Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
yeah, from decades agoopen mind?Well, it's nice to see you're keeping an open mind about this.
Oh, wait...
what is this, more daveman weirdness?
there is no open mind needed here as the Chairman of the GOP apologized for a GOP racist strategy.
i believe that was in the late 60's
What people, name names please.we know it because the people that told him said soIf by no one you mean CON$ervative pundits, then yes. And how do you know what he knew, mister mind-reader?WRONG, until the editor is named, we dont know WHO the editor is
that is the HONEST way
and no one says rather MADE the forgeries, but that he USED them even after he KNEW they were not legit
Notice how Rather was expected to name his source to clear his name by the pundit below. There's a well-known journalism rule that says if a source burns you, and especially if a source burns you badly by knowingly peddling BS and making you look bad in the process, then any confidentiality agreement is off.
Notice how coy the pundit is in first ALMOST denying that Rather made the forgeries himself, almost but not quite.
Did Rather Do It? | PoliPundit.com
Did Rather Do It?
By PoliPundit ~ September 11th, 2004 @ 3:11 pm
A reader asked if Dan Rather forged the documents himself. This seems far-fetched and I was about to say so.
But consider: Rather refuses to disclose the source for the documents. He refuses to produce even the photocopy that hes based his entire story on.
Based on this, we have no way of knowing who forged them. It may be the Kerry campaign, or Rather, or his Democrat-partisan daughter. The only way to clear this up is for Rather to reveal his source and present the photocopy of the crudely forged documents for independent investigation.
You'll take his double standards when you pry them from his cold, dead fingers.Robert Byrds racism= forgivenSo, let me make sure I understand...the left screeches and howls about the right bringing up the decades-old racism of Sherrod -- and you bring up the Southern Strategy?open mind?
what is this, more daveman weirdness?
there is no open mind needed here as the Chairman of the GOP apologized for a GOP racist strategy.
I guess the left's racism has a statute of limitations, huh?
Strom Thurmonds racism ≠ forgiven
Robert Byrds racism= forgivenSo, let me make sure I understand...the left screeches and howls about the right bringing up the decades-old racism of Sherrod -- and you bring up the Southern Strategy?open mind?
what is this, more daveman weirdness?
there is no open mind needed here as the Chairman of the GOP apologized for a GOP racist strategy.
I guess the left's racism has a statute of limitations, huh?
Strom Thurmonds racism ≠ forgiven
Just post this every time and save typing:yeah, from decades agoopen mind?
what is this, more daveman weirdness?
there is no open mind needed here as the Chairman of the GOP apologized for a GOP racist strategy.
i believe that was in the late 60's
The Chairman apologized during George W. Bush's term.
It appears from the last few years that the GOP Chairman may have parted with the evil ways, but the party didn't -- even when they voted in (after a long drawn out battle) a black man as GOP Chair, they still play to their old strength -- their old Southern Strategy, in black face.
i forgot the namesWhat people, name names please.we know it because the people that told him said soIf by no one you mean CON$ervative pundits, then yes. And how do you know what he knew, mister mind-reader?
Notice how Rather was expected to name his source to clear his name by the pundit below. There's a well-known journalism rule that says if a source burns you, and especially if a source burns you badly by knowingly peddling BS and making you look bad in the process, then any confidentiality agreement is off.
Notice how coy the pundit is in first ALMOST denying that Rather made the forgeries himself, almost but not quite.
Did Rather Do It? | PoliPundit.com
Did Rather Do It?
By PoliPundit ~ September 11th, 2004 @ 3:11 pm
A reader asked if Dan Rather forged the documents himself. This seems far-fetched and I was about to say so.
But consider: Rather refuses to disclose the source for the documents. He refuses to produce even the photocopy that hes based his entire story on.
Based on this, we have no way of knowing who forged them. It may be the Kerry campaign, or Rather, or his Democrat-partisan daughter. The only way to clear this up is for Rather to reveal his source and present the photocopy of the crudely forged documents for independent investigation.
hey, even wiki says he moderated his stance on raceRobert Byrds racism= forgivenSo, let me make sure I understand...the left screeches and howls about the right bringing up the decades-old racism of Sherrod -- and you bring up the Southern Strategy?
I guess the left's racism has a statute of limitations, huh?
Strom Thurmonds racism ≠ forgiven
see? there you go.
Byrd long ago apologized and worked on behalf of racial equality. No Democrats says Byrd's racism was okay
Strom left the Democrats and was an unrepentant racist for years. Strom Thurmond - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
oh PLEASEthe above posts mentioning Byrd's past racism is a prime example of the conservative racists trying to water down their own racism by mentioning the past errors of people who repented of their old ways.
they make no distinction because it gives them cover
the above posts mentioning Byrd's past racism is a prime example of the conservative racists trying to water down their own racism by mentioning the past errors of people who repented of their old ways.
they make no distinction because it gives them cover
moderated!!!!!!!!!!hey, even wiki says he moderated his stance on raceRobert Byrds racism= forgiven
Strom Thurmonds racism ≠ forgiven
see? there you go.
Byrd long ago apologized and worked on behalf of racial equality. No Democrats says Byrd's racism was okay
Strom left the Democrats and was an unrepentant racist for years. Strom Thurmond - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
but i guess that means nothing
i likely wouldnt have ever voted for him had i lived in SC
yeah, wiki would use that term because it tends to lean to the leftmoderated!!!!!!!!!!hey, even wiki says he moderated his stance on racesee? there you go.
Byrd long ago apologized and worked on behalf of racial equality. No Democrats says Byrd's racism was okay
Strom left the Democrats and was an unrepentant racist for years. Strom Thurmond - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
but i guess that means nothing
i likely wouldnt have ever voted for him had i lived in SC
Oh, it means something alright.
It means he never repented, he just toned it down.
Somebody here told me he just did that as camouflage.yeah, wiki would use that term because it tends to lean to the leftmoderated!!!!!!!!!!hey, even wiki says he moderated his stance on race
but i guess that means nothing
i likely wouldnt have ever voted for him had i lived in SC
Oh, it means something alright.
It means he never repented, he just toned it down.
LOL
i guess his being the first senator to actually hire blacks on his staff means nothing too
yeah, wiki would use that term because it tends to lean to the leftmoderated!!!!!!!!!!hey, even wiki says he moderated his stance on race
but i guess that means nothing
i likely wouldnt have ever voted for him had i lived in SC
Oh, it means something alright.
It means he never repented, he just toned it down.
LOL
i guess his being the first senator to actually hire blacks on his staff means nothing too
Somebody here told me he just did that as camouflage.yeah, wiki would use that term because it tends to lean to the leftmoderated!!!!!!!!!!
Oh, it means something alright.
It means he never repented, he just toned it down.
LOL
i guess his being the first senator to actually hire blacks on his staff means nothing too
wowyeah, wiki would use that term because it tends to lean to the leftmoderated!!!!!!!!!!
Oh, it means something alright.
It means he never repented, he just toned it down.
LOL
i guess his being the first senator to actually hire blacks on his staff means nothing too
racists have been hiring blacks since they lost the civil war and blacks could no longer be owned.
strom Thurmond helped individuals who were his constituents, regardless of race. I would bet that most, if not all racist politicians did the same.
watching your parsing of what constitutes a racist or racist behavior is amusing as well as sad
Somebody here told me he just did that as camouflage.yeah, wiki would use that term because it tends to lean to the left
LOL
i guess his being the first senator to actually hire blacks on his staff means nothing too
lots of racists have black friends. having black friends, treating individuals in one way, does not earn a pass from being a racist.
wowyeah, wiki would use that term because it tends to lean to the left
LOL
i guess his being the first senator to actually hire blacks on his staff means nothing too
racists have been hiring blacks since they lost the civil war and blacks could no longer be owned.
strom Thurmond helped individuals who were his constituents, regardless of race. I would bet that most, if not all racist politicians did the same.
watching your parsing of what constitutes a racist or racist behavior is amusing as well as sad
so now its racist to give a black person a job
wowyeah, wiki would use that term because it tends to lean to the left
LOL
i guess his being the first senator to actually hire blacks on his staff means nothing too
racists have been hiring blacks since they lost the civil war and blacks could no longer be owned.
strom Thurmond helped individuals who were his constituents, regardless of race. I would bet that most, if not all racist politicians did the same.
watching your parsing of what constitutes a racist or racist behavior is amusing as well as sad
so now its racist to give a black person a job
wowracists have been hiring blacks since they lost the civil war and blacks could no longer be owned.
strom Thurmond helped individuals who were his constituents, regardless of race. I would bet that most, if not all racist politicians did the same.
watching your parsing of what constitutes a racist or racist behavior is amusing as well as sad
so now its racist to give a black person a job
