the REAL racist?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, she thinks of him as an infallible black man. She's pathetic. He's a failure , regardless of color.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Neither one of you knows or understands what I think. Your minds are too closed. For the last fucking time. If people criticized Obama because they don't like his policies, they would not have to say he's a racist and hates white people, carry signs portraying him as a witch doctor, and so on!!! They would just talk about his policies. But with some people it is not his policies they are against. It's him because he is black!!! What is so damn hard about understanding that??
Click to expand...



I am still waiting on you to show me where I have attacked you. NOW add to that where I have said he is a racist....
Also prove my mind is closed.


----------



## PLYMCO_PILGRIM

My liberal friends who still support obama at this point in time please stop posting in this thread.

It really makes the left look horrible when they ADMIT to being dishonest and using race in a dishonest way to stifle/win debates on topics.

Guys just let it die it is making the libs look REAL REAL bad.


----------



## drsmith1072

Modbert said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> what actual illegal activity did Rove engage in
> NONE
> thats proof you are a partisan hack
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So wait, you just said one post ago that you had no idea whether every allegation was untrue.
> 
> I said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You say a lot of that "mud slinging" is pure bullshit. Not willing to go out on a limb and say all of it is Dive?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You said the post right before that:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i cant say all of it is because i dont know
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So did you make a phone call in between those posts and find out some information that you didn't know previously?
Click to expand...


Don't waste your time, even with the facts right in front of him dive will just ignore them, twist your words, make claims he can't support even as he demands that you prove everything that you say beyond a shadow of a doubt. He is a troll and a hack, so don't waste your time with him. 

In another thread, he tried to claim sherrod's comments weren't taken out of context in spite of the fact that breitbart left off the second half of her parable, which he had. dive's reasoning to claim that they weren't taken out of context was because the excerpt fit into the context of brietbart's intent so therefore they weren't out of context. LOL


----------



## drsmith1072

PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:


> My liberal friends who still support obama at this point in time please stop posting in this thread.
> 
> It really makes the left look horrible when they ADMIT to being dishonest and using race in a dishonest way to stifle/win debates on topics.
> 
> Guys just let it die it is making the libs look REAL REAL bad.



So you are trying to apply the actions and statements of a few to the whole even though in the past you said for the left to do so against the tea party was wrong?? Thanks for proving that you are nothing but a hypocrite.

BTW it's kind of sad that you, who previously chimed into a thread, dishonestly accused me of saying things that i never said and then vanished when asked for proof of your accusations, are actually trying to be critical of anyone over being dishonest.


----------



## DiveCon

drsmith1072 said:


> Modbert said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> what actual illegal activity did Rove engage in
> NONE
> thats proof you are a partisan hack
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So wait, you just said one post ago that you had no idea whether every allegation was untrue.
> 
> I said:
> 
> 
> 
> You said the post right before that:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i cant say all of it is because i dont know
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So did you make a phone call in between those posts and find out some information that you didn't know previously?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Don't waste your time, even with the facts right in front of him dive will just ignore them, twist your words, make claims he can't support even as he demands that you prove everything that you say beyond a shadow of a doubt. He is a troll and a hack, so don't waste your time with him.
> 
> In another thread, he tried to claim sherrod's comments weren't taken out of context in spite of the fact that breitbart left off the second half of her parable, which he had. dive's reasoning to claim that they weren't taken out of context was because the excerpt fit into the context of brietbart's intent so therefore they weren't out of context. LOL
Click to expand...

ah, more lies and distortion from moronic smith


----------



## PLYMCO_PILGRIM

drsmith1072 said:


> PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:
> 
> 
> 
> My liberal friends who still support obama at this point in time please stop posting in this thread.
> 
> It really makes the left look horrible when they ADMIT to being dishonest and using race in a dishonest way to stifle/win debates on topics.
> 
> Guys just let it die it is making the libs look REAL REAL bad.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So you are trying to apply the actions and statements of a few to the whole even though in the past you said for the left to do so against the tea party was wrong?? Thanks for proving that you are nothing but a hypocrite.
> 
> BTW it's kind of sad that you, who previously chimed into a thread, dishonestly accused me of saying things that i never said and then vanished when asked for proof of your accusations, are actually trying to be critical of anyone over being dishonest.
Click to expand...


Its not the statements of a few citizens it is the statements of several leaders of large and influential news reporting/"journalism" outlets.    Totally different than the population of a protest....but why be honest in comparisons if it doesn't make you look good right Dr?

TPIWWOL  (This post is worthless without links).  Why? Because I walk away from the forum for days at a time and then scroll through my rep comments and active topics to find threads to post on.

BTW awesome example of Deflection Dr. Smith.....did you learn that at the Carville school of dishonest debate?


----------



## Big Fitz

The only ones convinced of conservatives being inherently racist are the progressofascist left.

They've been lying so long, they believe their own shit, but everyone else is waking up from the stench.


----------



## drsmith1072

DiveCon said:


> Flaylo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> blastoff said:
> 
> 
> 
> LOL...all this outrage because a totally inept administration forced the resignation of a USDA employee for no reason at all.
> 
> Next time you clowns should look for a little more substance from a candidate than just hope and change.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So the administration is at fault but not the lying piece of shit who started in the first place? Great, the Teabastards are all of the sudden on Sherrod's side because of the wicked actions of the White House when they at first condemed her and Briebart is not fault for anything. Not one media outlet on the right has run scathing attacks on Broebart for his part. They're spinning on their broke dicks like I expected.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Breitbart is not the one that fired her
> 
> and he didnt lie
> you are just another partisan hack
Click to expand...



He did lie, his dishonest actions as he only presented half of the story, when he had the second half, in order to retaliate against the naacp over their resolution is what caused the whole incident. 

Essentially breitbart yelled fire in a crouded theater and you are trying to blame the owner of the theater because he fired the usher as you give the guy yelling fire, when there was none, a pass. 

So the only one that looks like a partisan hack is YOU.


----------



## DiveCon

drsmith1072 said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Flaylo said:
> 
> 
> 
> So the administration is at fault but not the lying piece of shit who started in the first place? Great, the Teabastards are all of the sudden on Sherrod's side because of the wicked actions of the White House when they at first condemed her and Briebart is not fault for anything. Not one media outlet on the right has run scathing attacks on Broebart for his part. They're spinning on their broke dicks like I expected.
> 
> 
> 
> Breitbart is not the one that fired her
> 
> and he didnt lie
> you are just another partisan hack
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> He did lie, his dishonest actions as he only presented half of the story, when he had the second half, in order to retaliate against the naacp over their resolution is what caused the whole incident.
> 
> Essentially breitbart yelled fire in a crouded theater and you are trying to blame the owner of the theater because he fired the usher as you give the guy yelling fire, when there was none, a pass.
> 
> So the only one that looks like a partisan hack is YOU.
Click to expand...

ah, more pathetic projections


----------



## Rinata

DiveCon said:


> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> Breitbart is not the one that fired her
> 
> and he didnt lie
> you are just another partisan hack
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is your needle stuck????
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> the truth hurts, doesn't it?
Click to expand...


No, it doesn't hurt me. I'm sorry you can't say the same.


----------



## Rinata

Kat said:


> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ConHog said:
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, she thinks of him as an infallible black man. She's pathetic. He's a failure , regardless of color.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Neither one of you knows or understands what I think. Your minds are too closed. For the last fucking time. If people criticized Obama because they don't like his policies, they would not have to say he's a racist and hates white people, carry signs portraying him as a witch doctor, and so on!!! They would just talk about his policies. But with some people it is not his policies they are against. It's him because he is black!!! What is so damn hard about understanding that??
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I am still waiting on you to show me where I have attacked you. NOW add to that where I have said he is a racist....
> Also prove my mind is closed.
Click to expand...


What are you jabbering about, you babbling idiot??? You interjected yourself into the battle going on here and keep bugging me with your stupid questions.


----------



## Rinata

drsmith1072 said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> That's not what it's about and you know it. All of the hate is spewed under the guise of "not liking Obama's policies". You don't accuse him of not being born here, of being a muslim, calling him the n word, and a million other things that are despicable, because you don't like his policies!!! Who do you people think you're kidding????
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If your post isn't a satire, you are providing proof positive that the Left uses the Racist accusation to quell criticism of Obama's policies.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> He was pretty specific as to who he was referring to so why did you fail to see that??
> 
> Furthermore, if you don't meet those qualifications then he is not referring to valid criticism of obama just he one who try to hide their hate behind false claims and then expose themselves by engaging in accusing "him of not being born here, of being a muslim, calling him the n word, and a million other things that are despicable".
> 
> Did you not see how he was being specific or were you only interested in the attack as you took what was said out of context to score points?
Click to expand...


Finally somebody gets it!! Did you ever see people so friggin' dense?? Oh, I'm a she.


----------



## Rinata

PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:


> My liberal friends who still support obama at this point in time please stop posting in this thread.
> 
> It really makes the left look horrible when they ADMIT to being dishonest and using race in a dishonest way to stifle/win debates on topics.
> 
> Guys just let it die it is making the libs look REAL REAL bad.



I have no idea what you're talking about.


----------



## DiveCon

Rinata said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is your needle stuck????
> 
> 
> 
> the truth hurts, doesn't it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, it doesn't hurt me. I'm sorry you can't say the same.
Click to expand...

thats because you are too ignorant
it sure as hell doesnt hurt me because i'm not oblivious to it, like you are


----------



## DiveCon

Rinata said:


> PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:
> 
> 
> 
> My liberal friends who still support obama at this point in time please stop posting in this thread.
> 
> It really makes the left look horrible when they ADMIT to being dishonest and using race in a dishonest way to stifle/win debates on topics.
> 
> Guys just let it die it is making the libs look REAL REAL bad.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have no idea what you're talking about.
Click to expand...

hes talking about YOU
LOL


----------



## Rinata

DiveCon said:


> drsmith1072 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Modbert said:
> 
> 
> 
> So wait, you just said one post ago that you had no idea whether every allegation was untrue.
> 
> I said:
> 
> 
> 
> You said the post right before that:
> 
> 
> 
> So did you make a phone call in between those posts and find out some information that you didn't know previously?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Don't waste your time, even with the facts right in front of him dive will just ignore them, twist your words, make claims he can't support even as he demands that you prove everything that you say beyond a shadow of a doubt. He is a troll and a hack, so don't waste your time with him.
> 
> In another thread, he tried to claim sherrod's comments weren't taken out of context in spite of the fact that breitbart left off the second half of her parable, which he had. dive's reasoning to claim that they weren't taken out of context was because the excerpt fit into the context of brietbart's intent so therefore they weren't out of context. LOL
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ah, more lies and distortion from moronic smith
Click to expand...


Yeah, sure. He's got your number, doesn't he??? Go take a dive. Fool.


----------



## Rinata

divecon said:


> rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> divecon said:
> 
> 
> 
> the truth hurts, doesn't it?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> no, it doesn't hurt me. I'm sorry you can't say the same.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> thats because you are too ignorant
> it sure as hell doesnt hurt me because i'm not oblivious to it, like you are
Click to expand...


----------



## DiveCon

Rinata said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drsmith1072 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Don't waste your time, even with the facts right in front of him dive will just ignore them, twist your words, make claims he can't support even as he demands that you prove everything that you say beyond a shadow of a doubt. He is a troll and a hack, so don't waste your time with him.
> 
> In another thread, he tried to claim sherrod's comments weren't taken out of context in spite of the fact that breitbart left off the second half of her parable, which he had. dive's reasoning to claim that they weren't taken out of context was because the excerpt fit into the context of brietbart's intent so therefore they weren't out of context. LOL
> 
> 
> 
> ah, more lies and distortion from moronic smith
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah, sure. He's got your number, doesn't he??? Go take a dive. Fool.
Click to expand...

ah more projection from moronic rinata


----------



## DiveCon

Rinata said:


> divecon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> no, it doesn't hurt me. I'm sorry you can't say the same.
> 
> 
> 
> thats because you are too ignorant
> it sure as hell doesnt hurt me because i'm not oblivious to it, like you are
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> View attachment 11040
Click to expand...

then stop reading, moron


----------



## Kat

Rinata said:


> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> Neither one of you knows or understands what I think. Your minds are too closed. For the last fucking time. If people criticized Obama because they don't like his policies, they would not have to say he's a racist and hates white people, carry signs portraying him as a witch doctor, and so on!!! They would just talk about his policies. But with some people it is not his policies they are against. It's him because he is black!!! What is so damn hard about understanding that??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am still waiting on you to show me where I have attacked you. NOW add to that where I have said he is a racist....
> Also prove my mind is closed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What are you jabbering about, you babbling idiot??? You interjected yourself into the battle going on here and keep bugging me with your stupid questions.
Click to expand...



_*YOU*_ are the one that posted to _*ME* _saying how you were attacked. I merely asked you to prove it. And still am waiting.


----------



## Kat

DiveCon said:


> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:
> 
> 
> 
> My liberal friends who still support obama at this point in time please stop posting in this thread.
> 
> It really makes the left look horrible when they ADMIT to being dishonest and using race in a dishonest way to stifle/win debates on topics.
> 
> Guys just let it die it is making the libs look REAL REAL bad.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have no idea what you're talking about.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> hes talking about YOU
> LOL
Click to expand...


----------



## MaggieMae

Kat said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> Th thing about WIKI...especially with politics, is I have found it leans left, not to mention it can be added to and taken from. (edited)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep, no one can use Wikipedia 'cep the cons. Newsflash: Wikipedia is the most reliable online encyclopedia used by everyone of every social, financial, political level worldwide. It now clearly posts if an entry requires editing. Plus, if you think it is biased, then go to their sourced material at the bottom of every page and do your own research.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> ''Wake up Maggie I think I got something to say to youuuuuuuu...''
> 
> Again. I do NOT trust Wiki for *political* issues. If you want to, go for it, but let's not be telling ME what to do, mmk?
Click to expand...


I sometimes question their _analysis_, but at least I'm pointed in the right direction to get at the truth, the original source, is all I'm saying. I would venture though that they are 99% accurate, which is good enough for me. It's now very difficult to just enter and edit BECAUSE they went through a lot of accusations of biased inaccuracy about five years ago. You have to prove credentials to edit and your own source for a correction.

Wikipedia:Verifiability - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## MaggieMae

PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:


> My liberal friends who still support obama at this point in time please stop posting in this thread.
> 
> It really makes the left look horrible when they ADMIT to being dishonest and using race in a dishonest way to stifle/win debates on topics.
> 
> Guys just let it die it is making the libs look REAL REAL bad.



Still relying on that Journolist website, I see, in spite of the fact that Tucker Carlson cherry-picked a selected handful of emails out of over 25,000. Those "liberal" journalists never represented a grand conspiracy to inject racism into issues, but they were part of a chattering group of wonks that anyone might find openly discussing such things around the water cooler. But of course the desired effect hit its mark. It always does in Gullible America these days.


----------



## DiveCon

MaggieMae said:


> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yep, no one can use Wikipedia 'cep the cons. Newsflash: Wikipedia is the most reliable online encyclopedia used by everyone of every social, financial, political level worldwide. It now clearly posts if an entry requires editing. Plus, if you think it is biased, then go to their sourced material at the bottom of every page and do your own research.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ''Wake up Maggie I think I got something to say to youuuuuuuu...''
> 
> Again. I do NOT trust Wiki for *political* issues. If you want to, go for it, but let's not be telling ME what to do, mmk?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I sometimes question their _analysis_, but at least I'm pointed in the right direction to get at the truth, the original source, is all I'm saying. I would venture though that they are 99% accurate, which is good enough for me. It's now very difficult to just enter and edit BECAUSE they went through a lot of accusations of biased inaccuracy about five years ago. You have to prove credentials to edit and your own source for a correction.
> 
> Wikipedia:Verifiability - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...

I've done that before
took 3 times posting the correct info before it stuck, and if it hadn't stuck on the third try i was gonna give up


----------



## Big Fitz

I reiterate,  NEVER trust Wikipedia on political issues... use them for only the most common, well known aspects of a discussion or last resort.


----------



## MaggieMae

DiveCon said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> that is not true
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Believe whatever you want. The facts are abundant.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> yeah, they are
> and you dont have them
Click to expand...


Well what do you have to back up any other result? Even the civil suit naming Rove and Armitage brought by Valerie Plame was not heard by the Supreme Court, so Rove was off the hook there as well. It is what it is.


----------



## MaggieMae

Kat said:


> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am still waiting on you to show me where I have attacked you. NOW add to that where I have said he is a racist....
> Also prove my mind is closed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What are you jabbering about, you babbling idiot??? You interjected yourself into the battle going on here and keep bugging me with your stupid questions.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> _*YOU*_ are the one that posted to _*ME* _saying how you were attacked. I merely asked you to prove it. And still am waiting.
Click to expand...


I'm sick of you whining about this. This thread is quickly approaching a thousand hits, so expecting anyone to 'remember' what they said three or four days ago requires extensive research. You could at least give a hint as to what you're pissing and moaning over. Other inquiring minds want to know so you'll shut up about it.


----------



## DiveCon

MaggieMae said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> Believe whatever you want. The facts are abundant.
> 
> 
> 
> yeah, they are
> and you dont have them
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well what do you have to back up any other result? Even the civil suit naming Rove and Armitage brought by Valerie Plame was not heard by the Supreme Court, so Rove was off the hook there as well. It is what it is.
Click to expand...

being "off the hook" is not guilty, correct?


----------



## MaggieMae

Big Fitz said:


> I reiterate,  NEVER trust Wikipedia on political issues... use them for only the most common, well known aspects of a discussion or last resort.



Okay, from now on I shall rely on what YOU say.


----------



## PLYMCO_PILGRIM

Rinata said:


> PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:
> 
> 
> 
> My liberal friends who still support obama at this point in time please stop posting in this thread.
> W
> It really makes the left look horrible when they ADMIT to being dishonest and using race in a dishonest way to stifle/win debates on topics.
> 
> Guys just let it die it is making the libs look REAL REAL bad.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have no idea what you're talking about.
Click to expand...


Below is what i'm talking about rinata



boedicca said:


> The Daily Caller's "JournoList" expose has finally resolved the matter:
> 
> Based on Spencer Ackerman's tactic:
> 
> _*If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game theyve put upon us, Ackerman wrote on the Journolist listserv in April 2008. Instead, take one of them  Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares  and call them racists.*_
> 
> Conservatives Karl Rove and Fred Barnes respond to Journolist racist post | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment
> 
> 
> It's out in the open now.  The Left uses the racist accusation against the Right, the Tea Party, Conservatives, the GOP...  Anyone who critiques prominent lefties or their programs will be falsely attacked as a racist as a diversionary tactic.
> 
> More evidence is Sherrod's hateful comment regarding the GOP to Media Matters.
> 
> So here's the thing you lefties should understand:  we're not falling for it.


----------



## MaggieMae

DiveCon said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> yeah, they are
> and you dont have them
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well what do you have to back up any other result? Even the civil suit naming Rove and Armitage brought by Valerie Plame was not heard by the Supreme Court, so Rove was off the hook there as well. It is what it is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> being "off the hook" is not guilty, correct?
Click to expand...


Innocent until proven guilty. But in Rove's case, lucky is more like it. He wasn't the one who first leaked the information, but he sure was a co-conspirator with Novak in getting the buzz out to MSM.


----------



## DiveCon

MaggieMae said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well what do you have to back up any other result? Even the civil suit naming Rove and Armitage brought by Valerie Plame was not heard by the Supreme Court, so Rove was off the hook there as well. It is what it is.
> 
> 
> 
> being "off the hook" is not guilty, correct?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Innocent until proven guilty. But in Rove's case, lucky is more like it. He wasn't the one who first leaked the information, but he sure was a co-conspirator with Novak in getting the buzz out to MSM.
Click to expand...

if i remember correctly, Rove responded to a leading question from Novak where Novak was the one asking about Plame


----------



## Kat

MaggieMae said:


> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> What are you jabbering about, you babbling idiot??? You interjected yourself into the battle going on here and keep bugging me with your stupid questions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _*YOU*_ are the one that posted to _*ME* _saying how you were attacked. I merely asked you to prove it. And still am waiting.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm sick of you whining about this. This thread is quickly approaching a thousand hits, so expecting anyone to 'remember' what they said three or four days ago requires extensive research. You could at least give a hint as to what you're pissing and moaning over. Other inquiring minds want to know so you'll shut up about it.
Click to expand...



Kiss off Maggie. Rinata should have not have falsely accused me then. AND should have answered me right away. THEN she would not have to remember.
I DID say what it was. I quoted her more than once..she accused me of attacking her.
That is false.

I have as much right to post what I want, when I want, as you do. You don't like what I post, put me on ignore. Sheesh.


----------



## Rinata

MaggieMae said:


> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> What are you jabbering about, you babbling idiot??? You interjected yourself into the battle going on here and keep bugging me with your stupid questions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _*YOU*_ are the one that posted to _*ME* _saying how you were attacked. I merely asked you to prove it. And still am waiting.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm sick of you whining about this. This thread is quickly approaching a thousand hits, so expecting anyone to 'remember' what they said three or four days ago requires extensive research. You could at least give a hint as to what you're pissing and moaning over. Other inquiring minds want to know so you'll shut up about it.
Click to expand...


Really!!! I don't remember what I said to this pain in the ass broad!!!!


----------



## Rinata

PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:


> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:
> 
> 
> 
> My liberal friends who still support obama at this point in time please stop posting in this thread.
> W
> It really makes the left look horrible when they ADMIT to being dishonest and using race in a dishonest way to stifle/win debates on topics.
> 
> Guys just let it die it is making the libs look REAL REAL bad.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have no idea what you're talking about.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Below is what i'm talking about rinata
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Daily Caller's "JournoList" expose has finally resolved the matter:
> 
> Based on Spencer Ackerman's tactic:
> 
> _*If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game theyve put upon us, Ackerman wrote on the Journolist listserv in April 2008. Instead, take one of them  Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares  and call them racists.*_
> 
> Conservatives Karl Rove and Fred Barnes respond to Journolist racist post | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment
> 
> 
> It's out in the open now.  The Left uses the racist accusation against the Right, the Tea Party, Conservatives, the GOP...  Anyone who critiques prominent lefties or their programs will be falsely attacked as a racist as a diversionary tactic.
> More evidence is Sherrod's hateful comment regarding the GOP to Media Matters.
> 
> So here's the thing you lefties should understand:  we're not falling for it.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


Not this again. I think I've changed my mind and I will repeat this as often as I have to. People that say things like Obama should go back to Kenya, Obama is not an American, Obama is not a Christian, Obama is a Muslim, we came unarmed this time, are not protesting policy!!!


----------



## Bass v 2.0

DiveCon said:


> drsmith1072 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> Breitbart is not the one that fired her
> 
> and he didnt lie
> you are just another partisan hack
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He did lie, his dishonest actions as he only presented half of the story, when he had the second half, in order to retaliate against the naacp over their resolution is what caused the whole incident.
> 
> Essentially breitbart yelled fire in a crouded theater and you are trying to blame the owner of the theater because he fired the usher as you give the guy yelling fire, when there was none, a pass.
> 
> So the only one that looks like a partisan hack is YOU.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ah, more pathetic projections
Click to expand...



Is that all you have to say after being roasted? You seriously have your thinking cap screwed on backwards if you think Brierbart did nothing wrong. If it was for him posting that edited video none of this would have happened in the first place, you see, God don't like ugly and when you lie and use deceit you will get caught.


----------



## Bass v 2.0

Big Fitz said:


> The only ones convinced of conservatives being inherently racist are the progressofascist left.
> 
> They've been lying so long, they believe their own shit, but everyone else is waking up from the stench.



The only idiots convinced that rightwingers aren't racists are the rightwing monkeys themselves, just ask William Bennett and all the other shameless monkeys on the right, Bennett said the crime rate would go down if you aborted black babies, it was the right and even Negroes on the right[frustrated slaves] that defended him and said he wasn't racist, a New Black Panther party member says kill whitey and the right is yelling black racism, how is either one not racist? The heads on the left deserve some credit for not defending racists, rightwing apes and monkeys defend racists.


----------



## Lonestar_logic

Bass v 2.0 said:


> Big Fitz said:
> 
> 
> 
> The only ones convinced of conservatives being inherently racist are the progressofascist left.
> 
> They've been lying so long, they believe their own shit, but everyone else is waking up from the stench.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The only idiots convinced that rightwingers aren't racists are the rightwing monkeys themselves, just ask William Bennett and all the other shameless monkeys on the right, Bennett said the crime rate would go down if you aborted black babies, it was the right and even Negroes on the right[frustrated slaves] that defended him and said he wasn't racist, a New Black Panther party member says kill whitey and the right is yelling black racism, how is either one not racist? The heads on the left deserve some credit for not defending racists, rightwing apes and monkeys defend racists.
Click to expand...


Abortion is a liberal tenet you moron. NBP's are a racist bunch of pukes and you seem to fit right in.


----------



## DiveCon

Bass v 2.0 said:


> Big Fitz said:
> 
> 
> 
> The only ones convinced of conservatives being inherently racist are the progressofascist left.
> 
> They've been lying so long, they believe their own shit, but everyone else is waking up from the stench.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The only idiots convinced that rightwingers aren't racists are the rightwing monkeys themselves, just ask William Bennett and all the other shameless monkeys on the right, Bennett said the crime rate would go down if you aborted black babies, it was the right and even Negroes on the right[frustrated slaves] that defended him and said he wasn't racist, a New Black Panther party member says kill whitey and the right is yelling black racism, how is either one not racist? The heads on the left deserve some credit for not defending racists, rightwing apes and monkeys defend racists.
Click to expand...

coming from one of the board biggest racists , i'm not really concerned about your opinion


----------



## Bass v 2.0

DiveCon said:


> Bass v 2.0 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Big Fitz said:
> 
> 
> 
> The only ones convinced of conservatives being inherently racist are the progressofascist left.
> 
> They've been lying so long, they believe their own shit, but everyone else is waking up from the stench.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The only idiots convinced that rightwingers aren't racists are the rightwing monkeys themselves, just ask William Bennett and all the other shameless monkeys on the right, Bennett said the crime rate would go down if you aborted black babies, it was the right and even Negroes on the right[frustrated slaves] that defended him and said he wasn't racist, a New Black Panther party member says kill whitey and the right is yelling black racism, how is either one not racist? The heads on the left deserve some credit for not defending racists, rightwing apes and monkeys defend racists.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> coming from one of the board biggest racists , i'm not really concerned about your opinion
Click to expand...


Now you're playing the race card with me? Yes, sure I'm a racist you monkey, prove it.


----------



## DiveCon

Bass v 2.0 said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bass v 2.0 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The only idiots convinced that rightwingers aren't racists are the rightwing monkeys themselves, just ask William Bennett and all the other shameless monkeys on the right, Bennett said the crime rate would go down if you aborted black babies, it was the right and even Negroes on the right[frustrated slaves] that defended him and said he wasn't racist, a New Black Panther party member says kill whitey and the right is yelling black racism, how is either one not racist? The heads on the left deserve some credit for not defending racists, rightwing apes and monkeys defend racists.
> 
> 
> 
> coming from one of the board biggest racists , i'm not really concerned about your opinion
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Now you're playing the race card with me? Yes, sure I'm a racist you monkey, prove it.
Click to expand...

i dont have to
your own posts prove it


----------



## Bass v 2.0

DiveCon said:


> Bass v 2.0 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> coming from one of the board biggest racists , i'm not really concerned about your opinion
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now you're playing the race card with me? Yes, sure I'm a racist you monkey, prove it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> i dont have to
> your own posts prove it
Click to expand...


no evidence, more Divecon spinning and trolling.


----------



## DiveCon

Bass v 2.0 said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bass v 2.0 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Now you're playing the race card with me? Yes, sure I'm a racist you monkey, prove it.
> 
> 
> 
> i dont have to
> your own posts prove it
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> no evidence, more Divecon spinning and trolling.
Click to expand...


yeah, more projection from a KNOWN troll


----------



## Bass v 2.0

DiveCon said:


> Bass v 2.0 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> i dont have to
> your own posts prove it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> no evidence, more Divecon spinning and trolling.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> yeah, more projection from a KNOWN troll
Click to expand...


Now you're chimping out and neg repping me because your feeling got hurt and you're frustrated that you have no proof that I'm racist.


----------



## DiveCon

Bass v 2.0 said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bass v 2.0 said:
> 
> 
> 
> no evidence, more Divecon spinning and trolling.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yeah, more projection from a KNOWN troll
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Now you're chimping out and neg repping me because your feeling got hurt and you're frustrated that you have no proof that I'm racist.
Click to expand...

LOL no, i neg repped you because you are an asshole
and racist to the core


----------



## Big Fitz

MaggieMae said:


> Big Fitz said:
> 
> 
> 
> I reiterate,  NEVER trust Wikipedia on political issues... use them for only the most common, well known aspects of a discussion or last resort.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Okay, from now on I shall rely on what YOU say.
Click to expand...

Didn't say that either.  But that always IS a good idea.


----------



## Big Fitz

Bass v 2.0 said:


> Big Fitz said:
> 
> 
> 
> The only ones convinced of conservatives being inherently racist are the progressofascist left.
> 
> They've been lying so long, they believe their own shit, but everyone else is waking up from the stench.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The only idiots convinced that rightwingers aren't racists are the rightwing monkeys themselves, just ask William Bennett and all the other shameless monkeys on the right, Bennett said the crime rate would go down if you aborted black babies, it was the right and even Negroes on the right[frustrated slaves] that defended him and said he wasn't racist, a New Black Panther party member says kill whitey and the right is yelling black racism, how is either one not racist? The heads on the left deserve some credit for not defending racists, rightwing apes and monkeys defend racists.
Click to expand...




> The only idiots convinced that rightwingers aren't racists are the rightwing monkeys themselves,



Really?  Let's try a little test shall we?

1. Do you believe that it is more important to have the most qualified person for the job, or the most diverse workforce regardless of skill?

2. Do you believe that there needs to be special racial rules to standardized tests to help people of other races compete?

3. What matters more?  Content of character or color of skin?

4. If a black man votes for someone who is no liberal, are they an "uncle tom" or 'race traitor'?

I'm curious to learn your answers if you are brave enough to reveal your true colors.



> just ask William Bennett and all the other shameless monkeys on the right, Bennett said the crime rate would go down if you aborted black babies



One, never heard of such stupid audacity and therefore doubt it's truthiness.  Two, if he had uttered such a horrid phrase, he deserves excoriation.  Three, he's an elitist who's been a Washington insider for far too long, because every time I have listened to him, he espouses the progressive republican line except for matters of morality... which makes the factual nature of this supposed allegation even more unlikely.



> it was the right and even Negroes on the right[frustrated slaves] that defended him and said he wasn't racist,



Oh my stars!  A Negro!    Have you called a black man an uncle tom or race traitor today?  If not, you better hurry up and get to it!  You're falling behind.  Thank you for proving you are a condescendng racist.  You and Ravi Bunker can now hold a sheet whitening party and feel better about yourself.  Do you take starch in your hood, or prefer that rakish flop to one side?



> a New Black Panther party member says kill whitey and the right is yelling black racism, how is either one not racist?



New Black Panthers are racist.  But according to the original black panthers, they're wusses because they haven't started killing whitey yet.  You create a false comparison between an alleged Bill Bennett quote which you're gonna have to find a VERY reputable source for that before I believe it and a bunch of racist motherfuckers who should be jailed for their crimes of voter intimidation while making sure "a black man gets elected'.



> The heads on the left deserve some credit for not defending racists, rightwing apes and monkeys defend racists.



Really?  Now let me ask you.  Robert Byrd belonged to what white sheeted organization?  That's right.  Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Van Jones all are race baiters and socialists in democrat clothing.  Who stood against civil rights legislation?  Southern Democrats.

Other noted racist democrat/liberals

Margaret Sanger (Sterilize the genetically handicapped and minorities through Planned Parenthood)
George Wallace (Segregation now, segregation forever)
Bull Connor (Get them firehoses)
FDR (internment camps anyone?)
Hugo Black (KKK member)
Jimmy Byrnes (Segregationist)
Ernest Hollings (Segregationist)
Dick Gephart (spoke to white supremacist groups)

And here's a list of all 21 Democrat senators opposed to Civil Rights legislation.

- Hill and Sparkman of Alabama
- Fulbright and McClellan of Arkansas
- Holland and Smathers of Florida
- Russell and Talmadge of Georgia
- Ellender and Long of Louisiana
- Eastland and Stennis of Mississippi
- Ervin and Jordan of North Carolina
- Johnston and Thurmond of South Carolina
- Gore Sr. and Walters of Tennessee
- H. Byrd and Robertson of Virginia
- R. Byrd of West Virginia 

Interesting... isn't it?  Still think you get to act like your shit don't stink?


----------



## daveman

Rinata said:


> PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have no idea what you're talking about.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Below is what i'm talking about rinata
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Daily Caller's "JournoList" expose has finally resolved the matter:
> 
> Based on Spencer Ackerman's tactic:
> 
> _*If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game theyve put upon us, Ackerman wrote on the Journolist listserv in April 2008. Instead, take one of them  Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares  and call them racists.*_
> 
> Conservatives Karl Rove and Fred Barnes respond to Journolist racist post | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment
> 
> 
> It's out in the open now.  The Left uses the racist accusation against the Right, the Tea Party, Conservatives, the GOP...  Anyone who critiques prominent lefties or their programs will be falsely attacked as a racist as a diversionary tactic.
> More evidence is Sherrod's hateful comment regarding the GOP to Media Matters.
> 
> So here's the thing you lefties should understand:  we're not falling for it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not this again. I think I've changed my mind and I will repeat this as often as I have to. People that say things like Obama should go back to Kenya, Obama is not an American, Obama is not a Christian, Obama is a Muslim, we came unarmed this time, are not protesting policy!!!
Click to expand...

But most aren't saying that.  The minority who are are the ones who get all the press.


----------



## Rinata

Bass v 2.0 said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bass v 2.0 said:
> 
> 
> 
> no evidence, more Divecon spinning and trolling.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yeah, more projection from a KNOWN troll
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Now you're chimping out and neg repping me because your feeling got hurt and you're frustrated that you have no proof that I'm racist.
Click to expand...


 He's got your number, little diver!!! I told you before that when you neg rep it just lets the person know that they got under your skin!!! And from what I've been reading, why don't you just give it up??? Bass is making you look like a chump!!!


----------



## Rinata

daveman said:


> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:
> 
> 
> 
> Below is what i'm talking about rinata
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not this again. I think I've changed my mind and I will repeat this as often as I have to. People that say things like Obama should go back to Kenya, Obama is not an American, Obama is not a Christian, Obama is a Muslim, we came unarmed this time, are not protesting policy!!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> But most aren't saying that.  The minority who are are the ones who get all the press.
Click to expand...


You know damn well that there are a lot of people on here that insult the president in the same manner. Then try to say that they are not racist. They just don't like his policies. Then they whine about always being accused of being racist just because they don't agree with him. Such crap. In fact, most of them never discuss policy at all!!!


----------



## DiveCon

Rinata said:


> Bass v 2.0 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yeah, more projection from a KNOWN troll
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now you're chimping out and neg repping me because your feeling got hurt and you're frustrated that you have no proof that I'm racist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> He's got your number, little diver!!! I told you before that when you neg rep it just lets the person know that they got under your skin!!! And from what I've been reading, why don't you just give it up??? Bass is making you look like a chump!!!
Click to expand...

ROFLMAO

you are such a moron
the rep system is a PEER REVIEW system
get over it bitch
you are backing one of the biggest fucking racists on the board


----------



## drsmith1072

PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:


> drsmith1072 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:
> 
> 
> 
> My liberal friends who still support obama at this point in time please stop posting in this thread.
> 
> It really makes the left look horrible when they ADMIT to being dishonest and using race in a dishonest way to stifle/win debates on topics.
> 
> Guys just let it die it is making the libs look REAL REAL bad.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So you are trying to apply the actions and statements of a few to the whole even though in the past you said for the left to do so against the tea party was wrong?? Thanks for proving that you are nothing but a hypocrite.
> 
> BTW it's kind of sad that you, who previously chimed into a thread, dishonestly accused me of saying things that i never said and then vanished when asked for proof of your accusations, are actually trying to be critical of anyone over being dishonest.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Its not the statements of a few citizens it is the statements of several leaders of large and influential news reporting/"journalism" outlets.    Totally different than the population of a protest....but why be honest in comparisons if it doesn't make you look good right Dr?
> 
> TPIWWOL  (This post is worthless without links).  Why? Because I walk away from the forum for days at a time and then scroll through my rep comments and active topics to find threads to post on.
> 
> BTW awesome example of Deflection Dr. Smith.....did you learn that at the Carville school of dishonest debate?
Click to expand...


So are you claiming that all of those comments are representative of the whole and can you prove that? Furthermore, aren't many of those reporters in question citizens?? 

In reality there is no difference between labeling the entire tea party based on the actions and statements of a few and labeling the entire left based on the actions and statements of a few and you are nothing but a hypocritical hack. 

BTW what is deflection, I don't deny that the comments were made and don't make excuses for those who made them but I think it's quite telling that some of the same people would attack the left as a whole over a few comments after all of their conflicting arguments saying that it is wrong to do similar to the tea party.



boedicca said:


> It's out in the open now.  *The Left *uses the racist accusation against the Right, the Tea Party, Conservatives, the GOP...  Anyone who critiques prominent lefties or their programs will be falsely attacked as a racist as a diversionary tactic.



And look at all of the rigth wingers who thanked the hack who wrote the hypocrtical op.



> AllieBaba (07-23-2010), Annie (07-22-2010), AquaAthena (07-22-2010), ba1614 (07-22-2010), Big Fitz (07-27-2010), Foxfyre (07-24-2010), fyrenza (07-22-2010), GWV5903 (07-27-2010), Kat (07-22-2010), keee keee (07-24-2010), KissMy (07-23-2010), masquerade (07-22-2010), Misty (07-22-2010), mudwhistle (07-22-2010), Nonelitist (07-23-2010), Pale Rider (07-22-2010), pete (07-23-2010), PLYMCO_PILGRIM (07-22-2010), Ragnar (Yesterday), Rat in the Hat (07-28-2010), Sherry (07-25-2010), sitarro (07-23-2010), The Rabbi (07-22-2010), The T (07-22-2010), Wicked Jester (07-23-2010), WillowTree (07-22-2010), Zander (07-23-2010), Zoom-boing (07-23-2010)



I wonder, how many of them defended the tea party from blanket statements like the one made in the OP??


----------



## drsmith1072

DiveCon said:


> drsmith1072 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> Breitbart is not the one that fired her
> 
> and he didnt lie
> you are just another partisan hack
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He did lie, his dishonest actions as he only presented half of the story, when he had the second half, in order to retaliate against the naacp over their resolution is what caused the whole incident.
> 
> Essentially breitbart yelled fire in a crouded theater and you are trying to blame the owner of the theater because he fired the usher as you give the guy yelling fire, when there was none, a pass.
> 
> So the only one that looks like a partisan hack is YOU.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ah, more pathetic projections
Click to expand...


ah, more pathetic avoidance from you. lol


----------



## drsmith1072

Rinata said:


> PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:
> 
> 
> 
> My liberal friends who still support obama at this point in time please stop posting in this thread.
> 
> It really makes the left look horrible when they ADMIT to being dishonest and using race in a dishonest way to stifle/win debates on topics.
> 
> Guys just let it die it is making the libs look REAL REAL bad.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have no idea what you're talking about.
Click to expand...


It's ok neither does PP. LOL


----------



## drsmith1072

PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:


> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:
> 
> 
> 
> My liberal friends who still support obama at this point in time please stop posting in this thread.
> W
> It really makes the left look horrible when they ADMIT to being dishonest and using race in a dishonest way to stifle/win debates on topics.
> 
> Guys just let it die it is making the libs look REAL REAL bad.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have no idea what you're talking about.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Below is what i'm talking about rinata
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Daily Caller's "JournoList" expose has finally resolved the matter:
> 
> Based on Spencer Ackerman's tactic:
> 
> _*If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game theyve put upon us, Ackerman wrote on the Journolist listserv in April 2008. Instead, take one of them  Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares  and call them racists.*_
> 
> Conservatives Karl Rove and Fred Barnes respond to Journolist racist post | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment
> 
> 
> It's out in the open now.  *The Lef*t uses the racist accusation against the Right, the Tea Party, Conservatives, the GOP...  Anyone who critiques prominent lefties or their programs will be falsely attacked as a racist as a diversionary tactic.
> 
> More evidence is Sherrod's hateful comment regarding the GOP to Media Matters.
> 
> So here's the thing you lefties should understand:  we're not falling for it.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


Yeah, one comment that the OP tried to apply to the left as a whole and was thanked many many times by rightwingers. GJ, did you catch the hypocrisy yet??


----------



## DiveCon

drsmith1072 said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drsmith1072 said:
> 
> 
> 
> He did lie, his dishonest actions as he only presented half of the story, when he had the second half, in order to retaliate against the naacp over their resolution is what caused the whole incident.
> 
> Essentially breitbart yelled fire in a crouded theater and you are trying to blame the owner of the theater because he fired the usher as you give the guy yelling fire, when there was none, a pass.
> 
> So the only one that looks like a partisan hack is YOU.
> 
> 
> 
> ah, more pathetic projections
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> ah, more pathetic avoidance from you. lol
Click to expand...

no, but i dont expect you to understand


----------



## drsmith1072

DiveCon said:


> Bass v 2.0 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> i dont have to
> your own posts prove it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> no evidence, more Divecon spinning and trolling.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> yeah, more projection from a KNOWN troll
Click to expand...


Yes, you are a known troll so stop projecting and respond to the content instead of avoiding and ignoring facts that you can't spin. LOL


----------



## DiveCon

drsmith1072 said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bass v 2.0 said:
> 
> 
> 
> no evidence, more Divecon spinning and trolling.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yeah, more projection from a KNOWN troll
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes, you are a known troll so stop projecting and respond to the content instead of avoiding and ignoring facts that you can't spin. LOL
Click to expand...

gee, why dont you start a poll on that
LOL


----------



## Big Fitz

> And look at all of the rigth wingers who thanked the hack who wrote the hypocrtical op.









All I here is   "Whaaaa!  Whaaaa!  Whaaaaa!"


----------



## PLYMCO_PILGRIM

drsmith1072 said:


> PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have no idea what you're talking about.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Below is what I'm talking about Rinata
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Daily Caller's "JournoList" expose has finally resolved the matter:
> 
> Based on Spencer Ackerman's tactic:
> 
> _*&#8220;If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game they&#8217;ve put upon us,&#8221; Ackerman wrote on the Journolist listserv in April 2008. &#8220;Instead, take one of them &#8212; Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares &#8212; and call them racists.&#8221;*_
> 
> Conservatives Karl Rove and Fred Barnes respond to Journolist &#8216;racist&#8217; post | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment
> 
> 
> It's out in the open now.  *The Lef*t uses the racist accusation against the Right, the Tea Party, Conservatives, the GOP...  Anyone who critiques prominent lefties or their programs will be falsely attacked as a racist as a diversionary tactic.
> 
> More evidence is Sherrod's hateful comment regarding the GOP to Media Matters.
> 
> So here's the thing you lefties should understand:  we're not falling for it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah, one comment that the OP tried to apply to the left as a whole and was thanked many many times by rightwingers. GJ, did you catch the hypocrisy yet??
Click to expand...


Its definitely not the entire left that does it.  However many in the media repeat these mis-characterizations that this group has put out and many on the forum here who claim to be of the left persuasion use the very same tactic.

Its definitely not every "left leaner"  I can immediately think of over 5 people who are liberal minded that I post with who do not do that.


----------



## Rinata

DiveCon said:


> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bass v 2.0 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Now you're chimping out and neg repping me because your feeling got hurt and you're frustrated that you have no proof that I'm racist.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He's got your number, little diver!!! I told you before that when you neg rep it just lets the person know that they got under your skin!!! And from what I've been reading, why don't you just give it up??? Bass is making you look like a chump!!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ROFLMAO
> 
> you are such a moron
> the rep system is a PEER REVIEW system
> get over it bitch
> you are backing one of the biggest fucking racists on the board
Click to expand...


Oh, shut up!!! Do you ever make any sense with that water logged brain of yours??? Go diving some more and see if you can get any stupider.


----------



## Rinata

Kat said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> _*YOU*_ are the one that posted to _*ME* _saying how you were attacked. I merely asked you to prove it. And still am waiting.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm sick of you whining about this. This thread is quickly approaching a thousand hits, so expecting anyone to 'remember' what they said three or four days ago requires extensive research. You could at least give a hint as to what you're pissing and moaning over. Other inquiring minds want to know so you'll shut up about it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Kiss off Maggie. Rinata should have not have falsely accused me then. AND should have answered me right away. THEN she would not have to remember.
> I DID say what it was. I quoted her more than once..she accused me of attacking her.
> That is false.
> 
> I have as much right to post what I want, when I want, as you do. You don't like what I post, put me on ignore. Sheesh.
Click to expand...


I am not particularly interested in answering your questions. I don't like you. Next time give me the post number you are talking about. I'm certainly not going looking for it. Do you think you can do that or have I stumped you???


----------



## DiveCon

Rinata said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> He's got your number, little diver!!! I told you before that when you neg rep it just lets the person know that they got under your skin!!! And from what I've been reading, why don't you just give it up??? Bass is making you look like a chump!!!
> 
> 
> 
> ROFLMAO
> 
> you are such a moron
> the rep system is a PEER REVIEW system
> get over it bitch
> you are backing one of the biggest fucking racists on the board
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh, shut up!!! Do you ever make any sense with that water logged brain of yours??? Go diving some more and see if you can get any stupider.
Click to expand...

oooh such a retort, did it take you all this time to come up with that

you are PATHETIC


----------



## Kat

Rinata said:


> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm sick of you whining about this. This thread is quickly approaching a thousand hits, so expecting anyone to 'remember' what they said three or four days ago requires extensive research. You could at least give a hint as to what you're pissing and moaning over. Other inquiring minds want to know so you'll shut up about it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kiss off Maggie. Rinata should have not have falsely accused me then. AND should have answered me right away. THEN she would not have to remember.
> I DID say what it was. I quoted her more than once..she accused me of attacking her.
> That is false.
> 
> I have as much right to post what I want, when I want, as you do. You don't like what I post, put me on ignore. Sheesh.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am not particularly interested in answering your questions. I don't like you. Next time give me the post number you are talking about. I'm certainly not going looking for it. Do you think you can do that or have I  that stumped you???
Click to expand...


Ohhhhhhhhhhhh nooooooooooooooooo Rinata doesn't like me. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




Of course you aren't going to look for it. You already know you are wrong. You are excused now..


----------



## Flaylo

DiveCon said:


> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bass v 2.0 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Now you're chimping out and neg repping me because your feeling got hurt and you're frustrated that you have no proof that I'm racist.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He's got your number, little diver!!! I told you before that when you neg rep it just lets the person know that they got under your skin!!! And from what I've been reading, why don't you just give it up??? Bass is making you look like a chump!!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ROFLMAO
> 
> you are such a moron
> the rep system is a PEER REVIEW system
> get over it bitch
> you are backing one of the biggest fucking racists on the board
Click to expand...


So says the pile of human shit that refuses to condemn Briefart's lying, misleading video, you're one piece of fucking work.


----------



## Lonestar_logic

Flaylo said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> He's got your number, little diver!!! I told you before that when you neg rep it just lets the person know that they got under your skin!!! And from what I've been reading, why don't you just give it up??? Bass is making you look like a chump!!!
> 
> 
> 
> ROFLMAO
> 
> you are such a moron
> the rep system is a PEER REVIEW system
> get over it bitch
> you are backing one of the biggest fucking racists on the board
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So says the pile of human shit that refuses to condemn Briefart's lying, misleading video, you're one piece of fucking work.
Click to expand...


Breitbart lied? Prove it.


----------



## Flaylo

DiveCon said:


> drsmith1072 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> ah, more pathetic projections
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ah, more pathetic avoidance from you. lol
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no, but i dont expect you to understand
Click to expand...



You're the one that doesn't understand shithead, Briefart didn't even apologize for his gaffe, its not the first time that piece of lying shit has used heavily edited videos to smear and drag people in the dirt, the NAACP and the WH did apologize, thats shows just how much balls Briefart doesn't have and you're a mangy, miserable dumbfuck for still supporting that lying piece of shit, you're even lower than him.


----------



## Flaylo

Lonestar_logic said:


> Flaylo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> ROFLMAO
> 
> you are such a moron
> the rep system is a PEER REVIEW system
> get over it bitch
> you are backing one of the biggest fucking racists on the board
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So says the pile of human shit that refuses to condemn Briefart's lying, misleading video, you're one piece of fucking work.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Breitbart lied? Prove it.
Click to expand...



He didn't post the entire video and edited it with the comments that the NAACP was applauding black on white racism to smear the NAACP, the full video doesn't show this and to edit someone out of context is blatant dishonesty and fucking lying by omission, which part of that do you not understand you Texas piss stain?


----------



## Lonestar_logic

Flaylo said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drsmith1072 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ah, more pathetic avoidance from you. lol
> 
> 
> 
> no, but i dont expect you to understand
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You're the one that doesn't understand shithead, Briefart didn't even apologize for his gaffe, its not the first time that piece of lying shit has used heavily edited videos to smear and drag people in the dirt, the NAACP and the WH did apologize, thats shows just how much balls Briefart doesn't have and you're a mangy, miserable dumbfuck for still supporting that lying piece of shit, you're even lower than him.
Click to expand...


Why should Breitbart apologize?


----------



## Lonestar_logic

Flaylo said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Flaylo said:
> 
> 
> 
> So says the pile of human shit that refuses to condemn Briefart's lying, misleading video, you're one piece of fucking work.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Breitbart lied? Prove it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> He didn't post the entire video and edited it with the comments that the NAACP was applauding black on white racism to smear the NAACP, the full video doesn't show this and to edit someone out of context is blatant dishonesty and fucking lying by omission, which part of that do you not understand you Texas piss stain?
Click to expand...


Not posting the entire video isn't a lie. Shall I give you the definition of a lie? Your racism is starting to show.


----------



## MaggieMae

drsmith1072 said:


> PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drsmith1072 said:
> 
> 
> 
> So you are trying to apply the actions and statements of a few to the whole even though in the past you said for the left to do so against the tea party was wrong?? Thanks for proving that you are nothing but a hypocrite.
> 
> BTW it's kind of sad that you, who previously chimed into a thread, dishonestly accused me of saying things that i never said and then vanished when asked for proof of your accusations, are actually trying to be critical of anyone over being dishonest.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Its not the statements of a few citizens it is the statements of several leaders of large and influential news reporting/"journalism" outlets.    Totally different than the population of a protest....but why be honest in comparisons if it doesn't make you look good right Dr?
> 
> TPIWWOL  (This post is worthless without links).  Why? Because I walk away from the forum for days at a time and then scroll through my rep comments and active topics to find threads to post on.
> 
> BTW awesome example of Deflection Dr. Smith.....did you learn that at the Carville school of dishonest debate?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So are you claiming that all of those comments are representative of the whole and can you prove that? Furthermore, aren't many of those reporters in question citizens??
> 
> In reality there is no difference between labeling the entire tea party based on the actions and statements of a few and labeling the entire left based on the actions and statements of a few and you are nothing but a hypocritical hack.
> 
> BTW what is deflection, I don't deny that the comments were made and don't make excuses for those who made them but I think it's quite telling that some of the same people would attack the left as a whole over a few comments after all of their conflicting arguments saying that it is wrong to do similar to the tea party.
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's out in the open now.  *The Left *uses the racist accusation against the Right, the Tea Party, Conservatives, the GOP...  Anyone who critiques prominent lefties or their programs will be falsely attacked as a racist as a diversionary tactic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And look at all of the rigth wingers who thanked the hack who wrote the hypocrtical op.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AllieBaba (07-23-2010), Annie (07-22-2010), AquaAthena (07-22-2010), ba1614 (07-22-2010), Big Fitz (07-27-2010), Foxfyre (07-24-2010), fyrenza (07-22-2010), GWV5903 (07-27-2010), Kat (07-22-2010), keee keee (07-24-2010), KissMy (07-23-2010), masquerade (07-22-2010), Misty (07-22-2010), mudwhistle (07-22-2010), Nonelitist (07-23-2010), Pale Rider (07-22-2010), pete (07-23-2010), PLYMCO_PILGRIM (07-22-2010), Ragnar (Yesterday), Rat in the Hat (07-28-2010), Sherry (07-25-2010), sitarro (07-23-2010), The Rabbi (07-22-2010), The T (07-22-2010), Wicked Jester (07-23-2010), WillowTree (07-22-2010), Zander (07-23-2010), Zoom-boing (07-23-2010)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I wonder, how many of them defended the tea party from blanket statements like the one made in the OP??
Click to expand...


The "New Right" has never been able to recognize their own hypocrisy. Very strange. You see it everywhere.


----------



## MaggieMae

Why is it by evening, a thread is often hijacked by people who want a one-on-one fight? Take it to your PM folder, guys. Geeze. 

He said/she said. You're a troll/no you're a troll. Blah blah fuckingblah. Go to bed at a decent hour, children and come back when you're refreshed and unstupid.


----------



## DiveCon

Flaylo said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> He's got your number, little diver!!! I told you before that when you neg rep it just lets the person know that they got under your skin!!! And from what I've been reading, why don't you just give it up??? Bass is making you look like a chump!!!
> 
> 
> 
> ROFLMAO
> 
> you are such a moron
> the rep system is a PEER REVIEW system
> get over it bitch
> you are backing one of the biggest fucking racists on the board
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So says the pile of human shit that refuses to condemn Briefart's lying, misleading video, you're one piece of fucking work.
Click to expand...

wow, another liberal MORON doing the classic projection


----------



## Rinata

Kat said:


> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> Kiss off Maggie. Rinata should have not have falsely accused me then. AND should have answered me right away. THEN she would not have to remember.
> I DID say what it was. I quoted her more than once..she accused me of attacking her.
> That is false.
> 
> I have as much right to post what I want, when I want, as you do. You don't like what I post, put me on ignore. Sheesh.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am not particularly interested in answering your questions. I don't like you. Next time give me the post number you are talking about. I'm certainly not going looking for it. Do you think you can do that or have I  stumped you???
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ohhhhhhhhhhhh nooooooooooooooooo Rinata doesn't like me.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course you aren't going to look for it. You already know you are wrong. You are excused now..
Click to expand...


How would I know I am wrong if I don't even know what you're talking about?? Either give me a post number or quit whining about it.


----------



## PLYMCO_PILGRIM

Rinata said:


> PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have no idea what you're talking about.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Below is what i'm talking about rinata
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Daily Caller's "JournoList" expose has finally resolved the matter:
> 
> Based on Spencer Ackerman's tactic:
> 
> _*If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game theyve put upon us, Ackerman wrote on the Journolist listserv in April 2008. Instead, take one of them  Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares  and call them racists.*_
> 
> Conservatives Karl Rove and Fred Barnes respond to Journolist racist post | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment
> 
> 
> It's out in the open now.  The Left uses the racist accusation against the Right, the Tea Party, Conservatives, the GOP...  Anyone who critiques prominent lefties or their programs will be falsely attacked as a racist as a diversionary tactic.
> More evidence is Sherrod's hateful comment regarding the GOP to Media Matters.
> 
> So here's the thing you lefties should understand:  we're not falling for it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not this again. I think I've changed my mind and I will repeat this as often as I have to. People that say things like Obama should go back to Kenya, Obama is not an American, Obama is not a Christian, Obama is a Muslim, we came unarmed this time, are not protesting policy!!!
Click to expand...


Rinata why did you make this your response to me answering your question?  

Please ask around.  I dont say these things about obama and you posting that as a response to my post to you makes me feel as if you are claiming that I do.   

Type into the forum search  "Hawaii newspaper announcement" and narrow your search by plymco_pilgrim as the user and you will see your comments, that seem to relate to a "Birther" mindset, are not applicable to me.


----------



## Kat

Rinata said:


> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rinata said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am not particularly interested in answering your questions. I don't like you. Next time give me the post number you are talking about. I'm certainly not going looking for it. Do you think you can do that or have I  stumped you???
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ohhhhhhhhhhhh nooooooooooooooooo Rinata doesn't like me.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course you aren't going to look for it. You already know you are wrong. You are excused now..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How would I know I am wrong if I don't even know what you're talking about?? Either give me a post number or quit whining about it.
Click to expand...



Kiss off. And FYI it isn't whining. I don't give a rip about anything you have to say. 
I repeated myself because YOU needed to be reminded of your dishonestly. 
You are so full of yourself and your hatred that you spew, you wouldn't see that if it slapped you up the side of your head.
Sooo...get lost. You are excused now...take your pick...


----------



## boedicca

drsmith1072 said:


> And look at all of the rigth wingers who thanked the hack who wrote the hypocrtical op.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AllieBaba (07-23-2010), Annie (07-22-2010), AquaAthena (07-22-2010), ba1614 (07-22-2010), Big Fitz (07-27-2010), Foxfyre (07-24-2010), fyrenza (07-22-2010), GWV5903 (07-27-2010), Kat (07-22-2010), keee keee (07-24-2010), KissMy (07-23-2010), masquerade (07-22-2010), Misty (07-22-2010), mudwhistle (07-22-2010), Nonelitist (07-23-2010), Pale Rider (07-22-2010), pete (07-23-2010), PLYMCO_PILGRIM (07-22-2010), Ragnar (Yesterday), Rat in the Hat (07-28-2010), Sherry (07-25-2010), sitarro (07-23-2010), The Rabbi (07-22-2010), The T (07-22-2010), Wicked Jester (07-23-2010), WillowTree (07-22-2010), Zander (07-23-2010), Zoom-boing (07-23-2010)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I wonder, how many of them defended the tea party from blanket statements like the one made in the OP??
Click to expand...



In reality, we are all decent, intelligent people with Good Taste.

You're only jealous.


----------



## ConHog

MaggieMae said:


> drsmith1072 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:
> 
> 
> 
> Its not the statements of a few citizens it is the statements of several leaders of large and influential news reporting/"journalism" outlets.    Totally different than the population of a protest....but why be honest in comparisons if it doesn't make you look good right Dr?
> 
> TPIWWOL  (This post is worthless without links).  Why? Because I walk away from the forum for days at a time and then scroll through my rep comments and active topics to find threads to post on.
> 
> BTW awesome example of Deflection Dr. Smith.....did you learn that at the Carville school of dishonest debate?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So are you claiming that all of those comments are representative of the whole and can you prove that? Furthermore, aren't many of those reporters in question citizens??
> 
> In reality there is no difference between labeling the entire tea party based on the actions and statements of a few and labeling the entire left based on the actions and statements of a few and you are nothing but a hypocritical hack.
> 
> BTW what is deflection, I don't deny that the comments were made and don't make excuses for those who made them but I think it's quite telling that some of the same people would attack the left as a whole over a few comments after all of their conflicting arguments saying that it is wrong to do similar to the tea party.
> 
> 
> 
> And look at all of the rigth wingers who thanked the hack who wrote the hypocrtical op.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AllieBaba (07-23-2010), Annie (07-22-2010), AquaAthena (07-22-2010), ba1614 (07-22-2010), Big Fitz (07-27-2010), Foxfyre (07-24-2010), fyrenza (07-22-2010), GWV5903 (07-27-2010), Kat (07-22-2010), keee keee (07-24-2010), KissMy (07-23-2010), masquerade (07-22-2010), Misty (07-22-2010), mudwhistle (07-22-2010), Nonelitist (07-23-2010), Pale Rider (07-22-2010), pete (07-23-2010), PLYMCO_PILGRIM (07-22-2010), Ragnar (Yesterday), Rat in the Hat (07-28-2010), Sherry (07-25-2010), sitarro (07-23-2010), The Rabbi (07-22-2010), The T (07-22-2010), Wicked Jester (07-23-2010), WillowTree (07-22-2010), Zander (07-23-2010), Zoom-boing (07-23-2010)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I wonder, how many of them defended the tea party from blanket statements like the one made in the OP??
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The "New Right" has never been able to recognize their own hypocrisy. Very strange. You see it everywhere.
Click to expand...


HAHAHAHHA, BOTH sides have hypocrites Mrs Maggie, but of course you being the partisan hack that you are can't possibly admit that.


----------



## Flaylo

ConHog said:


> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drsmith1072 said:
> 
> 
> 
> So are you claiming that all of those comments are representative of the whole and can you prove that? Furthermore, aren't many of those reporters in question citizens??
> 
> In reality there is no difference between labeling the entire tea party based on the actions and statements of a few and labeling the entire left based on the actions and statements of a few and you are nothing but a hypocritical hack.
> 
> BTW what is deflection, I don't deny that the comments were made and don't make excuses for those who made them but I think it's quite telling that some of the same people would attack the left as a whole over a few comments after all of their conflicting arguments saying that it is wrong to do similar to the tea party.
> 
> 
> 
> And look at all of the rigth wingers who thanked the hack who wrote the hypocrtical op.
> 
> 
> 
> I wonder, how many of them defended the tea party from blanket statements like the one made in the OP??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The "New Right" has never been able to recognize their own hypocrisy. Very strange. You see it everywhere.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> HAHAHAHHA, BOTH sides have hypocrites Mrs Maggie, but of course you being the partisan hack that you are can't possibly admit that.
Click to expand...


Then why is that piece of shit DiveCon saying that Briebart shouldn't apologize for his deliberate action of distortion? The right has no integrity and tries to rationalize their fuck ups even after they're caught red-handed being dishonest. Every rightwing fucktard is looking for any dirt on Sherrod now like that stupid shithead cow boedicca .


----------



## DiveCon

Flaylo said:


> ConHog said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> The "New Right" has never been able to recognize their own hypocrisy. Very strange. You see it everywhere.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HAHAHAHHA, BOTH sides have hypocrites Mrs Maggie, but of course you being the partisan hack that you are can't possibly admit that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Then why is that piece of shit DiveCon saying that Briebart shouldn't apologize for his deliberate action of distortion? The right has no integrity and tries to rationalize their fuck ups even after they're caught red-handed being dishonest. Every rightwing fucktard is looking for any dirt on Sherrod now like that stupid shithead cow boedicca .
Click to expand...

link to where i said that?
or you are  a proven LIAR


----------



## drsmith1072

DiveCon said:


> drsmith1072 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> ah, more pathetic projections
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ah, more pathetic avoidance from you. lol
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no, but i dont expect you to understand
Click to expand...


Unfortunately for you I understand perfectly. 

You have notihing valid to say and no real counter to the FACTS which contradict your spin, so all you can do is parrot the accusation that those you can't counter are projecting as you try to avoid facts that you can't spin to suit your needs. 

It's all you have and that is just sad.


----------



## MaggieMae

ConHog said:
			
		

> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> The "New Right" has never been able to recognize their own hypocrisy. Very strange. You see it everywhere.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HAHAHAHHA, BOTH sides have hypocrites Mrs Maggie, but of course you being the partisan hack that you are can't possibly admit that.
Click to expand...


I admit others do, but I don't. It's a simple matter of knowing what has gone on in the past and not making some ignorant statement criticizing a position or situation that the other party has also done. An example off the top of my head is all the screeching when Obama flies somewhere on Air Force One and how much that "costs" the taxpayer. WHAT?! jesus christ, you'd think he was the only president to ever use the plane for combination business and pleasure, or just for pleasure (vacation). THAT, my friend, is ignorant hypocrisy to which I refer in general.

And I'm not a "hack" anymore than you are. That lame characterization belongs right up there with "strawman" and "troll" when referring to people who post here all the time. If that's the best you can do, then you have my sympathies for also being unoriginal.


----------



## Big Fitz

Flaylo said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Flaylo said:
> 
> 
> 
> So says the pile of human shit that refuses to condemn Briefart's lying, misleading video, you're one piece of fucking work.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Breitbart lied? Prove it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> He didn't post the entire video and edited it with the comments that the NAACP was applauding black on white racism to smear the NAACP, the full video doesn't show this and to edit someone out of context is blatant dishonesty and fucking lying by omission, which part of that do you not understand you Texas piss stain?
Click to expand...

Oh, so now lies of omission matter?  Huh.  Who knew.  Someone alert the Press Corps that they can no longer edit down interviews and tape to fit, using only the most unkind edits.

Hypocrite.  If that's a lie, I want to hear you screaming about the decades this has been done by the news media all over.  Media matters makes a living doing just this, and you want to freak out on Breitbart?  Sorry, you set the standard, unkind edits are not lying.  Unless you want to hold your pet monkey's feet to the fire too.


----------



## boedicca

If lies of omission matter, then the virtually the entire MSM LIED in order to get Obama elected.

Just sayin'.


----------



## Foxfyre

boedicca said:


> If lies of omission matter, then the virtually the entire MSM LIED in order to get Obama elected.
> 
> Just sayin'.



At the very least they were masters of omission to be sure that the negative were ignored or diverted off the front pages or news casts by some diversion or detraction.

They've been doing that consistently since the election too.

Fox News has been regularly listing all the news stories that would have been featured in a Bush administration but which the MSM has pretty much ignored in an Obama administration.  It is astounding.


----------



## boedicca

Indeed.  The JournoList squashing coverage of certain stories which the Blogosphere and alternative media covered is very telling.  It's also why the Obama Administration views Fox, Brietbart, and the non-MSM media as The Enemy.   They are The Enemy because they do cover the news.


----------



## Foxfyre

boedicca said:


> Indeed.  The JournoList squashing coverage of certain stories which the Blogosphere and alternative media covered is very telling.  It's also why the Obama Administration views Fox, Brietbart, and the non-MSM media as The Enemy.   They are The Enemy because they do cover the news.



Yup.  So they do their damndest to discredit Fox, Breitbart, Drudge, conservative talk radio, and us on the internet who are making sure this stuff isn't totally buried.


----------



## Big Fitz

boedicca said:


> Indeed.  The JournoList squashing coverage of certain stories which the Blogosphere and alternative media covered is very telling.  It's also why the Obama Administration views Fox, Brietbart, and the non-MSM media as The Enemy.   They are The Enemy because they do cover the news.


Those yellowdog "journalists" on that site should be fired.  They've obviously been violating journalistic standards and principles.  Although a crime probably has not been committed, I wonder if anyone could file a civil suit against the members.


----------



## boedicca

Well, donchaknow?  Anyone who dares to criticize The One must be a racist.


----------



## boedicca

Big Fitz said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed.  The JournoList squashing coverage of certain stories which the Blogosphere and alternative media covered is very telling.  It's also why the Obama Administration views Fox, Brietbart, and the non-MSM media as The Enemy.   They are The Enemy because they do cover the news.
> 
> 
> 
> Those yellowdog "journalists" on that site should be fired.  They've obviously been violating journalistic standards and principles.  Although a crime probably has not been committed, I wonder if anyone could file a civil suit against the members.
Click to expand...



The best solution is shunning.

Don't watch their programs.  Don't buy their print publications.  Don't visit their websites.

There's a reason why Newsweek was sold for ONE DOLLAR - lack of readership.   Starve the bastards by not giving them your money.


----------



## Bass v 2.0

Flaylo said:


> ConHog said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaggieMae said:
> 
> 
> 
> The "New Right" has never been able to recognize their own hypocrisy. Very strange. You see it everywhere.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HAHAHAHHA, BOTH sides have hypocrites Mrs Maggie, but of course you being the partisan hack that you are can't possibly admit that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Then why is that piece of shit DiveCon saying that Briebart shouldn't apologize for his deliberate action of distortion? The right has no integrity and tries to rationalize their fuck ups even after they're caught red-handed being dishonest. Every rightwing fucktard is looking for any dirt on Sherrod now like that stupid shithead cow boedicca .
Click to expand...


If you're looking for honesty do not expect it anytime soon from DiveCoon, he's only here to antagonize you lefties, not to argue anything coherently.


----------



## Kat

Bass v 2.0 said:


> Flaylo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ConHog said:
> 
> 
> 
> HAHAHAHHA, BOTH sides have hypocrites Mrs Maggie, but of course you being the partisan hack that you are can't possibly admit that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then why is that piece of shit DiveCon saying that Briebart shouldn't apologize for his deliberate action of distortion? The right has no integrity and tries to rationalize their fuck ups even after they're caught red-handed being dishonest. Every rightwing fucktard is looking for any dirt on Sherrod now like that stupid shithead cow boedicca .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you're looking for honesty do not expect it anytime soon from *DiveCoon*, he's only here to antagonize you lefties, not to argue anything coherently.
Click to expand...


----------



## boedicca

Bass v 2.0 is hardly qualified to judge the coherency of anyone's posts.


----------



## DiveCon

drsmith1072 said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drsmith1072 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ah, more pathetic avoidance from you. lol
> 
> 
> 
> no, but i dont expect you to understand
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Unfortunately for you I understand perfectly.
> 
> You have notihing valid to say and no real counter to the FACTS which contradict your spin, so all you can do is parrot the accusation that those you can't counter are projecting as you try to avoid facts that you can't spin to suit your needs.
> 
> It's all you have and that is just sad.
Click to expand...

you are the one doing the spin, moron


----------



## boedicca

One would think he'd be dizzy by now.  He must be mainlining Dramamine.


----------



## Kat

boedicca said:


> One would think he'd be dizzy by now.  He must be mainlining Dramamine.


----------



## Foxfyre

boedicca said:


> One would think he'd be dizzy by now.  He must be mainlining Dramamine.



Am I thinking of something else or are multiple accounts illegal on USMB?  Cuz some of these folks sound so much like one or two oher folks, it's hard to believe they aren't the same person.


----------



## Bass v 2.0

boedicca said:


> Bass v 2.0 is hardly qualified to judge the coherency of anyone's posts.



Don't embarrass yourself trying to make a fool of me, it will be your own undoing. I'm much too much for anyone here to handle.


----------



## Bass v 2.0

Kat said:


> Bass v 2.0 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Flaylo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Then why is that piece of shit DiveCon saying that Briebart shouldn't apologize for his deliberate action of distortion? The right has no integrity and tries to rationalize their fuck ups even after they're caught red-handed being dishonest. Every rightwing fucktard is looking for any dirt on Sherrod now like that stupid shithead cow boedicca .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you're looking for honesty do not expect it anytime soon from *DiveCoon*, he's only here to antagonize you lefties, not to argue anything coherently.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...



Yes, I know you are confused, whats new? I've seen your posts and you are one pathetic monkey.


----------



## Kat

Bass v 2.0 said:


> Kat said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bass v 2.0 said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you're looking for honesty do not expect it anytime soon from *DiveCoon*, he's only here to antagonize you lefties, not to argue anything coherently.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, I know you are confused, whats new? I've seen your posts and you are one pathetic monkey.
Click to expand...



I am not confused in the least I was a wee bit stunned at your blatant racism. Get lost troll.


----------



## DiveCon

Bass v 2.0 said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> Bass v 2.0 is hardly qualified to judge the coherency of anyone's posts.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Don't embarrass yourself trying to make a fool of me, it will be your own undoing. I'm much too much for anyone here to handle.
Click to expand...

you make a fool of yourself on a constant basis


----------



## MaggieMae

Foxfyre said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> If lies of omission matter, then the virtually the entire MSM LIED in order to get Obama elected.
> 
> Just sayin'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> At the very least they were masters of omission to be sure that the negative were ignored or diverted off the front pages or news casts by some diversion or detraction.
> 
> They've been doing that consistently since the election too.
> 
> Fox News has been regularly listing all the news stories that would have been featured in a Bush administration but which the MSM has pretty much ignored in an Obama administration.  It is astounding.
Click to expand...


Examples?


----------



## PLYMCO_PILGRIM

boedicca said:


> If lies of omission matter, then the virtually the entire MSM LIED in order to get Obama elected.
> 
> Just sayin'.



Good Point.


----------



## Big Fitz

The media lied
the Constitution died!


----------



## boedicca

Bass v 2.0 said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> Bass v 2.0 is hardly qualified to judge the coherency of anyone's posts.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Don't embarrass yourself trying to make a fool of me, it will be your own undoing. I'm much too much for anyone here to handle.
Click to expand...




Too much to handle?

Oh Puh-leeze.  You are an intellectual gnat.


----------



## daveman

Bass v 2.0 said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> Bass v 2.0 is hardly qualified to judge the coherency of anyone's posts.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Don't embarrass yourself trying to make a fool of me, it will be your own undoing. I'm much too much for anyone here to handle.
Click to expand...


Yeah, boedicca!


----------



## Bass v 2.0

DiveCon said:


> Bass v 2.0 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> Bass v 2.0 is hardly qualified to judge the coherency of anyone's posts.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Don't embarrass yourself trying to make a fool of me, it will be your own undoing. I'm much too much for anyone here to handle.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> you make a fool of yourself on a constant basis
Click to expand...


DiveChimp you've totally lost your value, why bother with me? You're on ignore now, I don't argue with monkeys like you.


----------



## DiveCon

Bass v 2.0 said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bass v 2.0 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Don't embarrass yourself trying to make a fool of me, it will be your own undoing. I'm much too much for anyone here to handle.
> 
> 
> 
> you make a fool of yourself on a constant basis
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> DiveChimp you've totally lost your value, why bother with me? You're on ignore now, I don't argue with monkeys like you.
Click to expand...

you responded, you prove you are not only a fool, but a liar as well


----------



## boedicca

You've got to give him 10 Points For Consistency, however.


----------



## DiveCon

boedicca said:


> You've got to give him 10 Points For Consistency, however.


do i have to?


----------



## Kat

DiveCon said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> You've got to give him 10 Points For Consistency, however.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> do i have to?
Click to expand...



youse a wasist...youse a wasist...youse a bigot...youse a bigot...we all is!!


----------



## DiveCon

Kat said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> You've got to give him 10 Points For Consistency, however.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> do i have to?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> youse a wasist...youse a wasist...youse a bigot...youse a bigot...we all is!!
Click to expand...

must be
i disagree with a black man
LOL


----------



## boedicca

You're in good company.  Over half the country now qualifies as WASCIST!


----------



## boedicca

I&#8217;m a WASCIST. 
You&#8217;re a WACIST. 
We are WACISTS all. 
And when we get together, we do the WASCIST call! 

U to the S, US, of A, E pluribis, unum, US,
Declaration, Constitution, Rule, of Law, Limited, Government, 
WACISTS!


----------



## Kat

boedicca said:


> im a wascist.
> Youre a wacist.
> We are wacists all.
> And when we get together, we do the wascist call!
> 
> U to the s, us, of a, e pluribis, unum, us,
> declaration, constitution, rule, of law, limited, government,
> wacists!



rotflmao!


----------



## boedicca

Rep for anyone who identifies the original upon which it is based.


----------



## Big Fitz

I prefer the Chris Baker version Bod...

I'm a Racist
You're a Racist
He's a Racist
She's a Racist
If you don't like Obama, so are you!

It captures the feel of the Dr. Pepper jingle so much better.


----------



## PLYMCO_PILGRIM

boedicca said:


> You're in good company.  Over half the country now qualifies as WASCIST!



Those who truly are not racist, are not the racists  


They should make a new children's fable called "The Guy Who Cried Racist"


----------



## drsmith1072

PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> You're in good company.  Over half the country now qualifies as WASCIST!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Those who truly are not racist, are not the racists
> 
> 
> They should make a new children's fable called "The Guy Who Cried Racist"
Click to expand...


Why would anyone write a children's fable about breitbart??


----------



## Dante

boedicca said:


> The Daily Caller's "JournoList" expose has finally resolved the matter:
> 
> Based on Spencer Ackerman's tactic:
> 
> _*If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game theyve put upon us, Ackerman wrote on the Journolist listserv in April 2008. Instead, take one of them  Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares  and call them racists.*_
> 
> Conservatives Karl Rove and Fred Barnes respond to Journolist racist post | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment
> 
> Read more: Conservatives Karl Rove and Fred Barnes respond to Journolist &#8216;racist&#8217; post | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment
> 
> It's out in the open now.  The Left uses the racist accusation against the Right, the Tea Party, Conservatives, the GOP...  Anyone who critiques prominent lefties or their programs will be falsely attacked as a racist as a diversionary tactic.
> 
> More evidence is Sherrod's hateful comment regarding the GOP to Media Matters.
> 
> So here's the thing you lefties should understand:  we're not falling for it.



what about reading and comprehension?

*If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down...call them racists.

While many members of the group voiced concerns about Ackerman on strategic grounds...Mark Schmitt, now at the liberal magazine the American Prospect, who said the tactic of calling conservatives racist would do nothing to advance the argument.*


----------



## drsmith1072

Dante said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Daily Caller's "JournoList" expose has finally resolved the matter:
> 
> Based on Spencer Ackerman's tactic:
> 
> _*If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game theyve put upon us, Ackerman wrote on the Journolist listserv in April 2008. Instead, take one of them  Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares  and call them racists.*_
> 
> Conservatives Karl Rove and Fred Barnes respond to Journolist racist post | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment
> 
> Read more: Conservatives Karl Rove and Fred Barnes respond to Journolist racist post | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment
> 
> It's out in the open now.  The Left uses the racist accusation against the Right, the Tea Party, Conservatives, the GOP...  Anyone who critiques prominent lefties or their programs will be falsely attacked as a racist as a diversionary tactic.
> 
> More evidence is Sherrod's hateful comment regarding the GOP to Media Matters.
> 
> So here's the thing you lefties should understand:  we're not falling for it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> what about reading and comprehension?
> 
> *If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down...call them racists.
> 
> While many members of the group voiced concerns about Ackerman on strategic grounds...Mark Schmitt, now at the liberal magazine the American Prospect, who said the tactic of calling conservatives racist would do nothing to advance the argument.*
Click to expand...



Unfortunately it has very little to do with reading comprehension and a lot to do with the fact that many right-wingers on this board tend to ignore anything that counters their talking point of day, week, month...


----------



## Dante

drsmith1072 said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Daily Caller's "JournoList" expose has finally resolved the matter:
> 
> Based on Spencer Ackerman's tactic:
> 
> _*If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game theyve put upon us, Ackerman wrote on the Journolist listserv in April 2008. Instead, take one of them  Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares  and call them racists.*_
> 
> Conservatives Karl Rove and Fred Barnes respond to Journolist racist post | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment
> 
> Read more: Conservatives Karl Rove and Fred Barnes respond to Journolist racist post | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment
> 
> It's out in the open now.  The Left uses the racist accusation against the Right, the Tea Party, Conservatives, the GOP...  Anyone who critiques prominent lefties or their programs will be falsely attacked as a racist as a diversionary tactic.
> 
> More evidence is Sherrod's hateful comment regarding the GOP to Media Matters.
> 
> So here's the thing you lefties should understand:  we're not falling for it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> what about reading and comprehension?
> 
> *If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down...call them racists.
> 
> While many members of the group voiced concerns about Ackerman on strategic grounds...Mark Schmitt, now at the liberal magazine the American Prospect, who said the tactic of calling conservatives racist would do nothing to advance the argument.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Unfortunately it has very little to do with reading comprehension and a lot to do with the fact that many right-wingers on this board tend to ignore anything that counters their talking point of day, week, month...
Click to expand...


true.

many leftists do the same, but it has been my observation that the cons here hold the lead.


----------



## Foxfyre

Okay everybody, listen up.

We've gone 62 pages and 928 posts so far on this thread, which speaks to the interest in the subject, but have yet to agree on what constitute's racist.

I now have the final definition of racist that should settle the matter once and for all.

So here ya go:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OEDk9o3fxuI"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OEDk9o3fxuI[/ame]


----------



## Rinata

VaYank5150 said:


> Who the hell is Spencer Ackerman and WTF is "The Daily Caller's "JournoList""?



Get a load of all of the thank yous.


----------



## Rinata

You people wouldn't know the truth if it kicked you in the ass. Here is the truth.

It has been a long time since a president has been hated so much by so few for trying to do too much and too fast.

The congregation that hates Obama is unique in their composition.

There are those who did not vote for Obama. Among this group are those who do not want the result of the last election to stand. They cannot accept that Obama is their president. They cannot wait for another three years to vote him out. They want him out now- by any means necessary. What keeps this group up at night is any opportunity to say &#8216;we told you so.&#8221; They are looking for it, digging, sipping, licking and faking. They will believe anything.

There are those who thought they have found an obedient black man who will not shake the system, no matter how unjust it might be. They are shocked at how the man who promised change is transforming the landscape of America. They feel tricked. They feel they should have trusted their first instinct.

There are the natives - the Lou Dobbs&#8217; people. Beside Mexico where they go to buy illegal drugs, they have never been abroad. But they can tell you how the world outside works, especially concerning socialized medicine and swastika. They fear change even when it is from bad to good.

And then there are those who are pissed that a black man is the president of the United States. They are usually the ones who preface their rants with the expression, this is not about race. They want this seven months long nightmare to go away. Today.

The good news is that Obama is going to be around for the next seven years. So if you are pissed off now, get ready because it is going to be a long road for you. You really should start learning German today. By the time it hits you that Obama is not going anywhere in 2012, you can easily resettle in Germany, where you will feel at home.

Another thing- listening to yourself scream often makes you think the world is screaming with you. I wish those who did not vote for Obama will shut up just for a day. They will be surprised that America is a very serene country. But of course, they are incapable of that.

So ride on, I say to y&#8217;all. Make all the noise you can. The dinosaurs made the same noise before they were extinct. 
Don&#8217;t worry folks, history will remember that you guys were here. Your intelligent scribbles all over the internet will last for another 200 years. It is a promise.

Why do they hate Obama so much?

Describes you losers perfectly.


----------



## DiveCon

"you people"
??????

i thought it was racist to say that


----------



## Kat

DiveCon said:


> "you people"
> ??????
> 
> i thought it was racist to say that



no no...only if YOU say it...or I say it, or anyone that is not a lib says it.

Doncha have to chuckle at the spew of the true racist?


----------



## DiveCon

Kat said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> "you people"
> ??????
> 
> i thought it was racist to say that
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> no no...only if YOU say it...or I say it, or anyone that is not a lib says it.
> 
> Doncha have to chuckle at the spew of the true racist?
Click to expand...

oh DOH, i forgot


kerry on then rinata


----------

