206 Comments

1. stuart williamson:

Because the Chicago machine hyped a badly flawed, incompetent candidate to the Presdency, this Administration, whatever the outcome, will take the cause of racial amity back at least two generations. The end of his term will always be blamed by the Democrats and the Black voters on the race factor alone. What a tragedy that our first black President’s lack of qualifications will make it difficult for future candidates of high character.

Aug 17, 2009 - 12:15 am 2. klrtz1:

I like to try to predict the troll talking points on a post like this. Today I’m thinking they will be talking genocide. I predict you, Frank J. Fleming, will be accused of genocide before this thread is dead. Maybe they’ll cross me up and just accuse all conservatives of genocide though.

“Thus we are at a point where someone’s “blackness” is questioned if he doesn’t share the same politics as a rich, white liberal.”

Good line.

Aug 17, 2009 - 2:31 am 3. Snake Eater:

They’ve debased the word. So many people have been called racist so much no one cares anymore. They’ve lost the argument, they’ve debased the language, and now we see them for what they really are a party of neo authoritarians running around trying to stifle dissent by any means necessary. True heirs of totalitarian Marxism all.

Aug 17, 2009 - 2:31 am 4. Ed Wallis:

Frank, I think you left out one important point:

“REASON” is *r*a*c*i*s*t*!

Explanation from Leftists: “Well…’cause it is!!!”

heh.

Aug 17, 2009 - 2:45 am 5. vivo:

“And I have come to the now obvious conclusion that America can never become post-racial while electing Democrats.”

Solution: elect Republicans, the ultimate post-racial people . . .

“So they come up with childish name-calling, such as “conservatives are greedy” and “conservatives are evil” to try and shut up what they don’t understand.”

But conservatives are allowed to use derogatory words they coined such as socialist, communist, liberal, fascist, etc. knowing that these labels are not accurate but have an impact on the mentally lazy.

Aug 17, 2009 - 3:09 am 6. sodacrackers:

The biggest racist I know now is in the White House. I, too, hoped that Obama would grow into the job and become a president for all of us. Instead, we have a president who talks about “typical white people,” like his grandma, who lovingly raised him. The “race problem” is between his two ears. And by the way, blacks can be racist too!

Aug 17, 2009 - 3:28 am 7. Mark E.:

The statement that “Liberals…don’t really understand conservatives’ attraction to individualism and honor and responsibility…” goes beyond the issue of race and racial politics. In essence, liberals are blind to the vision of the Founding Fathers and have no respect for anyone who doesn’t agree with them. The maligning of average Americans during the health care Town Halls is prima facie evidence that the Democrats have no respect for anyone — even a large portion of their own support base. How many voting Americans aligned with the Democrats really want their neighbors thinking of them as represented by Reid, Pelosi, et. al., who insist that said non-Democrat neighbors are “un-American,” “Nazis,” “evil doers,” and “racist”? Moreover, it appears these baseless ad hominems are no longer reserved for Republican politicians, but appear to be applicable to anyone who dissents from the Democrats’”party line,” as enshrined by the so-called “enlightened” radicals currently running the representative and executive branches of our federal government. However, what truly is beyond the pale is why these same individuals do not FEAR the voters, because they should. You would think the “employees” (politicians) would at least fear what the “employer” (voters) can do at the ballot box. Yet, not even this seems to deter the current administration and congressional leadership. We live in interesting times indeed and if the country’s mood is any indicator, it seems the “employer” may be exploring other options to deal with the “employees” who fail to provide an honest day’s work.

Aug 17, 2009 - 3:59 am 8. David Thomson:

“When Barack Obama said he was a post-racial candidate, I initially believed him.”

I never believed him for a second. As matter of fact, I predicted that he could set back race relations in the United States by twenty years. There is no such thing, on a gut level, as a left-wing Democrat wanting to get past race. Instinctively, Democrats constantly rub raw the scabs off the wounds so that they will not heal. Embittered and self-pitying minorities are useful in helping them gain power. The Democratic Party would be lucky to win even 45% of the elections in this country if it did not employ the race card. And no, I don’t think I am even slightly exaggerating. There is something else that must not be overlooked: Obama was born in 1961. By the time he entered his teen years—most of our racial problems had already been eliminated! He has rarely, if ever, suffered directly because of the color of his skin.

Affirmative action programs inherently worsen racial tensions. Obsessing over someone’s racial and ethnic characteristics inadvertently devalues their individuality. Their group identity becomes far too important. We must get rid of them as quickly as possible.

Aug 17, 2009 - 4:39 am 9. macko:

Frank,
I didn’t laugh once. You’re making good sense a regular thing.

Aug 17, 2009 - 4:39 am 10. drjohn:

The overuse of perjorative terms is good news for conservatives. The tread is wearing out and finally people are becoming desensitized to the terms. The terms are losing their currency.

Aug 17, 2009 - 5:01 am 11. cedarhill:

Oh that I came from a family that could afford slaves. Or from the leaders of the Old South plantation system that whupped on slaves. Or a direct descendent of Simon Legree. Or at least a member of David Duke’s political allies.
I have, however, read this
http://phibetacons.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YWE4OGQ5NDQ0OTJiZTljOWNhNDk3MDliODFmNDA1MzI=

which must be the thinking of the community since Nikki Giovanni given the praise she’s received:
http://nikki-giovanni.com/awardsnhonors.shtml

Branded for life. Gee how I wish that I had more children that could be put to the back of the line in the spirit of atoning for what all you evil white folk have done. That is if I could afford to send my kids to the line in the first place. The curse of being born white in America.

Aug 17, 2009 - 5:25 am 12. David S:

I think it would be great “if the debate actually centered on the specifics of health care”, but all I have seen from the right is fear mongering, complaining, and insanity.

Most of the talking point deployed against health care reform are not even rational – they are lies manufactured for the sole purpose of frightening citizens.

Lying about the nature and purpose of health care reform is the problem here – charges of racism from either side are a distraction. If the GOP was willing to have an honest debate on the specifics of health care, we would have had universal coverage decades ago.

Peace.

DS

Aug 17, 2009 - 5:26 am 13. Allan:

It seems most liberals wouldn’t recognize a racist even if they saw one in the mirror.

Aug 17, 2009 - 5:31 am 14. Vaughn:

I’ve seen 60 years of American race relations, and a prediction, made by myself and numerous white friends, is rapidly coming to fruition. Obama is turning ‘racism’ into a ‘badge of honor’ among us. More than any time in my life, I will no longer hide it. This is a race war! Inflamed by the ‘Imposter-in-Chief’!

Aug 17, 2009 - 5:42 am 15. George S.:

Frank Fleming.

I find this comment interesting.

…..Liberals have always had a problem debating with conservatives. They don’t really understand conservatives’ attraction to individualism and honor and responsibility enough to be able to come up with coherent responses….

it is because they cannot think critically or independantly …thanks to the liberal education institutions they created.

it also shows how hypocritical they are. they talk community “it take a freaking village” but they don’t apply those standards to themselves as they employ armies of gardeners, maids and other sour faced people to do everything for them. INDIVIDUAL FOR ME ….COMMUNITY FOR YOU.

I want to see Pelosi and Ried live in one of those community high rises they keep insisting the common folk live in ..heck they could be freaking nieghbours and commute together on their community airplanes. oh right those are just for them and family……how soon I forget.

Aug 17, 2009 - 5:50 am 16. cubedweller:

All this serves to do is dilute the meaning of the word “racist” (although the “progressives” are trying to redefine the word to mean “white male”).

Aug 17, 2009 - 6:18 am 17. Mike Murray:

Frivolous charges of racism are the refuge of scoundrels. If Obama can’t take the heat, let him leave the kitchen.

Aug 17, 2009 - 6:21 am 18. AThinkingPerson:

The liberals here cry that the term racist wouldn’t be needed IF ONLY the GOP was willing to have a debate about healthcare. LOL!

The left shut the door to debate long ago. The organizer-in-chief declared he “didn’t want to hear from the other side”. The Democratic Congress that went home for vacation have closed their ears to their constituents because “they don’t represent America”. The liberals put down half (and growing) of the American population with their “liberal” use of the racist put-down at every turn.

Yeah, the left is really open to a good health care debate. Funny thing is that the Independents, the Conservatives and the Moderate Democrats have now taken control of the debate away from the Progressives. Enjoy your time being marginalized withing your “super-majority” liberals.

Yes, liberals, continue to use the word racist as a sword. The problem is that you’re holding onto the wrong side of the weapon. It’s only making you look like simpletons. Again.

Aug 17, 2009 - 6:41 am 19. David W. Lincoln:

Frank, as long as those who cry, “racism” to those who arrive at different conclusions regarding Obama than his entourage, as long as they perceive they are correct (especially after abandoning an even handed analysis of the situation, even before this analysis starts), they will continue to blight the landscape.

It is more than politics, it is their culture, or what can be described as culture.

For, they lean far more often to truth being a reflection of the status quo, rather than what is
timeless and universal.

Put another way, they identify far more often with Antonio Gramsci as opposed to Mortimer Adler.

Aug 17, 2009 - 6:43 am 20. David W. Lincoln:

PS – instead of being against Obama, why not say, Obama is against those who arrive at different conclusions.

Even though he was sworn in as President, the oath taking did not increase his reserves of wisdom.

Aug 17, 2009 - 6:44 am 21. scythe:

Naive? No. Maybe you were just full of “hope” for “change”. This charlatan brought up race every chance he could insert it into the public discourse without appearing to do so. The subversive way he introduced the subject was more alarming that anything Jackson or Sharpton did becaue AT LEAST YOU CAN TELL WHERE THEY ARE COMING FROM. His remarks about “his funny name”, he “doesn’t look like all those Presidents on the dollar bills”…remember that? That was his was of stinking up the election with race and using it to shame the white population (whom it becomes more obvious he despises) into falling into his arms. He is a Reverend White Racist and every day that slips by he mask slips as well.

Aug 17, 2009 - 6:48 am 22. Moho:

No one likes to be called a racist — it’s about the same level as being called a pedophile — and it’s great for liberals to use, because there is very little defense for the charge. You are basically guilty until proven innocent — and you can’t prove yourself innocent. When called a racist, you can say, “No, I am not a racist.”

This is hilarious, because its exactly what your movement does to Obama and to anyone else who is conscious of race. Sure, there are a lot of white people out there who want to be post-racial. Being post-racial, at a time only forty years after the end of a 400 year apartheid regime, is merely the maintenance of the status quo. The fact that all of the post-racial blather is mostly put forth by white conservatives, is very informative as to its intentions. Whine all you want about being called racist–even while you call every person of color who’s ever made a comment about race, a racist–no one has any pity for you. You people are just going to have to suck it up and act like adults.

Aug 17, 2009 - 7:07 am 23. SusieQ:

Since they call us names such as “birthers” “deathers” , etc… I say for those who call us racists ….. we call them “ObamaGates” , or ” ObamaGaters” as in Obama and Prof Gates … the REAL racists!!!

Aug 17, 2009 - 7:11 am 24. Jack Olson:

No, political hacks will never stop talking about racism as long as they can get any advantage out of it and they will always get some advantage out of it among gullible people. Notice how many black people think just what Rev. Wright said, that the government invented HIV as a racist plot to kill black people, no matter how many white people have died of AIDS. Notice how many black people believe that the federal government through the CIA imported crack cocaine into black slums, no matter how hard the DEA tried to keep it out.

I once worked with a black woman who said that in her opinion President Kennedy didn’t die in 1963 but lived on in a coma for several years until Jackie Kennedy ordered him disconnected from life support so she could marry Arisotle Onaissis. I asked her what evidence she had for this. She admitted she had none at all. Why, then, I asked, did she believe it? She said she believed it because it was her opinion. Don’t expect a woman like that to question any accusation of racism however groundless. She will accept it as unquestionably true because it’s her opinion.

Aug 17, 2009 - 7:18 am 25. Moho:

Like I just said–>”Since they call us names such as “birthers” “deathers” , etc… I say for those who call us racists ….. we call them “ObamaGates” , or ” ObamaGaters” as in Obama and Prof Gates … the REAL racists!!!”

Aug 17, 2009 - 7:27 am 26. Sallie:

Forget the “blackness’. How about his “AMERICANISM” ? The most important quality Obama lacks. He’s an arrogant man.

I’m not a Republican, but I do have a vested interest in America as a country of free men and women. I do not like the socialists leanings we are taking on. “Free” is never free..somewhere, somehow someone paid for it.

Obama was reared and groomed for the position that he is now in, and his handlers will not give up easily. He will probably be relected…remember the black panthers etc..The money wants this man in office,.check 6

Aug 17, 2009 - 7:31 am 27. Now and Then:

Aren’t you getting tired of calling liberals Nazis?

Aug 17, 2009 - 7:32 am 28. MikeD:

As soon as somebody injects the words racist or racism into any discussion or argument I find that I now have absolutely no interest in anything else they have to say.
Talk about beating a dead horse, using these two words has come to indicate the presence of the brain-dead and the shallowest of people.

Aug 17, 2009 - 7:35 am 29. Войска ПВО:

David Thompson’s got it right. But, David Thompson’s always got it right. It was just another dodge from a scum bag Chicago Pol moving his lips to get elected and the tools on the left went into some beatific swoon and experienced hyper-leg-tingle.

Now, everything is seen in black-and-white, and I don’t mean “with clarity”.

I only hope David’s right about this sack of crap: that he won’t finish out his term.

Aug 17, 2009 - 7:36 am 30. RE:

What I find most alarming is how people like Mr Fleming fall for the con in the first place.

That recklessness in light of all the evidence is truly frightening.

Aug 17, 2009 - 7:37 am 31. Juvenal:

There’s very little they can do. I mean, they can’t argue their case on its merits.

They can pretend that 100% of the lies and distractions haven’t come from the Left.

They can pretend that, given the rough, sloppy, vague nature of the legislation Democrat members of Congress have written, that this is all “a work in progress and you’re all getting upset over nothing,” as if they hadn’t tied to force through one of these pieces of excrement before the recess.

Or they can scream “RACIST!”

They’re finding out that this, for once, is turning out to be a losing strategy, and that they’re chances of succeeding while going this route are slim. But if they agree to let the debate be “centered on the specifics of health care,” or even to tell truth about those specifics, they have no chance at all.

Aug 17, 2009 - 7:37 am 32. Now and Then:

15 George S
” . . . but they don’t apply those standards to themselves”

Now you see, George, that’s your problem. You only complain about hypocrisy when it’s the “other side” who’s guilty of it. Who’s a crook? Who’s a liar? Who cheats on his wife? Who’s a pervert? It’s not a partisan or ideological issue. And as long as the politicians can keep you busy flogging that dead horse, the longer they can abuse your rights and take your money.

Quit whining about “the other guy” and start living a life worth your time, cuz it’s gonna be over any day now.

Aug 17, 2009 - 7:44 am 33. Juvenal:

#22 Moho

This is hilarious, because its exactly what your movement does to Obama and to anyone else who is conscious of race. Sure, there are a lot of white people out there who want to be post-racial. Being post-racial, at a time only forty years after the end of a 400 year apartheid regime, is merely the maintenance of the status quo.

This is a perfect example of the kind of ignorant, hysterical nonsense that has taken all meaning out of words like “racist” or “fascist,” and, coming soon, “apartheid.” These people are too busy acting like drama queens to have any experience or understanding of the meaning of these words.

Aug 17, 2009 - 7:47 am 34. bibio44:

#2: “I like to try to predict the troll talking points on a post like this.”

Better a troll than an a-hole.

Aug 17, 2009 - 7:48 am 35. Moho:

Juvenal–> Do you understand what apartheid is? Can you explain why Southern Jim Crow structures weren’t apartheid? I doubt it.

Aug 17, 2009 - 8:00 am 36. shimauma:

per macko, this was too insightful to be funny. Be careful Frank, you may end up as a journalist after all.

Aug 17, 2009 - 8:25 am 37. blotto:

moho: Now you resort to comparing Jim Crow to apartheid just to make a point about how terrible America is? Dude, you are way to sick and full of self loathing to be debating here. If you have to make these kinds of comparisons in order to try to make a point and win a debate, then you can win.

What this has to do with the article is anyone’s guess. But your comment makes the point abundantly clear that the left will stoop to any lower level when they cannot debate the topic.

Go ahead, call yourself a winner and obviously America a loser. Is that your end game?

Aug 17, 2009 - 8:43 am 38. Pee Wee Herman, Community Organizer:

Better a troll than an a-hole.

Ooh! Ooh! Clever, brilliant bumper sticker! No Prius should be without one. Looks great right next to the one that says “war is bad for children and other living things”, and the remnant of the Grateful Dead dancing bears.

Oh, the cleverness.

Aug 17, 2009 - 8:43 am 39. Martin Knight:

#22 Moho

Being post-racial, at a time only forty years after the end of a 400 year apartheid regime, is merely the maintenance of the status quo.

In other words, treating everyone equally without regard to race or ethnicity is now “apartheid” and “racism.”

Aug 17, 2009 - 8:44 am 40. Steve Sampson:

Apparently the United States wasn’t as ripe for a Marxist transformation as the Progressive Marxists predicted. Plekhanov the “Father of Russian Marxism” became disgusted with the progress of the Revolution in 1918, and the schism of the Bolsheviks and Socialist Revolutionary Parties and declared, “Russian history hasn’t yet ground the flour to make the wheat cakes of Socialism.” Although his frustration reflected the struggle for power and control among the revolutionary elements, the less sophisticated and semi-literate represenatives of the American Progressive Marxists are reluctant to express their frustration or the truth that America is not ready for their Marxist Socialism: instead, they proclaim all resistance to their collectivism is a form of racism:
Racism that is a perceived remnant of American slavery and the pathos of White Guilt over a system that died a 150 years ago. If we look deeper into the “Peculiar Institution” (a term of the Ante-Bellum South for servitude)that was slavery, we learn that over 50% of the total population of America was descended from indentured servants who paid for their passage to America by putting themselves in bondage for seven years. The English also emptied their jails and turned a handsome profit by selling prisoners, debtors,and the homeless to the American Auction Block of Indentured Servitude. Europeans and Americans put themselves under a period of American servitude to keep from starving.

For hundreds of years up to the 19th Century, Europe used the system of serfdom: the peasant or serf was owned by the land title or to the liege or Lord of the land in a hereditary system. He lived on the land from birth until death serving the land lord. The slavery system goes back through recorded history and surely beyond, with the Romans, Greeks, Egyptians, and Jews. The Greeks considered it more humane to give conquered people the choice between servitude and death, of course most people chose slavery. In those days it was customary to slaughter vanquished people, but cities and agriculture created a need for labor and the “Peculiar Institution” fulfilled a need.

Now that slavery has been over except for parts of the Muslim World and Africa, we the American whites are to feel remorse for past injustice and create an ongoing pathway for blacks to enjoy an advantage. Especially now that America seems reluctant or not yet ready to plunge into the Progressive Marxist Morass. We now have to endure the repetitive and unceasing calls of racism for being so bold as to point out the incompetence and Marxist designs of an undocumented liar in the White House.

I say enough is enough, America should not suffer through the indignity of being called racist because the Progressive Socialists and Liberal Marxists miscalculated and promoted a witless Marxist sycophant to the presidency before America had ground the flour to make the wheat cakes of Socialism.

Aug 17, 2009 - 8:44 am 41. Juvenal:

Juvenal–> Do you understand what apartheid is? Can you explain why Southern Jim Crow structures weren’t apartheid? I doubt it.

Of course I know what apartheid was. And understanding it as something that happened in South Africa as a shameful part of that country’s past is essential to being able to speak intelligently about it or learn anything form it.

Jim Crow laws weren’t the same as apartheid. They they were close enough you could certainly compare the two separate, distinct systems of oppression. But they were just that: Separate and distinct.

If you had said “40 years after the end of 400 years of slavery, segregation, etc., etc.” you might have been a little closer to being accurate. (Although the “400 years” crack is still pretty sloppy: Are 21st-century American whites also responsible for Spain’s and Portugal’s involvement in slavery?)

But even if you amended it that way, your argument, such as it is, would still be ill-informed, hysterical and dishonest, all to the purpose of making it fair game to call critics of Obama’s policies “racists.”

Aug 17, 2009 - 8:44 am 42. Calvin Ball:

Godwin’s law needs a complimentary law. Let’s call it Dogwin’s law. The first one who levels the charge of racism loses the argument. Like Godwin’s law, there an exception, when the charge is directly supported by facts, and not just some fantasy.

Aug 17, 2009 - 8:47 am 43. Calvin Ball:

400 year apartheid regime

And there needs to be yet another law against just plain stupid hyperbole.

Aug 17, 2009 - 8:49 am 44. Basil:

Moho: “You people”?

Everything after that ia blah blah blah.

Aug 17, 2009 - 8:51 am 45. Crusader:

You people are just going to have to suck it up and act like adults.

Up your ass with a resurrection!

Aug 17, 2009 - 8:54 am 46. Martin Knight:

#22 Moho

This is hilarious, because its exactly what your movement does to Obama and to anyone else who is conscious of race. Sure, there are a lot of white people out there who want to be post-racial. Being post-racial, at a time only forty years after the end of a 400 year apartheid regime, is merely the maintenance of the status quo.

Short form: Treating people equally without regard to race or ethnicity is now a form of apartheid and racism on a par with Jim Crow. Next we’ll hear that up is down and failure is success …

How patronizing.

It’s obvious that Moho is one of the more insidious species of racist that has probably done more damage to the black community since the 1960s than even the most vicious of KKK leaders envisaged.

He’s the type that doesn’t see black people as human beings but as objects of pity and thinks he’s enlightened.

He’s the type of fool that would think the school administrators in San Francisco (where else?) which decided to award ‘A’s to black students when a similar score would earn a white or Asian child a ‘B’ were actually helping their black students.

Aug 17, 2009 - 8:56 am 47. Thomas:

It’s part of the plot

Is anybody that naive to believe that The Joker – a nobody without any achievement during his life and with concealed background – could occupy the Throne all by his own effort and by his luminous, light emitting sparking brain?

Come on – he is a Mascot! A cleverly selected Mascot by those who pulled him out by his ears from the hat: the Soros group as financiers and the Dead Fish – Axelrod group as chief ideologues. The plot was simple: by using a black person the String pullers became UNTOUCHABLE just like Al Capone was in the movie.

The code word now is: “”BOOOOO! You RACIST!”"

And the horror and self-hate descend on the people like a plague and they beg for forgiveness for deeds what they never committed.

And the String Pullers laugh at the idiotic, intimidated sheeple…
Here is the secret anti-serum to the RACIST! accusation: HEY, STUFF IT!

Aug 17, 2009 - 9:01 am 48. Idahoser:

and all of this would be self-evident and not worth talking about if there was a real conservative movement with candidates interested in principle.

Aug 17, 2009 - 9:04 am 49. Ed Wallis:

Dear Juvenal and Martin Knight,

PLEASE IGNORE THE TROLLS. Their posts are designed to deflect, divert and distract from serious dialogue.

“moho”, “vivo” and others of their ilk are just displaying the dying vestiges of Leftism unmasked.

Aug 17, 2009 - 9:07 am 50. Jason S:

Harry Alford could tell you who the real racists are. They would be the ones who use race as a bludgeon to stifle debate, who claim to empathize with minorities but have nothing but condescension towards them, who pity minorities because they firmly believe that minorities could never get ahead without help from white elites like themselves.

The good news is this charade is being exposed every time the Barbara Boxers of the world open their mouths. Eric Holder is another great example of a flat-out racist, as shown in his department’s handling of a local voter intimidation case in which racists were wielding weapons on camera at a voting precinct but were miraculously exhonerated by the #3 in his department despite the default judgement already won by the prosecution. In direct conflict with Dr. King’s dream, these thugs were judged solely by the color of their skin by a racist justice department, and obviously not by the content of their character, or complete lack thereof.

This president’s actions have been a complete disgrace at every turn and have divided this nation along racial lines to a level unseen in the past 40 years. This is why in almost every post I make I refer to the “destructionism” embodied by the new Democrats, which is 180 degrees from the progressivism they supposedly espouse. By definition, obstructing destruction is progressive. 40 years of progress have been sytematically destroyed in the mega disaster that has been the first 8 months of this presidency. Where have you gone, Dr. King? A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.

Aug 17, 2009 - 9:07 am 51. johnt:

Moho, stop, you’re making a fool of yourself.

Anyway, and apart from the dregs of liberalism that show up here, it should be pointed out that an administration that wishes to control energy policy, control the nation’s medical care, control auto companies,[while screwing bondholders and divvying up ownership with the unions], quadruple deficits[ mostly for the needs of the Party, raise taxes, including on the above mentioned dregs, in general to massively increase centralized government power, may in fairness be called socialist. Much though as the words hurts the ears of the ignorant.

There are valid grounds for the words use, far less so for the incessant use of the word “racist”, which if anything, and this is ironic, is far more applicable to the racist Obama than to normal people.

Aug 17, 2009 - 9:10 am 52. Rocker:

What we as conservatives have to understand is that our contempt for liberals is fundamentally based on the fact that they are intellectually lazy. But they are smart enough/educated enough to operate on an intellectual level (I don’t mean this entirely as a complement), but not at the level where intellectualism and practicality converge. I’ve often thought that while the majority of moderately high/highly educated people are liberal, or lean liberal, I’d bet that the truly gifted..top 1% or so, leans more conservative. Being conservative is just more mature, and the result of really thinking things through.

We do need to recognize though that liberals feel…sincerely even though they are fooling themselves…like they hold the moral high ground. They are against poverty. For health care for all. Education for all. Jobs for all. Wealth for all. Clean air/water. Etc ad nauseum. They do believe in the wisdom of the founding fathers, they just have an asterisk against them (referencing all the ways they’ve identified to “improve on it”.) While we know their cures are invariably worse than the diseases, I think if conservatives could show a little more sensitivity to the real issues that underlie “liberal causes”, we could bury them. Yes, I understand how quickly their “concern” degnerates into hypocrisy, but again at it’s core, many of them are actually sincere. We come across as not really concerned with the problems of society. Let’s be concerned, let’s let people know we’re concerned, but let’s also be realistic about what can and cannot be achieved, and how quickly.

Let’s be the adults. Let’s try not to get drawn into playground mudfights. Be steadfast, but empathetic. We’ll win… because that’s where most Americans really are.

Maybe I’m trying too hard to build bridges, but I do feel the public debate in this country…or more correctly, Washington DC, has been going in circles for too long.

Aug 17, 2009 - 9:14 am 53. The Shadow:

Frank – If the shoe fits wear it. You are a partisan hack and everything you say should be taken with a grain of sand.

Aug 17, 2009 - 9:21 am 54. AThinkingPerson:

Yes Frank, our resident comic book character has spoken. “The Shadow” offers up yet another thoughtful, intelligent comment (#53) on the subject at hand. Please “The Shadow”, more of your extraordinary insight on how we’re all racist for speaking out against Obama! Oh wait, there was NO insight. Nevermind. I must have been thinking of some other comic book character.

Aug 17, 2009 - 9:33 am 55. Martin Knight:

#53 “The Shadow”

Considering your rather interesting (i.e. likely racist) choice of screen name, maybe the shoe is more your size.

Aug 17, 2009 - 9:34 am 56. Saltherring:

Obama promised, during his campaign, to be a “post-racial” uniter, rather than a divider. Every policy he unveils, every bit of legislation he proposes and virtually every advisor/czar/cabinet member he appoints screams division. Objective dialogue can be used to unite, as can promotion of viable, cost effective solutions to our nation’s problems. Obama and Democrats, by contrast, attemt to ram their leftist policies down the throats of unwilling Americans, and then resort to name-calling when resistance mounts. This president is nothing but a lying, divisive, race-baiting antagonist.

Aug 17, 2009 - 9:38 am 57. James W.:

What a joke. The Modern GOP was built on a strategy of racial and geographic division that started with Nixon:

“From now on, the Republicans are never going to get more than 10 to 20 percent of the Negro vote and they don’t need any more than that… but Republicans would be shortsighted if they weakened enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. The more Negroes who register as Democrats in the South, the sooner the Negrophobe whites will quit the Democrats and become Republicans. That’s where the votes are. Without that prodding from the blacks, the whites will backslide into their old comfortable arrangement with the local Democrats.”
– Richard Nixon, 1970 interview with New York Times

And clearly it was successful because the GOP is currently very white and very southern.

The end result of this strategy is that the GOP is now led by a group of cynical southern whites who unapologetically e-mail each other photoshopped pictures of Obama “welfare bucks”, pictures of a white house lawn covered in watermelon, pictures of our President with a bone through his nose, and an image of a gallery of presidents with Presdient Obama pictured as a pair of floating eyes on an all-black background.

And that’s just the stuff that was somehow leaked to the press/public. I shudder to think about the stuff that never surfaced.

Clearly, the intent of creating and distributing these pictures is to:
– marginalize the president because of his race,
– associate being black with poverty and laziness,
– advance the belief that blacks are incapable of presidential leadership,
– send a message to the white conservative GOP base that they tacitly endorse white supremacy in government and culture.

But none of this stuff is new. Unabashed racism is how the GOP has won elections for the past 40 years.

Nixon got the ball rolling with his Southern Strategy, dreaming of a future political landscape that was clearly divided by race for the purpose of GOP political advantage.

Ronald Reagan continued the political race war by opposing making Martin Luther King Day a national holiday and intervening on the side of Bob Jones University to help it keep its tax-exempt status, which it was in danger of losing because of its ban on interracial dating.

In June 1988, Republican candidate George H.W. Bush made race the cornerstone of his campaign when he seized on the Horton case, bringing it up repeatedly in campaign speeches and using the face of Horton, a black felon, as the face of violent crime. Bush’s campaign manager, Lee Atwater, predicted that “by the time this election is over, Willie Horton will be a household name.” And he was right. Once, again, the GOP cynically drew a correlation between blackness, violent crime and the Democratic Party for the sake of exploiting whites’ fears.

In 2000, The GOP even used race baiting within its own primaries. Nine years ago, John McCain took the New Hampshire primary and was favored to win in South Carolina. Had he succeeded, he would likely have thwarted the presidential aspirations of George W. Bush and become the Republican nominee. But Bush strategist Karl Rove came to the rescue with a vicious smear tactic. Rove invented a uniquely injurious fiction for his operatives to circulate via a phony poll. Voters were asked, “Would you be more or less likely to vote for John McCain…if you knew he had fathered an illegitimate black child?” This was no random slur. McCain was at the time campaigning with his dark-skinned daughter, Bridget, adopted from Bangladesh. It worked. Owing largely to the Rove-orchestrated whispering campaign, Bush prevailed in South Carolina and secured the Republican nomination.

For the past six months, the FOX news headlines have been several variations of “Is Obama Racist?”

Glenn Beck recently claimed that Obama has a deep seated hatred of white people and white culture.

This is all part and parcel of the same racist GOP strategy that it has been regurgitating for four decades: Gin up bogus stories, accuse black people of hating white people, find isolated incidents of black crime and then hyperinflate them, accuse civil rights activists of trying to help blacks achieve unfair advantage over whites, all the while marginalizing and insulting black people while constantly throwing crumbs to the white GOP base by pandering to the south, by using catch phrases like “states rights” and making claims that “this is fundamentally a white Christian nation”.

This article fails to do anything but vomit out a bunch of laughable bull**** Ann Coulter-isms like “Liberals have always had a problem debating with conservatives. They don’t really understand conservatives’ attraction to individualism and honor and responsibility.”

Yes, because clearly, when I think about a group of people bringing guns to public forums and screaming incoherently so that no one can have a legitimate discussion, the first two words that spring to mind are definitely “honor” and “responsibility”.

Additionally, at no point does this article engage racism itself, its causes or its effects. Perhaps that is above the author’s paygrade. The extent of the depth of this article is:
“Racism doesn’t really even exist anymore and has become just a crutch used by minorities. But if it does exist, it’s clearly the liberal Democrats’ fault. Therefore, we shouldn’t eve call anyone a racist again, even if they are a racist, because it’s a just such a mean and nasty thing to say. But I still reserve the right to call people a Socialist/Marxist/Totalitarian/Fascist/Sith Lord, or whatever it is that Glenn Beck has decided to call the President this week.”

Only a party as cynical as the GOP, which has never nominated a minority for any major office, could possibly claim that the Democratic party, which nominated the first black president, is more racist than they.

And only a party as cynical as the GOP could create a political strategy focused entirely on race for 40 years and then react with outrage when called racist.

Aug 17, 2009 - 9:53 am 58. Tim Mayhugh:

I love to be called a racist. My answer is always, “Yeah, so what? Humans are at the top of food chain. That makes everything else food.” or “Of course I’m a racist. Do you want to let the dogs run the world?” or something similar. It really drives them crazy when you mock them in all seriousness. You just have to do it with a straight face. It will generally get a good laugh from people watching the exchange as well.

Aug 17, 2009 - 9:55 am 59. klrtz1:

Did I say genocide? I meant apartheid. The troll talking point will be apartheid.

Was I right?

The two words mean pretty much the same thing to a troll anyway.

Aug 17, 2009 - 10:05 am 60. George S.:

STOP FEEDING THE TROLLS … they are morally corrupt and dishonest. You can not expect a reasoned debate with them.

watch this clip and you will understand why they continue to make the same arguments over and over no matter what they are shown or told.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTmbcyeZ9ic&feature=related

this clip gives great insight into the lefts blind following of an ideology that will bury them at the same time it buries us.

REMEMBER it was the liberals who would not debate ..the republicans were shut out of any negotitions while the democrats and whoitehouse pushed a program that didn’t exist on paper as the only possible option. THAT IS JUST PLAIN DISHONESTY.

Aug 17, 2009 - 10:10 am 61. Ed Wallis:

But “JamesW,” if “racism” *is* indeed such an evil thing so “condemned by Leftists,

just why do they engage in it so often these days?

Oh, that’s a rhetorical question; I didn’t wish to call anyone a fraud-peddler directly.

Aug 17, 2009 - 10:12 am 62. Blitzer:

#5 vivo: “conservatives are allowed to use derogatory words they coined such as socialist, communist, liberal, fascist, etc. knowing that these labels are not accurate but have an impact on the mentally lazy.”

Umm — WHAT? “Socialist” is a derogatory term? One coined by Conservatives? Wow, I’m sure the numerous European political factions who incorporate that very term in the actual name (or variations thereof) of their favored party would be surprised to learn that. They are PROUD Socialists who adopt such party names as “Democratic Socialists” and the like. There’s even an Socialist Party USA — self-named, no less — in case you weren’t aware. That appellation wasn’t imposed on them by conservatives.

As for the inaccuracy of applying such a term, please enumerate for us all those ideals of Socialism (or even modern Euro-Democratic Socialism) with which the modern American Left (including the Democrat majority in Washington) disagrees.

Aug 17, 2009 - 10:29 am 63. The Shadow:

Martin Knight – You are obviously too young to get the reference and too lazy to think anything other than the rightwing nuttyness

Aug 17, 2009 - 10:29 am 64. The Shadow:

Poor Dopeyperson – You racism is of the mindless quality. You would been perfectly comfortable in the South of the 1950s

Aug 17, 2009 - 10:33 am 65. Brian:

Case in point, how many lefties cried Bush was a racist for describing Obama as being “very articulate”? In what world does a compliment become a racist slur?

Aug 17, 2009 - 10:35 am 66. Gary Ogletree:

Like, the n word, “racist” has no power unless you play the game. Several years ago I was in the Jackson, MS, Petro truck stop when a white guy at the next table hollered, “Hey, N*****!” I was sure a fight was about to happen. Instead, the two exchanged friendly shoulder punches and the black guy sat down, laughing about something else entirely. So, even with the long history of meanness behind the word, it had lost the power to cut a man down, and was now a teasing term of affection. Maybe these guys were post racial. No, of course not. The white truck driver could have passed for a redneck and the black truck driver was obviously a race traitor.

Aug 17, 2009 - 10:53 am 67. bibio44:

“…what can I say, I’m a partisan hack….”

’nuff said!

Aug 17, 2009 - 10:59 am 68. bibio44:

#49: “PLEASE IGNORE THE TROLLS. Their posts are designed to deflect, divert and distract from”…our circle-jerk!

Aug 17, 2009 - 11:01 am 69. myth buster:

Poverty is rampant among blacks, although being black does not, in and of itself, have anything to do with poverty. What does have to do with poverty is fatherlessness, which is rampant among blacks (70% of babies born out of wedlock) and a major problem in the US population at large (40%+ of babies born out of wedlock).

Aug 17, 2009 - 11:04 am 70. Peter the Bubblehead:

65. Brian wrote:
Case in point, how many lefties cried Bush was a racist for describing Obama as being “very articulate”?

Peter writes: I thought it was Biden, The Won’s own VP-to-be, that called him “articulate” and “clean”?

Aug 17, 2009 - 11:05 am 71. billslayer:

Shadow and Now and Then: Where’s JHARP–I just wanted to remind him that Obama got his start turning tricks for a slumlord and that it’’s OK if he’s depressed about the Messiah’s lack of…messianic superpowers. It was sort of an unrealistic expectation…but none the less! I wanted to spread the love with a pretty mental picture for you: your messiah on his knees servicing Tony Rezko. Enjoy!

Aug 17, 2009 - 11:08 am 72. johnt:

James W’ hang in there baby. You need all the faux moral superiority you can manufacture.
You overlooked Rev Wright and The O, you make no attempt to answer the post and the constant use of the charge of racism by the human filth you support, in itself racist. No problem. Just choose what you wish to observe and call the rest a joke.
Curious, but just why did the Democrats, battlers for equality, shut down the school choice option in Washington D C, consigning hundreds of black kids back to one of the worst school syatems in America.
You’re a sharp dude, tell me, what was more important, kissing the ass of the teachers unions or helping young black kids?

Just to respond to you means to wallow in your slop James, so I’ll leave you with this thought;
Yes it was a shame that the issue of Willie Horton was brought up in 1988, Al Gore never should have done it.

Aug 17, 2009 - 11:14 am 73. Tim:

Nazism as a charge has gone out of vogue (proven by the fact that only person using that anymore is Nanny Pelosi). So, Goodwin’s Law needs an update.

I propose a new amendment. We’ll call it the Goodwin Law’s Amendment Directive (or GLAD for short):

Where the original stated: “As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1.” the a fore mentioned amendment would update the law as follows: “As an online political blog/article discussion in this “post-racial” environment grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving the KKK or racism approaches 1.”

Aug 17, 2009 - 11:18 am 74. AThinkingPerson:

The Comic Book Character known as The Shadow called me a racist of the “mindless quality” (#64). Wow…I not only rate as a “racist” but one of the “mindless quality” of racist. Weird.

Who knew there were levels of racism? The vacuum aka the liberal brain never ceases to amaze me.

Do tell “The Scary Shadow”… What level of racist is Obama? Is he just a “mindless quality” racist too or does he qualify for the mindful quality of racist?

Aug 17, 2009 - 11:46 am 75. Moho:

Nice work JohnT. And yet you didn’t answer, if I’m “making” a fool of myself, as opposed to you [a fool to begin with 24/7], then it should have been quite easy to describe just what Apartheid is and how it differed from Jim Crow. I assume someone of your intellect would enjoy rubbing someone else’s face in it…I mean, imagine, comparing state legislated segregation to apartheid. Everyone knows apartheid is an Afrikaans word and segregation is an English word.

While you’re at it, please explain how the Democrats lost the South right after the civil rights legislation of the sixties at the same exact time that the Republicans picked up the South. I’m sure it had to do with Republican resistance to Vietnam or something un-racist like that.

Aug 17, 2009 - 11:48 am 76. G. Soros:

stop ..STOP FEEDING THE TROLLS …if after viewing the video link below and you still think there is some value in engaging them go ahead. BUT WATCH THIS CLIP ..the whole interview is also worth watching.

watch this clip and you will understand why they continue to make the same arguments over and over no matter what they are shown or told.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTmbcyeZ9ic&feature=related

this clip gives great insight into the lefts blind following of an ideology that will bury them at the same time it buries us.

Aug 17, 2009 - 11:49 am 77. AThinkingPerson:

Moho… Why do you hate white Americans so much? I don’t understand how hating white people helps your liberal arguments. Please expound.

Aug 17, 2009 - 12:10 pm 78. Moho:

I don’t hate white Americans, shrinkingperson. Nor can you find anything I’ve written here that indicates it. Although you people have made me reconsider my open-mindedness over the past year more than once.

Aug 17, 2009 - 12:19 pm 79. Moho:

Of course I know what apartheid was. And understanding it as something that happened in South Africa as a shameful part of that country’s past is essential to being able to speak intelligently about it or learn anything form it.

Jim Crow laws weren’t the same as apartheid. They they were close enough you could certainly compare the two separate, distinct systems of oppression. But they were just that: Separate and distinct.

You really spend too much time here for your own good. Who cares if they were separate and distinct you idiot. The international community has acknowledged the word “apartheid” as it applies to ALL political situations like those of South Africa and the Jim Crowe South in INTERNATIONAL LAW.

Article 7 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court defines crimes against humanity as:

Article 7
Crimes against humanity

1. For the purpose of this Statute, ‘crime against humanity’ means any of the following acts when committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack:
1. Murder;
2. Extermination;
3. Enslavement;
4. Deportation or forcible transfer of population;
5. Imprisonment or other severe deprivation of physical liberty in violation of fundamental rules of international law;
6. Torture;
7. Rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, enforced sterilization, or any other form of sexual violence of comparable gravity;
8. Persecution against any identifiable group or collectivity on political, racial, national, ethnic, cultural, religious, gender as defined in paragraph 3, or other grounds that are universally recognized as impermissible under international law, in connection with any act referred to in this paragraph or any crime within the jurisdiction of the Court;
9. Enforced disappearance of persons;
10. The crime of apartheid;
11. Other inhumane acts of a similar character intentionally causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or to mental or physical health.[12]

Later in Article 7, the crime of apartheid is defined as:

The ‘crime of apartheid’ means inhumane acts of a character similar to those referred to in paragraph 1, committed in the context of an institutionalised regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime.[12]

I have to say I thought it would be fun to show you people for the fools that you are. But it simply makes me depressed that the human mind can be brought to such depths of malnourishment.

Aug 17, 2009 - 12:28 pm 80. Jim Baker:

They will never get tired of using the racism charge. They will still use it because straw man arguments and environmentalism have been the most successful tactics for these communists to use. I think they will actually ratchet up the rhetoric in these areas.

Aug 17, 2009 - 12:48 pm 81. Delia:

What exactly is ‘post-racial’?

This perhaps?…

Nelson Mandela sings about killing whites

Poor Whites – South Africa

Aug 17, 2009 - 12:49 pm 82. AThinkingPerson:

Moho(Re #22): I have no idea where I got the idea you hated white Americans.

“The fact that all of the post-racial blather is mostly put forth by white conservatives”

“Sure, there are a lot of white people out there who want to be post-racial. Being post-racial, at a time only forty years after the end of a 400 year apartheid regime, is merely the maintenance of the status quo.”

You claim to be open-minded and you write drivel like that? If you wrote crap like that and substituted the word “black” for every time you wrote the word “white” on ANY website, you’d sized for a white hood.

You need to think before you speak.

Aug 17, 2009 - 12:52 pm 83. Moho:

Delia, you’re an idiot.

Aug 17, 2009 - 12:58 pm 84. Juvenal:

You really spend too much time here for your own good.

This from a nickel-per-post troll.

Who cares if they were separate and distinct you idiot.

That seems to pretty much sum up your intellectual approach.

What exactly was the cut & paste of Article 7 supposed to prove? I confess that my “malnourished” mind is unable to see the relevance which you seem to believe your well-fed mind has created, Godlike, out of nothing.

Aug 17, 2009 - 1:00 pm 85. jack:

I know a group of people who think it is right to tell a black man or a woman that they are inferior to everyone else. They tell everyone they need help to advance in society. OH Yeah! thats AFFIRMATIVE ACTION!

Look at really who is racist!

If I was a black man, woman or any minority I would be insulted by that behavior. I would be pissed off. I would make a point to prove myself in society.

Thats how a poor white man has to do it.

DEMOCRATS LOOK AT BLACKS AS INFERIOR.

AFFIRMATIVE ACTION IS AN INSULT TO WHITES BUT MOSTLY TO BLACKS and other MINORITIES.

Aug 17, 2009 - 1:00 pm 86. Moho:

reallydumbperson…If you wrote crap like that and substituted the word “black” for every time you wrote the word “white” on ANY website, you’d sized for a white hood.

Well, it shouldn’t be too hard to put that to the test:

“The fact that all the post-racial blather is put forth by black conservatives”

Sounds weird, but I can’t see how you’d wring anything racist about it.

Then:
“Sure, there are a lot of black people out there who want to be post-racial. Being post-racial at a time only forty years after the end of a 400 year old apartheid regime, is merely the maintenance of the status quo.”

This one actually makes no sense, and though that alone would place it in good company with some of the batshit, but completely uncontested, racist stuff I see written here daily, again, it would be a challenge to find some way to make it sound racist.

It seems you’re implying that non-white people are unable to actually refer to white people. Which would be an odd thing to imply in the comments section of an article about the importance of being “post-racial”.

I’ve said it before, I’m glad you chose the screen name you use. It makes your comments somewhat funny, when they would normally be a depressing display of below average intellect and non-existent intellectual curiosity.

Aug 17, 2009 - 1:06 pm 87. Michael:

The trolls are sometimes entertaining but this has to be one of their worst efforts. Not an original idea yet.

They can’t deny the racism being practiced by the left and exploited by the left so they try to misdirect the debate away from the liberal aristocracy. Common guys, tell us why it isn’t racism when they do it!

Aug 17, 2009 - 1:14 pm 88. George S.:

81. Delia:

What exactly is ‘post-racial’?

This perhaps?…

Nelson Mandela sings about killing whites

Poor Whites – South Africa

good question …was Nelson Mandela signing about the whites he killed or just all the whites that need to be killed ?

why did he go to jail in the first place ?? I got some strange looks when I posed that question in South Africa.

saddly SA is on the path to become ZimbubweII …

Aug 17, 2009 - 1:14 pm 89. Thomas:

@79. Moho:
As of today the USA is not signatory to the “International Criminal Court” – thus your pontification is a moot point.

All these leftist kangaroo organizations you worship dare not touch the STRONG like China, Russia, and Islam because those countries don’t give squat what Fatoumata Dembélé Diarra of Mali, or Sanji Mmasenono Monageng of Botswana think or don’t think. (Real names and people!)

Hey fellow Americans! Do you care what David Ntanda Nsereko of Uganda or his colleague named Erkki Kourula want from you? Only our beloved poster “Moho” is kissing “Fatoumata Dembélé Diarra” lower section because it is Darkie. Ha, ha ha.

Aug 17, 2009 - 1:14 pm 90. ATHINKINGperson:

Moho… You really don’t see the forest for the trees do you? You REALLY think your comments were not hateful to white people? I see now how you can look yourself in the mirror…. major DENIAL.

I am not implying that non-white people are “unable to refer to white people”. I am IMPLYING that YOU are making blanket RACIST statements about WHITE PEOPLE that are WRONG. In your world, making statements about whites is okay but ANYTHING referring to Dear Leader is racist. Funny how I was one of MANY here to day to point that out to you.

You might join me for once and “THINK” before you speak (if possible).

When are you expected to be post-racial btw? I’d love to be there for the apology to us “white people” once you realize the folly of your racist ways.

Aug 17, 2009 - 1:15 pm 91. George S.:

84. Michael:

Your comment is awaiting moderation.

The trolls are sometimes entertaining but this has to be one of their worst efforts. Not an original idea yet.

They can’t deny the racism being practiced by the left and exploited by the left so they try to misdirect the debate away from the liberal aristocracy. Common guys, tell us why it isn’t racism when they do it!

IT IS RACISIM …THEY JUST WILL NOT ADMIT IT.

the trolls are completely ideologically indoctrinated and actually can not see the world as it is but as they think it is.

THIS MAY SEEM SIMPLISTIC BUT THEIR WORLD VIEW ISN”T BASED ON REALITY.

Aug 17, 2009 - 1:20 pm 92. Mr Lucky:

57. James W.:

I see Barack Obama as a dark skinned white man. Before your racist alarm goes of, consider –

Racism knows no color.

I’ve been a professional musician full time/part time since my early teens. Most of my gigs consist of performing in clubs and some studio gigs, but club gigs have been my bread and butter. Across those years I had had the opportunity to perform with many musicians, all colors, creeds, orientations, you name it.

When I was in my early twenties, I was offered a gig in a black funk band. Oh, by the way I am white. I was in the band for several years and during that time I lived in the black community, and I can say without a doubt that there are many very good black people and some very racist black people. I played in clubs where there was nary a white male face, maybe just a sprinkling of white and hispanic girls. At first I was rejected by some of the black patrons, but the band members put a stop to that. After a while, I was accepted, other than random outbursts by black racists, who were identified as such by my black friends.

Now invert this scene white for black, and the reverse was pretty much true, a white club, good white people and some white racists. Some clubs had more of a balance of colors, some didn’t, and it could be anything in between. In mostly white clubs if trouble came around, whites would back the black guys in the band, surprise! I saw this situation over the years in others bands that had differing ethnic ratios with the same outcomes. Racial incidents were rare, but they did happen.

Racism knows no color.

So what about Barack Obama being a dark skinned white man? I think many know this, that there is somewhat of a divide in the black community between “light skinned blacks” and “dark skinned blacks”. There was a sax player in the band described above who was quite light, and dare I say, clean and articulate. I noticed right away that he got a bit more razzing from the other guys, particularly about his girl friend, who was white. So at rehearsal one day, with all present, I asked the guys why. Everyone blew up with laughter, couldn’t I see, it was not just because of his girl friend, but because of his light skin. I was puzzled, I didn’t get it. I gave my take on it (as a joke) that he was really a dark skinned white boy. Everyone died laughing.

The bandleader later took me aside and explained it to me. He told me yes, with some blacks, there really is animosity between the light and dark groups, and in a naive way, I wasn’t too far off, and that nobody in the band had anything against the sax player, that people were just teasing each other. He also told me not to bring it up outside the band as some black racists (his words) would not look favorably on a white person commenting on what they thought was an exclusively black issue.

James W, could it be that Barack Obama is a dark skinned white man? Therefore, no need for the race card?

Aug 17, 2009 - 1:21 pm 93. malclave:

Treating a white man and a black (or mixed race) man the same is racist.

Aug 17, 2009 - 1:33 pm 94. blotto:

moho/james: Look you can write all the drivel you get told to write all day long. And you can post here acting as though you are some egalitarian, altruistic progressive given to overwhelming feelings for how down trodden blacks have been in America… But what have you, personally, and the Dem pargy done for a black or black Americans??? But it is all a facade.

Have you complained about the lack of blacks as nightly news anchors; have you complained that the staffs of your senators and congresspersons are NOT diverse enough (I should know I was part of a liberal staff); have you comlained about the lack of blacks on the staffs of the progressive MSM newspapers across America; have you complained about the lack of blacks/hispanics at Kos, CAP, HuffPo, etc.????

How many blacks have you actually helped do anything with their lives? As a former teacher, I helped many, many more black and hispanic kids than Obama could ever imagine…

Instead you post here and attempt to engage in debate not because you really care about blacks but because you are both paid to do so. Your use of ready-made quotes makes one wonder how you are so prepared to comment on these topics????

How has the Dem party helped blacks? Has their poverty rates lowered over the 50 years of the Great Society; has their illegitimacy rates decreased over the same periods; has the drop out rates fallen because you CARE so much about blacks; how about gang affiliation, drug use….

Until you can tell us that the Dems have helped blacks and not taken them for granted and not enslaved them to the party and government then anything you say regarding race, racial issues, and racism vis a vis the Dem party, is merely a futile, vapid and contrived gesture of faux progressive compassion.

Aug 17, 2009 - 1:41 pm 95. Catherine:

Moho, you are being played, but good, by the Democratic party. It is in their interest to keep you hyperaware of race. Their voting block DEPENDS on keeping racism on the front burner and simmering.
Being a sucker isn’t attractive.

Aug 17, 2009 - 2:07 pm 96. Still Bill:

I’m tired of the excuses and I’m tired of the racial preferences. Stupidity and racism is not restricted to white people. Think O.J Simpson and how the majority of blacks supported that murderer. If you are black and you can’t pass the test, the problem is you, not the test.

Aug 17, 2009 - 2:25 pm 97. Steve DeMarcus:

Alright sir so you think I am a racist then if that is what you believe then so be it, but I am still against the policies of the guy you are so supportive of regardless of his religion skin color or anything like that. It is not my job to care what you think or feel about me but I think Rick Nelson sang it that you can’t please everybody so you have to please your self. I choose to please myself and if you are displeased by my views then that is just too bad for you as I do not care what you think either and by the way are you racist because I am white (actually part Cherokee and French)!

Another great saying is sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me!

Aug 17, 2009 - 2:51 pm 98. johnt:

Moho, you are raving. The Dems did not lose the South after civil rights legislation, the major losses in representation came well after that and in particular in 1994.
Face it, your lunatic name calling is all you have in life, the daily expression of your bile is what you live for. What are you babbling about, segregation, apartheid? Why in your disorder do you think I owe you a specific answer to that babble?
I looked in, I saw you were being vicious as usual trying to add significance to what you call your life, and I suggested you stop making a fool of yourself, as well as demeaning your self.
Gee, I thought I was being a nice guy and helpful and this is the thanks I get.

Aug 17, 2009 - 3:02 pm 99. Delia:

Lefties have Margaret Sanger and Planned Parenthood to ’splain to the black folks they supposedly ’support’:
http://www.citizenreviewonline.org/special_issues/population/the_negro_project.htm
~
OffTopic: It’s impossible to take a tantrum throwing troll seriously who not-so-cleverly types their ‘HoMo’ moniker as the anagram ‘MoHo’ and calls everyone who doesn’t agree with ‘it’ “stupid” or “idiots”.

Cupid Stunt

Aug 17, 2009 - 3:04 pm 100. Hierodoc:

I’ve been called racist by in the last several years for such hateful conservative activities as 1) telling a black woman, who had parked her BMW blocking traffic in front of the local grocery store to use the ATM, that she should perhaps move the car; 2) telling a black female college history student of mine to substantiate her allegation that blacks were being prevented from voting in the 2000 election; 3) not voting for BHO.
I’d like to know if any of the legion of Leftists on here can defend any of these employments of the term?

Aug 17, 2009 - 3:05 pm 101. McBride:

Well the old facsist epithet was getting a little too cliche,and besides,being the unscrupulous oppurtunists that they are,using Mr. Obama’s skin tone to insult and ridicule their opponents was just to good to pass up.Does the fact that his genetics are as much white as they are black effectively cancel out the racism charge.Like off-setting penalties in football.Wait,we’re just hatin’ on the black half?Really?Not on the socialist whole?Seriously?Really?
So history and math wasn’t on the itinerary at the old liberal arts indoctination center huh moho?Let’s see,the government of The United States Of America declared their independece in 1776.Slavery was declared criminal in 1863 By a Republican adminisration.That doesn’t add up to 400 champ.Ohh,I get it,your holding the U.S government responsible for the policies of the previous Dutch,Spanish and British governments.My,how intellectually honest of you.
OT,I submit that the reason the artificially diallated troll sphincters who pollute PJM is; that they post here to fulfill their collective concupiscent appetite for abuse.It has nothing at all to do with a desire to hone their dialectic skills.After all,deep down in their desperate little collectivist subconscious they know,that we know,that they cannot use factual arguments to advance their agenda.Hence the adolescent ad homoinem vitriol that we see here every day in violation of the terms of usage.

Aug 17, 2009 - 3:06 pm 102. Anonymous:

What is post-racial? President Thomas Sowell being sworn in after getting all of the deliriously happy conservative vote would show the true racists to be on the left. Not all racism, just the political pandering sort used to keep a shrinking minority useful.

Aug 17, 2009 - 3:20 pm 103. Dohtimes:

What is post-racial? President Thomas Sowell being sworn in after getting all of the deliriously happy conservative vote would show the true racists to be on the left. Not all racism, just the political pandering sort used to keep a shrinking minority useful.

Aug 17, 2009 - 3:21 pm 104. Still Bill:

I just returned from a visit with my psychiatrist, and he tried a word association test on me. He said “ignorant” and I responded “Sheila”. He said “dumb” and I responded “Jackson”. He said “racist” and I responded “Lee”. After the test was over I asked him how I did. He said I was normal and wouldn’t need his services any longer.

Aug 17, 2009 - 3:26 pm 105. Moho:

Catherine–>

Moho, you are being played, but good, by the Democratic party.

Who said I was a Democrat. I see through their bullshit as easily as I see through yours.

Aug 17, 2009 - 3:29 pm 106. Moho:

Blotto–>

What an ass. How do you know I’m not black or hispanic?

Aug 17, 2009 - 3:31 pm 107. billslayer:

Barack Obama makes white liberals feel good about themselves. He’s not threatening to them, they don’t have to clutch their man purses when he gets in the elevator with them. They don’t have to walk to the other side of the street when he approaches. Nothing about him is threatening to them.
I think this might say a bit more about liberal racism than they’d like to admit.

Aug 17, 2009 - 3:33 pm 108. Moho:

Juvenal–>”what was the cut and paste of article 7 supposed to prove?”

all I can do is post the words, I can’t help you read them.

Aug 17, 2009 - 3:34 pm 109. Moho:

Why in your disorder do you think I owe you a specific answer to that babble?

Sorry, where I come from, when someone makes an asinine and unsupported remark, we give them an opportunity to back it up with some kind of citation, before we make our minds up that they’re idiots. I understand that in the culture you promulgate here, that’s akin and ideas are accepted according to an political aesthetic rather than reason. I doubt, I’ll insult you in that way again, and merely consider you to have your head way up your ass from the get-go.

Aug 17, 2009 - 3:37 pm 110. Moho:

Hierodoc–>

My heart goes out to you. I hope they didn’t make you cry.

Aug 17, 2009 - 3:45 pm 111. Moho:

Still Bill–>

So you’re saying that before today you were abnormal.

Aug 17, 2009 - 3:48 pm 112. Moho:

Oh Delia. I bet you’re not a homophobe, as well. I feel sorry for you people being constantly labeled racists and homophobes just because of the things you say and do! That’s just not fair. Let it all out honey, I know you people have sensitive feelings and cry easily.

Aug 17, 2009 - 3:49 pm 113. George S.:

STOP FEEDING THE TROLLS … they are morally corrupt and dishonest. You can NOT expect a reasoned debate with them.

their goal is not debate ..they are the equivilant of bullies and thugs.

watch this clip and you will understand why they continue to make the same arguments over and over no matter what they are shown or told.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTmbcyeZ9ic&feature=related

this clip gives great insight into the lefts blind following of an ideology that will bury them at the same time it buries us.

Aug 17, 2009 - 3:56 pm 114. Delia:

Racism and Sexism is an art-form for the Left.

lol@ Da Ho

Aug 17, 2009 - 3:56 pm 115. Moho:

Yes, of course it is, Delia. That’s why the right has so many non-white supporters.

Aug 17, 2009 - 4:01 pm 116. Frank J. Fleming:

Yeah, I don’t get the trying to debate trolls. It’s not very mentally balanced trying to spend so much time for the sole purpose of irritating people, so it’s not like they’re opinion makers or anyone important. There’s nothing to gain convincing one little weirdo… even if that person were actually rational enough for that to be a possibility.

Aug 17, 2009 - 4:08 pm 117. SukieTawdry:

“Racist” is the new word for “I’m completely over my head in this debate and haven’t a clue how to refute your argument.”

You know, I used to care (well, sorta) if someone implied I was a racist. Now I couldn’t care less. The term itself has lost its meaning and its power after decades of the left’s childish, ridiculous taunting and race baiting. So, lefties, bring it if you must. Says more about you than it does about me.

Aug 17, 2009 - 4:24 pm 118. SukieTawdry:

8. David Thomson: There is something else that must not be overlooked: Obama was born in 1961. By the time he entered his teen years—most of our racial problems had already been eliminated! He has rarely, if ever, suffered directly because of the color of his skin.

Quite to the contrary, in fact. I maintain he’s ascended to the heights he has primarily because of the color of skin. Would we have ever heard of the man called Barack Obama if his name had been Barry Dunham and his daddy had been a white guy from, say, Kansas?

Aug 17, 2009 - 4:40 pm 119. Chip:

“On the internet nobody knows your a dog.”

I am still trying to figure out why the color of someone’s skin matters at all.

And, to the tangential reference of Healthcare…. I am still trying to find out where one signs up to get on one of these Death Panels. I already have a G27 Civil Service rating, that’s got to be high enough……

Aug 17, 2009 - 4:52 pm 120. Hammersmith:

When BO was running, I heard individuals say: “You just wait, when he gets to be president, anyone who criticises him will be called a racist.”

Aug 17, 2009 - 5:00 pm 121. Martin Knight:

#63 The Shadow,

I do know the reference and I believe you’re just covering up. I’m pretty certain that you chose that name as a code and it has everything to do with race. It’s obvious you’re as racist as it gets.

Aug 17, 2009 - 5:04 pm 122. malclave:

@105
“Who said I was a Democrat. I see through their bullshit as easily as I see through yours.”

Moho just likes the taste of the Dems’.

Aug 17, 2009 - 5:19 pm 123. Delia:

Conservative Black = Uncle Tom
Conservative Hispanic = La Raza Traitor
Conservative Gay = Can’t Possibly Exist
Conservative White = Raaaaaaaaaaacisssssssst!

All of the above as Liberals = Atta Girl/Boy, toe the party line.

Silly Liberals.

Aug 17, 2009 - 5:27 pm 124. LarryG:

There are those that think I am a racist. Well, it isn’t about race and it isn’t about skin color. It isn’t the outside that counts – it’s the inside. It’s the attitude and behavior. What have we gained for billions of dollars down the rathole? More demands and accusations. I served in the far east (Korea and Viet Nam) while in the Army. I don’t hate those people. Look at how they conduct themselves. How about these other people? Vijay Singh is Fijian and quite dark. Where is all of the adulation? Tiger? It’s assumed from his dark skin he’s black but, alas, he’s mostly asian but you see how all of this goes. Tiger is 1/4 Chinese, 1/4 Thai, 1/4 black, 1/8 Cherokee and 1/8 Dutch (?).So much for racism. It’s about behavior but don’t tell Jesse.

Aug 17, 2009 - 5:29 pm 125. Martin Knight:

The Democrats today claim that the Republican Party turned against Civil Rights in the mid-1960s, and/or used subtle appeals to latent Southern racism to pick up the racist white vote in the South. This theory, that the GOP appealed to racism to reach their current position of dominance in the South, is what has since been termed the Republican “Southern Strategy.”
Practically every famous racist that had walked the sphere of American politics in the past 100 years had worn a ‘D’ behind his name, and yet Republicans are considered the “racist party.” Ben ‘Pitchfork’ Tillman, Woodrow Wilson, Theodore Bilbo, Richard Russell, John Sparkman, Orville Faubus, George Wallace, Lester Maddox, Ross Barnett, George Mahony, etc. all hardcore racists, all high profile (Senators and Governors, one a President), all Democrats. Bull Connor himself was a registered Democrat up until he died. Much like the relationship between Sinn Fein and the IRA, the Ku Klux Klan was the terrorist arm of the Democrat Party in the South for decades, and had enough clout that it even sent delegates to National Conventions. And it was not just in the South, the unions and city machines often played the same role for the Democrats in the North, manning the polls to prevent black people from voting.
It is hard not to be overcome with admiration at how the Democrats have managed to transfer all the bad karma they have richly earned on race to the GOP. They would never have succeeded without the assistance of their friends in the Press, but the GOPs own active stupidity and blindness (the GOP is not called the Stupid Party for nothing) was probably just as essential. Of course, one could justifiably say that all that is just ancient history. The real story is what the parties have done since the 1960s, when the GOP lost, permanently, whatever competitiveness it still retained in the black community. Did the Republican Party turn against Civil Rights even as the Democrat Party embraced it wholesale?
The Democrats and their friends in the Fourth Estate and academia all say yes. This is offered as the primary reason why the South went from being solidly Democrat to solidly Republican; the “Southern Strategy.”
But on closer examination, there are way too many ahistorical gaps in the logic upholding this so-called particular theory. First of all, the first Civil Rights Bills passed since Reconstruction in 1957 and 1960 were sent to Congress by the Eisenhower Administration and steered though to passage (though much weakened by Democrat Amendments) by Senate Republican Leader William Knowland of California. In the congressional battles for Civil Rights in the 1960s, the GOP, in both the House and Senate, consistently voted for Civil Rights in far greater percentages than the Democrats. In fact, the Senator at the forefront of writing the Senate versions of the Civil Rights Acts and breaking the 1964 filibuster was none other than the Senate Republican Leader, Everett Dirksen of Illinois. He and his fellow Republicans were far more instrumental in the passage of the Acts, so much so that the NAACP gave him the Leadership Conference of Civil Rights Award (though the rabidly anti-Republican NAACP is very likely to posthumously withdraw it anyday now).
So, it cannot be denied, the GOP acquitted itself well during the Civil Rights Acts’ fights for survival in congress and were key players in getting them passed. In fact, of the twenty Senators who filibustered the key Civil Rights Act in 1964, only one was a Republican, John Tower of Texas. The rest of them, Richard Russell, Allen Ellender, Jim Eastland, Al Gore Snr., Robert Byrd, Herman Talmadge, J. William Fulbright, etc. were all Democrats.
But among the other things the happened in the 1960s to sour the black community on the GOP is its Presidential nomination of Barry Goldwater, who had opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964. But, anyone who has any familiarity with Goldwater’s record knows that he had always been an opponent of segregation; before he entered politics he desegregated his department store, and he desegregated the Arizona National Guard when he served as its Chief of Staff a full two years before Harry S Truman ordered he desegregation of the Armed Forces. He was also a strong supporter of the 1957 and 1960 Civil Rights bills. Interestingly, he was a founding member of the Arizona NAACP and remained a member till his death. So why did he oppose the Civil Rights Act of 1964? He thought it was unconstitutional (he is the founding father of modern American Conservatism in Government, after all), overextended the role of the Federal Government and could possibly lead to racial preferences and quotas (he got that part right). He got 8% of the black vote in the 1964 election.
But Goldwater is not as often mentioned as the supposed “Southern Strategy” supposedly instituted by the Nixon campaign in 1968 and has supposedly since then been utilized by the GOP to win the South away from the Democrats. According to the narrative offered by the Democrats/Press, this “Southern Strategy” led the Dixiecrats to move en masse out of the Democrat Party and into the Republican Party, thus firmly delivering the South into Republican hands and the black community to the Democrats. This “Southern Strategy” was allegedly instrumental in Nixon’s victory over Hubert Humphrey.
No doubt there was some sort of “Southern Strategy” to appeal to Southerners, but was it based on race? Or other cultural issues?
The Democrats say it was based on race but there are far too many ahistorical holes in this story; how much of it is reality and how much of it is myth? For one, when Democratic news outlets like the New York Times write about the 1968 campaign and attribute Nixon’s victory to the “Southern Strategy” they invariably fail to mention that there were two Democrats running in 1968, Hubert Humphrey and George Wallace. It is my belief from looking at the history that this so-called “Southern Strategy“, even if implemented the way the Democrats say it was, was neither long-lasting nor in any way effective. Taking the following Southern states into account and judging the amount (and percentage) of votes Nixon got against Kennedy in 1960 and the votes he got against Humphrey in 1968;

ALABAMA
 1960
   John F Kennedy 324,050 [56.8%]
   Richard Nixon 237,981 [41.7%]
 1968
   Richard Nixon 146,923 [14.0%]
   Hubert Humphrey 196,579 [18.7%]

   George Wallace 691,425 [65.9%]
ARKANSAS
 1960
   John F Kennedy 215,049 [50.2%]
   Richard Nixon 184,508 [43.1%]
 1968
   Richard Nixon 190,759 [30.8%]

   Hubert Humphrey 188,228 [30.4%]
   George Wallace 240,982 [38.9%]
GEORGIA
 1960
   John F Kennedy 458,638 [62.5%]
   Richard Nixon 274,472 [37.4%]
 1968

   Richard Nixon 380,111 [30.4%]
   Hubert Humphrey 334,440 [26.7%]
   George Wallace 535,550 [42.8%]
LOUISIANA
 1960
   John F Kennedy 407,339 [50.4%]
   Richard Nixon 230,980 [28.6%]

 1968
   Richard Nixon 257,535 [23.5%]
   Hubert Humphrey 309,615 [28.2%]
   George Wallace 530,300 [48.3%]
MISSISSIPPI
 1960
   John F Kennedy 108,362 [36.3%]

   Richard Nixon 73,561 [24.7%]
 1968
   Richard Nixon 88,516 [13.5%]
   Hubert Humphrey 50,644 [23.0%]
   George Wallace 415,349 [63.5%]
NORTH CAROLINA
 1960

   John F Kennedy 713,136 [52.1%]
   Richard Nixon 655,420 [47.9%]
 1968
   Richard Nixon 627,192 [39.5%]
   Hubert Humphrey 464,113 [29.2%]
   George Wallace 496,188 [31.3%]

SOUTH CAROLINA
 1960
   John F Kennedy 198,129 [51.2%]
   Richard Nixon 188,558 [48.8%]
 1968
   Richard Nixon 254,062 [38.1%]
   Hubert Humphrey 197,486 [29.6%]

   George Wallace 215,430 [32.3%]
TENNESSEE
 1960
   John F Kennedy 481,453 [45.8%]
   Richard Nixon 556,577 [52.9%]
 1968
   Richard Nixon 472,592 [37.8%]

   Hubert Humphrey 351,233 [28.1%]
   George Wallace 424,792 [34.0%]
WEST VIRGINIA
 1960
   John F Kennedy 441,786 [52.7%]
   Richard Nixon 395,995 [47.3%]
 1968

   Richard Nixon 307,555 [40.8%]
   Hubert Humphrey 374,091 [49.6%]
   George Wallace 72,560 [9.6%]
Note that in 1968, there was nowhere where Nixon’s numbers went up consistently, i.e. he consistently lost support in the percentage of votes he recieved from 1960, and in many cases even lost votes in terms of raw numbers. In other words, Nixon’s “<i?Southern Strategy” yielded him absolutely nothing in terms of electoral success; raw numbers or percentages. Yet, strangely, Nixon’s victory is always attributed to appeals to racial hatreds – despite his campaign’s explicit statement in 1966 that it would leave it to the;

… party of Maddox, Mahoney and Wallace to squeeze the last ounces of political juice out of the rotting fruit of racial injustice.

I highlight the name Mahoney in order to make another point. Nixon picked Spiro Agnew in 1968 to be his running mate. This is the same Spiro Theodore Agnew who ran for Governor of Maryland in 1966 (just two years earlier) on a platform of extending civil rights to black Marylanders while his Democratic opponent George Mahoney, ran on an explicitly segregationist platform.
In other words, [1] Nixon denounced segregation throughout his 1968 campaign, [2] he was known for pushing civil rights legislation in the 1950s as Vice President, [3] he picks a famously anti-segregationist running mate. But yet we are told that he won in 1968 because he appealed to racism …

Furthermore, considering what Nixon did while in office; raised the Civil Rights Enforcement Budget 800%; made numerous appointments of African Americans to high federal offices; virtually invented Affirmative Action (the Philadelphia Plan by Arthur Fletcher); oversaw the aggressive desegregation of Southern schools; the people who voted for Nixon on account of racism must have felt extremely stupid and misled. Here’s another fact, Nixon won 18% of the black vote in 1968 and 25% of the black vote in 1972 – a feat no Republican has replicated since.

The common assertion made by the Democrats is that the Dixiecrats moved en masse into the GOP in protest against the Democrats’ supposed wholesale rejection of racism (while Talmadge, Stennis, Russell, etc still proudly wore Ds and leadership positions in the Senate … and the lone black man in the Senate, Edward Brooke, wore an R) is patently nonsensical. Hardly any Dixiecrats crossed the aisle. The often repeated assertion that the Dixiecrats became Republicans is one of the most ahistorical myths in the history of American politics. In fact, with the sole exception Strom Thurmond, no Dixiecrat left the Democrats for the GOP in the aftermath of the Civil Rights Acts, and his leaving had virtually nothing to do with race. In fact, it seemed as if he remained in the Democrat Party only because of its stand against civil rights, because he switched after the GOP overwhelmingly voted for the 1964 Civil Rights Act and continued to vote just as overwhelming for Civil Rights bills in 1965 and 1968. Once Jim Crow met its end, Thurmond simply made an honest man of himself and moved to the party whose ideology lay closer to his long held antipathy to an intrusive and activist federal government.

Either way, every Southern state was controlled by the Dixiecrats in 1960s, 1970s and some even up to this day. If a massive switch of partisan allegiance took place with the Dixiecrats leaving the Democrats to become Republicans in the aftermath of the Civil Rights movement, then the historical record would show huge amounts of Democrat politicians switching parties in Southern states. We should see the Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas, etc. state legislatures swing from Democrat to Republican majorities. But if one should check the records of every Southern state, that’s clearly not the case – it didn’t happen. Hardly any such partisan switches took place. In fact, legislatures of many Southern states like Alabama, Mississippi and Louisiana have never known majority control by the Republican Party, the current GOP Governor of Georgia is its first in near a century, the current junior Senator from Louisiana is the very first Republican Senator produced by the state, etc. So the simple fact remains that 99.9% of Dixiecrats stayed in the Democrat Party. They’re dying off. And, the South, moved Right even as the Democrats moved Left (witness the landmark nomination of McGovern in 1972 and the subsequent takeover by the far Left of the Democrat Party).

Once it is pointed out that Nixon’s election in 1968 could not have had anything to do with a supposed “Southern Strategy,” the next most common assertion is that Nixon and every Republican thenceforth have used “racial code words.” Such code words include “law and order“, “crime“, “welfare queen“**, “liberal“, “tax hiker“, “quota“, “cut taxes“, “federalism“. In the vast majority of these cases, most are attempts by the Democrats and their friends in the Press to declare areas in which they are politically weak off-limits to debate. The two most commonly cited examples of Republicans using “code words” or “code actions” are Reagan supposedly endorsing “states rights” in Philadelphia Mississippi, and the elder Bushs’ use of Willie Horton against Dukakis in 1988.

In the case of the phrase “States’ Rights,” there is a strong case to be made that consistent and extensive use of the phrase, especially in the South, is an attempt to stir up racial tensions, though how successful this particular tactic would be today is far different from the 1960s. But saying something positive about “States’ Rights” in a campaign speech, even in the South, does not a racist make. The concept of “States’ Rights“, i.e. Federalism, is a key element of small government Conservatism. Unfortunately, in defense of racism, the Dixiecrats poisoned the phrase and almost succeeded in poisoning the very idea of Federalism in the first place. Either way, I have long heard the story of how Reagan began his 1980 campaign in Philadelphia, MS (where three civil rights activists were murdered by Kluckers in 1964) and proclaimed his support for “States’ Rights” in his speech. According to the Democrats/Press, the choice of venue and words is conclusive evidence that Reagan was appealing to the racist vote as, the story goes, there could have been no other reason for Reagan to begin a campaign in Mississippi.
Of course, the story is a little bit lacking in facts and context. Reagan was in Philadelphia MS, to take advantage of the Neshoba County Fair, an annual political event in Mississippi, and a huge deal in the state’s politics. A major part of it are speeches by politicians. We are told that Reagan then unambiguously endorsed “States Rights,” in its racial context when he said; “I believe in States’ Rights …“. But the full quote is;

What we have to do is bring back the recognition that the people of this country can solve its problems. I still believe the answer to any problem lies with the people. I believe in state’s rights and I believe in people doing as much as they can for themselves at the community level and at the private level. I believe we have distorted the balance of our government today by giving powers that were never intended to be given in the Constitution to that federal establishment.

This was the first and last time Reagan uttered the words “state rights” in the speech, which is far from an outright “endorsement” or even “positive mention” of “states’ rights” (i.e. segregation). I personally do not believe that the average member of his Mississipi audience, even in 1980, immediately thought that within his explication of a basic principle of Conservatism (as underlined above), he had buried a promise to re-institute Jim Crow. Yet, according to the Press, upon hearing the phrase “States Rights“, average Southern whites, much like Pavlov’s dogs, suuposedly fell hypnotized, their latent inner Nazis surfacing and making them reflexively pull the GOP lever, months later on election day. A commonly held conceit among limousine liberals, particular those that inhabit the halls of journalism is that white Southerners are primarily or even only motivated by race and racism, therefore anyone who wins the Southern white vote must have appealed to racism.

Of course, this doesn’t apply to Democrats. When a Democrat wins the majority of the vote in a Southern state, like Carter, it’s because of his policies, sex appeal, pragmatism, etc. but when a Republican does, it’s because he used “code words” like “law and order” to appeal to the Southern inner-Nazi.
The legendary Willie Horton ad is another supposed sign that Republicans are racists, but in actuality is more of a sign of what a biased Press can do. Willie Horton was a convicted first degree murderer who had been let out of prison unsupervised under the aegis of the Massachusetts Furlough Program, of which Michael Dukakis, a limousine Leftist of the first order was a passionate supporter. So much so that he actually vetoed a bill banning the granting of such furloughs to first degree murderers. When Horton was released for a weekend, he never came back and instead went over to Maryland, where he tortured a couple, cutting the man nearly two dozen times and savagely raping the woman.

The Democrats realized that the Bush campaign had found Dukakis’ major achilles heel (he was notoriously soft on crime) and swiftly attempted to shut the Bush campaign and its supporters up. The Democrat charged that by revealing through a mug shot that Horton was black, the National Security PAC which produced the ad (“Weekend Passes”) in support of, but independent of the Bush campaign, had no other motive but appealing to racism. The thought apparently never occured to any member of the Press that the ad would have run even if Horton (the most notorious of furloughed re-offenders) had been white because the issue, as the vast majority of Americans recognized it, was one of crime, not race. But the Democrats and their allies in the Press strove mightily to switch the subject from being one of crime to one of race. Even though the ad “Revolving Doors” officially produced by the Bush campaign, on the same theme, featured 19 nine furloughed murderers, rapists, etc., sixteen white, two black and one Latino, Dan Rather and friends have managed to get it remembered more for the racial controversy they and their friends at the DNC injected into issue.
Like I mentioned before, without the Press, the Democrats would nowhere near as strong in the black community as they are now. Thurmond’s fellow Senator from South Carolina for over three decades, Fritz Hollings, was the Governor who first flew the Confederate flag over the South Carolina Capitol to show his support for segregation. This was/is hardly ever mentioned in the Press, even in articles and stories about him that devote space to detail his fellow Senator’s less than illustrious past on race. No newspaper article ever mentioned the late Strom Thurmond without duly informing its readers about Thurmond’s past as a segregationist Dixiecrat. Yet, despite a segregationist past every bit as repugnant as Thurmond’s, despite the fact that they both were numbered among the Senators who filibustered the Civil Rights Acts, despite his once being a Grand Kleagle in the Ku Klux Klan, Robert Byrd has no fear of his racist past appearing in any newspaper. Both Byrd and Thurmond long ago apologized, and there is nothing to suggest one was any less sincere than the other. Thurmond, interestingly, was the very first Southern Senator to hire a black legislative aide in Congress.

The only possible explanation for the difference in treatment with regard to Byrd and Thurmond on race is that Byrd remained a Democrat while Thurmond had the temerity to switch parties. Thurmond’s membership in the GOP is treated as a black mark against the party while Robert Byrd, who served twelve years (a record) as the leader of the Democrats in the Senate, is often cited as a credit to the Democrats. In fact, according to many members of Washington Press Corps, he’s the “Conscience of the Senate.”

When Douglas Wilder won the nomination for Governor in 1989, many Press outlets made it a point to inform the nation that Wilder was the first black man to recieve a major party nomination for Governor since Reconstruction. Which proves the oft-repeated point that the Press can be remarkably color-blind when it comes to minority Republicans … because the Michigan GOP had nominated a black man for Governor, William Lucas, just three years earlier, in 1986, to run against Jim Blanchard. Reagan, (the so-called racist) headlined fundraisers for the man. But, outside of Michigan, no-one knew that the man running for Governor was an African American. Contrast that to the hagiographies that the Press ran nationwide about Wilder (I confess that I’m glad Wilder won, by the way).

Aug 17, 2009 - 5:36 pm 126. Kay:

As with everything liberals do, they simply project their own views on others. That an argument being made such as health care opponents are racists, the person making the claim is the one that has race on their mind. Even saying Michal Jackson was a nut provokes a ‘you must be racist!’ prod from a left wing dolt. It’s the liberals that promote segregation and dividing individuals into little ‘race’ groups. And the kicker is the people lumped into their ‘groups’ that let THEM do it.

After Sotomyor was labeled by them as THE FIRST HISPANIC SUPREME COURT JUSTICE!!!! There are dozens of South American nations, none of the residents wish to be confused with any other’s residents. Different cultures, food, dialect, religion, politics, and history. Come to the USA and check your ‘Hispanic’ box on the form please….

And will someone PLEASE inform Pelosi the Nazi party was a left-wing group… The Democrats are the party of racism, are against free speech and free enterprise. And all true movements to racial equality were brought forth by conservatives. All language used by the Left are the exact opposite of their intentions. It is a clear indicator of intelligence, as there is ZERO logic in ANY agenda brought forth by the left. It’s impossible to decide if they are unbelievably stupid, completely brainwashed, or incredibly dangerous.

They need a commercial that in simple terms explains who the RIGHT WING extremists are, such as Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, George Mason, Abraham Lincoln, Ulysses S Grant, Frederick Douglas, Winston Churchill, Dwight Eisenhower, Martin Luther King, Margaret Thatcher, and Ronald Regan. LEFT WING extremists include Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini, Mao, Hussein, and a few others that love the upturned chin in their paintings they want plastered everywhere…..

Aug 17, 2009 - 5:44 pm 127. The Shadow:

Martin Knight Let me see if I can understand your logic. Because you are a racist you think that every term: black, shadow, dark = racism. Tell me did you schooling end in the 7th or 8th grade? This is what passes for humor in those grades

Aug 17, 2009 - 5:45 pm 128. Hejsan:

I once had a black student tell me “You won’t let me go to the bathroom because I’m a black man!” The whole class was in shock and were quiet- what would I do? The charge was so absurd (he had to wait his turn to use the bathroom pass) that I actually laughed- I laughed so hard I cried. The class relaxed and the student and I actually bonded, because he knew it was ridiculous. The only way to deal with ridiculous racist charges is to LAUGH and MOCK them, because there is no defense. It’s a worse charge than the question, when did you stop beating your wife? Besides, though liberals mock and deride conservatives all the time, turn the tables on them, laugh at them, and watch the fun with their conniption fit!

Aug 17, 2009 - 5:45 pm 129. Doug King:

Racism is judging people by the color of their skin (white, black or whatever), as opposed to the content of their character — at least that’s how Martin Luther King defined it. Character is a trait of individuals; it’s not an attribute of race or economic class. Character isn’t found in DNA. Trying to take credit or attribute blame for what peoples’ ancestors did is just another way of judging by color which is racism. Telling people they have no right to act or think like individuals because they must conform to some race-based definition of cultural values is another form of racism. I dare say Martin Luther King would be considered a “racist” by the way some people have redefined the word today.

The only escape from racism is a color-blind society where individuals are treated as such. In my experience, some liberals are racists, most are not. Likewise, some conservatives are racists, most are not. Ditto for independents.

The word “racism” so overused it’s becoming meaningless, and that’s a shame because the awful history of slavery and oppression was real and must not be forgotten.

Aug 17, 2009 - 5:46 pm 130. EC:

The word “racist” like the word “nazi” is cheapened and overused to a point beyond absurdity. It doesn’t mean anything anymore, except that those who accuse others of such expose themselves to be complete idiots.

Aug 17, 2009 - 5:48 pm 131. Bill:

The race-baiting in this country is out of control. I think it needs to be added to the federal Hate Crime legislation.

Aug 17, 2009 - 5:56 pm 132. Kay:

120. Hammersmith:

When BO was running, I heard individuals say: “You just wait, when he gets to be president, anyone who criticizes him will be called a racist.”

The funny thing is, the Left strategists thought this was going to be an ironclad move when they decided to kick the machine into gear to make this guy their choice. This is all wearing thin on all Americans with any semblance of intelligence-and making it glaringly obvious how important ‘racial identity’ at the lowest common denominator is to self-proclaimed ‘intelligent’ liberals.

Well, all this silly race talk has me in the mood for some “African-American” music, so I’m loading up Dave Matthews Band in the CD player…

Aug 17, 2009 - 6:00 pm 133. hierodoc:

Moho,
No, I learned a long time ago not to cry and had the training reinforced when I was in the 101st Airborne Division.
And, as usual for your mindless, insulting Lefist trolls, I note that you failed to answer my question.

Aug 17, 2009 - 6:36 pm 134. Dynomitejim:

I think the first step at moving past racism in this country is to identify yourself as an American. Too many blacks see themselves as African Americans before they see themselves as Americans. My family immigrated in the 1920’s from Sweden. I have never thought of myself as a Scandanavian-American.

Until we can raise our children as Americans, and not African Americans, Hispanics, and Asian Americans, we will always have this problem.

The democratic party constantly reminds these groups that they are not quite American enough.

Aug 17, 2009 - 6:53 pm 135. Calvin Ball:

60. George S.:

STOP FEEDING THE TROLLS … they are morally corrupt and dishonest. You can not expect a reasoned debate with them.

Seconded.

Aug 17, 2009 - 6:53 pm 136. Gringo:

Worth reading.
The Myth of the Racist Republicans.

Aug 17, 2009 - 6:56 pm 137. Calvin Ball:

What is post-racial? President Thomas Sowell being sworn in after getting all of the deliriously happy conservative vote would show the true racists to be on the left. Not all racism, just the political pandering sort used to keep a shrinking minority useful.

If Colin Powell had decided to run in 96, that would have thrown titanium monkey wrenches into a lot of political machinery. Moonbat teeth everywhere. It would have been a sight to see. If only…

Aug 17, 2009 - 7:00 pm 138. Mr Lucky:

Moho – Why do you care about black people? What’s your stake in this?

Aug 17, 2009 - 7:05 pm 139. Cristina:

# 117 SukieTawdry:

Absolutely right. “Racism” has lost its meaning and moral value. That’s what happens to concepts used indiscriminately, to salvage insolvent thinking and poor management of economic reality.
Mr Fleming:
What a great, necessary article. The empty accusations of racism have always reminded me of the communist strategy of branding the opposition, dissidents as well as everyday people who were found not conform to the dogmas and rules for such a simple thing as listening to jazz–with sinister-sounding names such as “imperialists,” “dirty rotten capitalists,” “saboteurs,” “fascists,” “bourgeois cosmopolitan scum,” “CIA agents.” “Cosmopolitan” (meaning reading Western stuff, like fashion magazines and adopting Western ideas/fashions) seemes so innocuous from our American point of view, but it meant being kicked out of high school, or college, or worse, a staged trial and hard labor, if combined with other, fabricated, accusations, which was usually the case.
The language changed from decade to decade, according to the latest fights and rocades within the Soviet top leadership, the Polit Bureau.

Most Americans have no idea of the terror of language use and its consequences in the commie totalitarian world. The communists mastered that art to perfection, and they imposed it on the entire society, from school text books to newspapers to works of fiction and historical scolarship.

Aug 17, 2009 - 7:14 pm 140. Hierdoc:

Re: Troll-feeding
Guilty as charged. I really must learn to resist temptation. “Get thee behind me, Troll!”

Aug 17, 2009 - 7:28 pm 141. Bill Carson:

As an older white guy, I am very happy to be called a racist. Truly. If that is the worst someone can say about me, then that means I’m a pretty good guy because all white guys who happen to be Republicans are automatically labeled racists. It is just a totally meaningless phrase. As such, it is virtually a compliment, in my opinion.

Aug 17, 2009 - 7:41 pm 142. patmanshardt.blogspot.com:

We’re all racists now.

Aug 17, 2009 - 8:09 pm 143. Gramps Cane:

# 79 Moho:
“Article 7 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court defines crimes against humanity as:
Article 7
Crimes against humanity

8. Persecution against any identifiable group or collectivity on political, racial, national, ethnic, cultural, religious, gender as defined in paragraph 3, or other grounds that are universally recognized as impermissible under international law, in connection with any act referred to in this paragraph or any crime within the jurisdiction of the Court;”

Now look at the Dept of Homeland Security bulletin stating that anyone opposing big government, abortion, etc is a potential terrorist. Are you saying that we are on the verge of apartheid in this country with the persecution of Conservatives by the ruling Socialists?

Aug 17, 2009 - 8:12 pm 144. patmanshardt.blogspot.com:

To No. 22: You mean we should just relax and enjoy it?

Aug 17, 2009 - 8:15 pm 145. Ani:

For what it’s worth, my hubby and I are lifelong Democrats — well we were, until 2008 when we took a good look at Pelosi, Reid, Dodd and Franks and all their shenanigans and left the party. We found Obama disingenuous and unqualified from the beginning and would not vote for him. Please know that there are a lot of democrats out there who put country before party and are very unhappy with this horrible meme the media and his more virulent supporters are using, and having been using with umpunity since January, 2008 to silence all comers. Some of us are more moderate, encourage debate and do not think Republicans are evil.

If this election accompished anything for me, it changed the way I look at both parties. I will never vote a straight party ticket again. I really wonder if the day will come when we stop electing American Idol.

Playing the race card will backfire on them. I think it already is. It being used unfairly to such a degree the charge is losing its meaning. And when there is a genuine issue of racism to address it may not get the attention it deserves as a result.

Aug 17, 2009 - 8:27 pm 146. patmanshardt.blogspot.com:

#52: You appear to be projecting what you know to be true about yourself (and conservatives) (that you are sincere) on to the liberals.

They don’t think this way, which is why they are always surprised to find out that we are sincere (remember their surpise at GWB following though on what he said he’d do)? They think nobody could believe our positions as we articulate them (how could we?).

There are 3 types of liberals:

1. The stupid, who acutally do beleive the stuff they spout out;
2. The cynical, who don’t believe a word of it, but say it for the benefit of others; and
3. The arrogant who think they know how to run your life better than you do and will tell you any fairy tale so that we will cede power to them.

Some people are not reachable by reason or logic.

Aug 17, 2009 - 8:45 pm 147. Kevin B.:

As a 45 year old Black Conservative man, I would have to say
that Rush Limbaugh was correct:

“Ignorance is our most expensive commodity”

Democrats continue to play the race card because it is not only
hard to defend but I believe it also extremely effective in keeping
their African American base in their place.

The Democrats use race because African Americans make extremely useful
victims, easily manipulated by emotions in order to advance a very liberal agenda.

They must continue to keep African Americans outraged and blaming all
their misfortunes on those evil, white republican capitalist who simply can’t
stand to see a black face in the white house.

Democrats have to use race to deflect the righteous indignation that many black
people feel in this country because of past wrongs.

Democrats have to use race because they know that if your black, poor, divided and
angry you make a useful counter attack when their agenda lacks any moral substance.

Back in the days of slavery, slave owners had to keep their slaves ignorant. They
were not allowed to read or educate themselves lest they discover the ability
to think for themselves and possibly start an uprising and over power their masters.

Democrats have to use race… lest their victims develop the ability to think for themselves.

Aug 17, 2009 - 9:48 pm 148. Rob:

Moho, we are still waiting to quantify your many remarks and you haven’t. You are content to sling mud and call people names, but facts bother you.

“Moho:

This is hilarious, because its exactly what your movement does to Obama and to anyone else who is conscious of race.”

That is exactly what makes you a bigot, you are conscious of race. The only time a person’s race is relevant is for health care (ex:blacks and sickle cell anemia) and when describing a person’s physical appearance. There is no good reason to be conscious of someone’s race.

Aug 17, 2009 - 10:19 pm 149. rich:

I find it interesting in these forums that there are always a few liberals that comment over and over again. They frequently use the same arguments/talking points and often digress to name calling and crude language/references.

Sometimes I wonder if these are employees of the democratic party. I guess if they can get busloads of “Organizing for America” people and union members to townhall meetings they can get some of these people to monitor conservative web-sites as well.

It is pointless to argue with them since they generally aren’t interested in the truth — they want to create the illusion that there are more liberals out there than there really are — the goal being to put liberals in power.

Most conservatives are too busy working, taking care of their families and making real contributions to the economy and society in general to be full-time political activists.

Aug 17, 2009 - 10:35 pm 150. Martin Knight:

#127 The Shadow

No. Being a black man, I’ve encountered your type far too many times before. You’re obviously a racist. If you were not, you would not have picked such an insensitive screen name.

Just admit it.

Aug 18, 2009 - 12:10 am 151. Robert Eldridge:

What a totally disingenuous and recreational bigoted article? Until any of you walk in the shoes of someone who is different in creed, race, sexual orientation and/or religion then you have no place to spread the rhetoric of such nonsense. People are pissed that black man was elected period and there is no rebuttal you can post to prove me wrong. Yea, Thanks for posting an article to show me how insensitive and divisive people continue to become

Aug 18, 2009 - 12:20 am 152. vivo:

62. Blitzer:

“Umm — WHAT? “Socialist” is a derogatory term? One coined by Conservatives?”

I agree that the word ’socialist’ is not a derogatory word in itself. It becomes derogatory when people use it with the intention of insulting someone else.

You can tease someone by call him ’son of a bitch’, but if you yell it aggressively that’s a different ’son of a bitch!’.

Aug 18, 2009 - 3:36 am 153. Peter the Bubblehead:

116. Frank J. Fleming wrote:
Yeah, I don’t get the trying to debate trolls.

Peter writes: Besides, it’s really unfair to have an intellectual battle with someone who is unarmed.

Aug 18, 2009 - 4:28 am 154. TickedinTupelo:

I’m fascinated that our Bi-Racial President doesn’t represent both sides of himself…he clearly sides with the Black Man. If he had to choose one, and no one said he did, he could logically be just as much a White President as he is a Black President. So he’s definitely “taken sides” instead of being true to his whole self. Why has he rejected his Whiteness????? Why are we even letting him call himself a Black PResident? He’s BI-RACIAL. OUr first Bi-President. I agree with all of the comments about using racism as a red herring. How sad this self-identified (and so politically expedient) Black PResident will, instead of making things better by setting a good example for people, make things worse. He really tipped his hand in the Skippy Gates fiasco.

Aug 18, 2009 - 5:25 am 155. Sue:

A lib came on my blog after I respectfully voiced dissent on Obama’s policies. Finding not a whiff of evidence in well over a hundred posts that I am an ACTUAL racist, he came up with this insightful commentary:

“I believe you’re a CLOSET racist.”

Wow, what mental gymnastics! I’m a racist, but I just don’t KNOW it! But he–being a super-intelligent, chosen lib–sniffed it out in me.

They’re laughably ridiculous.

Aug 18, 2009 - 5:32 am 156. genghis:

MOHO: fyi

Al Sharpton is a racist. Jesse Jackson is a racist. Louis Farrakan is a racist. The Rev. Wright is a racist. Obama-san?……….still undecided.

You are not a racist. You are just flat out dumb. Just another smug little liberal who enjoys playing the role of the morally superior caped crusader. How tiresome. Almost as trite as that other liberal favorite..McCarthyism.

Aug 18, 2009 - 5:44 am 157. rich:

Looks like MoHo’s shift ended and Robert Eldridge is now on the clock.

I’m white. My ancestors fought in the civil war to free the slaves. I’ve never put down people of any color because of their race. I’ve hired more non-whites than whites for jobs where I made the hiring decision. Is it ok if I don’t consider myself a racist even though I disagree with Obama’s socialist agenda? Oooops, I used the new N word. I guess I must be a racist somewhere in the depths of my subconscious….

Aug 18, 2009 - 6:08 am 158. Ray:

The Republican’s in DC will win when they recognize conservatives and libertarians significantly out number liberals. Liberals are irredeemable and can not be negotiated or compromised with. The Republicans in DC need to not compromise or reach across the aisles on any liberal legislation. Keep pointing out their illogical policies, and keep providing the better and simpler alternatives founded in individual liberty. You only lose when you cave in to liberalism and mimic their ways.

Aug 18, 2009 - 6:25 am 159. GED:

Socialist, communist, liberal, fascist, are derogatory words? That’s an idiotic statement. They are ideologies in no way derogatory unless of course you are conservative and someone calls you a socialist…conservatism is antithetical to socialism. Calling BO a liberal and his policies socialistic are nothing more than accurate descriptions of his policies and his world view. Saying he is an elitist, racist, SOB with big ears… now that’s derogatory.

Aug 18, 2009 - 6:31 am 160. Middleman:

I’d sort of believe this article if it wasn’t for the fact that I’ve seen PLENTY of racial bias geared towards Obama and blacks in general since his election. Some of it on here.
Case in point- A certain man named Steven who rants about how whites would live in a virtually crime-free world if it wasn’t for blacks. He’s posted junk like that several times and I’ve always seen people agree with him and never refute him.
Republicans play the race card. They just scratch off ‘black’ write in ‘white’ and throw it back.

Aug 18, 2009 - 6:38 am 161. Anonymous:

I think we just witnessed the meltdown of Moho on this thread.

Aug 18, 2009 - 6:39 am 162. genghis:

Robert: ‘people are pissed that black man elected…?Which people would those be? Anybody that isn’t black? Maybe only 65%? 75%? 98%? You, I suppose have had long conversations with these folks, and are not just running off at the mouth? It is, of course, inconceivable that some might find his methods, goals, and policies abhorrent? To criticize The One is ipso facto an admission of racism? Is that right? Musn’t criticize the black guy cause I haven’t walked in his shoes? That would make him first Affirmative Action President. For the record, though, I don’t own any slaves. Nor did my parents. Nor did their parents. Not one. So I’ll continue to judge people by what they do, and not make excuses. Obama-san’s a failure Robert. The fact that he is black is nothing special and doesn’t give him immunity from criticism. If you believe that it does, then guess who the racsit really is?

Aug 18, 2009 - 6:51 am 163. johnt:

Moho, you still out there? If so give me a nod online, I have more goodies for you.
I read your #109, the usual, boring filth. But I did respond to your ignorant mistake about the South rapidly turning Republican while the Heroic Dems were abandoned. You may also note Martin Knight’s #125. No sensible answer?
In turn all we get is the uncontrolled expression of your moronic rage. You actually think or even suspect that your name calling bothers me? You’re a foil to be played with, that’s all and nothing more.

In any case, if the nurses let you out of your room check in won’t you?

Aug 18, 2009 - 7:28 am 164. Peter the Bubblehead:

151. Robert Eldridge wrote:
People are pissed that black man was elected period and there is no rebuttal you can post to prove me wrong.

Peter writes: Which is just as obvious an example of projection and racism as I have ever seen. “In my mind, people who are against The Won must be racist!” cries Robert, thereby showing his own anti-white slant as he assumes that everyone who is against Obama MUSt therefore be white, right?

Ever occur to you, homey, that perhaps we don’t like Obama because he is an ignorant, inexperienced, leftist who by accident or (more likely) design is tearing apart this country that so many of us actually love and has nothing to do with whether he is black, white (happens to be both, you know), green, orange, purple, or blue with pink polka dots. It’s the man, his ideals, and his policies, not his skin color, dope! I would be ( and was ) just as much against him if he were the same skin color as John ‘the gigilo’ Kerry as long as he’s trying to tear my country apart.

Aug 18, 2009 - 7:28 am 165. Moho:

You people are hilarious. It’s not news to the non-nutbag people who visit here, but if you want to know why people think you’re racists, consider this:

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/doesnt-the-left-get-tired-of-calling-obama-opponents-racists/#comment-154
TickedinTupelo:

I’m fascinated that our Bi-Racial President doesn’t represent both sides of himself…he clearly sides with the Black Man. If he had to choose one, and no one said he did, he could logically be just as much a White President as he is a Black President. So he’s definitely “taken sides” instead of being true to his whole self. Why has he rejected his Whiteness????? Why are we even letting him call himself a Black PResident? He’s BI-RACIAL. OUr first Bi-President. I agree with all of the comments about using racism as a red herring. How sad this self-identified (and so politically expedient) Black PResident will, instead of making things better by setting a good example for people, make things worse. He really tipped his hand in the Skippy Gates fiasco.

I’ve yet to see anyone of you take a stand against any of this kind of crap, and believe me the entire site is littered with it. Again, what you people will never understand is that people call you racist because of the things you say and do–and in this case, don’t do. You’re not fooling anyone.

Aug 18, 2009 - 7:39 am 166. Moho:

Mr. Lucky
“Why do you care about black people?”

Whoa. Not sure what to make of that. First, you don’t know what race I am. Your assumption that I’m not black indicates to me that you don’t expect to encounter a black person here. Second, whatever race I am, I live in a divese community. I also care about Asians and Latinos, and yes, white people [although they are in the minority in my community]. Apparently, its either odd to care about the people who live in your neighborhood, or you can’t imagine living in a neighborhood with anything other than white people.

Aug 18, 2009 - 7:45 am 167. Moho:

Here’s another post that went uncontested:

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/doesnt-the-left-get-tired-of-calling-obama-opponents-racists/comment-page-4/#comment-89
89. Thomas:

@79. Moho:
As of today the USA is not signatory to the “International Criminal Court” – thus your pontification is a moot point.

All these leftist kangaroo organizations you worship dare not touch the STRONG like China, Russia, and Islam because those countries don’t give squat what Fatoumata Dembélé Diarra of Mali, or Sanji Mmasenono Monageng of Botswana think or don’t think. (Real names and people!)

Hey fellow Americans! Do you care what David Ntanda Nsereko of Uganda or his colleague named Erkki Kourula want from you? Only our beloved poster “Moho” is kissing “Fatoumata Dembélé Diarra” lower section because it is Darkie. Ha, ha ha.

Aug 18, 2009 - 7:49 am 168. Moho:

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/doesnt-the-left-get-tired-of-calling-obama-opponents-racists/comment-page-4/#comment-58
58. Tim Mayhugh:

I love to be called a racist. My answer is always, “Yeah, so what? Humans are at the top of food chain. That makes everything else food.” or “Of course I’m a racist. Do you want to let the dogs run the world?” or something similar. It really drives them crazy when you mock them in all seriousness. You just have to do it with a straight face. It will generally get a good laugh from people watching the exchange as well.

I thought this one was especially illustrative of the kind of racism that is rampant in these parts. People who simply believe that nothing they do is racist. “If I want to make a joke that sounds racist, well its certainly not racist, because I say its not”. Yes, everyone is laughing–black, latinos and asians love to be mocked in this way I assure you.

Aug 18, 2009 - 7:52 am 169. Moho:

The confusion in this one seems to outshout the racism, but still interesting to me for its utter absurd ignorance of race. What gets me is that some people are content to live their whole lives this way, never asking people of mixed race what it means to them, how they identify and why? To me, that’s just pathetic. People so hell-bent on escaping the racist label, that they simply live their lives in ignorance.

124. LarryG:

There are those that think I am a racist. Well, it isn’t about race and it isn’t about skin color. It isn’t the outside that counts – it’s the inside. It’s the attitude and behavior. What have we gained for billions of dollars down the rathole? More demands and accusations. I served in the far east (Korea and Viet Nam) while in the Army. I don’t hate those people. Look at how they conduct themselves. How about these other people? Vijay Singh is Fijian and quite dark. Where is all of the adulation? Tiger? It’s assumed from his dark skin he’s black but, alas, he’s mostly asian but you see how all of this goes. Tiger is 1/4 Chinese, 1/4 Thai, 1/4 black, 1/8 Cherokee and 1/8 Dutch (?).So much for racism. It’s about behavior but don’t tell Jesse.”

Mostly Asian? Assumed that he’s black? Oh, brother.

Aug 18, 2009 - 8:00 am 170. Chip:

I have been going back through some family history and I can’t find any evidence in ten generations that my family ‘owned’ anyone, black, white, yellow, green, or any other color. So may I please be excused from the rest of the racism debate?

Aug 18, 2009 - 8:17 am 171. Kevin B:

The Conservative Message:

We see all minorities as AMERICANS who have the God given right
to LIFE, LIBERTY, the Pursuit of HAPPINESS and the ability
to achieve any all things through personal responsibility.

=========================================
The Liberal Message:

We see all minorities as VICTIMS who have the right
to remove God, Destroy LIFE, Establish ENTITLEMENTS
and the ability to call you a RACIST and blame others with
help from 80% of the mainstream media if you disagree with us.

Aug 18, 2009 - 8:34 am 172. Anonymous:

No, I was wrong, the Moho meltdown continues on to today.

Aug 18, 2009 - 9:25 am 173. The Loud Talker:

I wonder these days if it is possible in the eyes of the left to disagree with a black person withOUT being called a racist. I think that’s crap. So, I came up with a phrase that I think sums it up nicely:

“I disagree with Obama because he is 100% Liberal, not because he is 50% Black.”

I’m sure someone will make lots of money from it, but here’s my humble attempt to help fund my conservative radio station: http://bit.ly/1tjlV6

KEEP UP THE GREAT WORK PJTV!!!

Aug 18, 2009 - 9:30 am 174. AThinkingPerson:

Moho… Re #169..”What gets me is that some people are content to live their whole lives this way, never asking people of mixed race what it means to them, how they identify and why? To me, that’s just pathetic.”

That’s what is wrong with you in a nutshell. We’re not avoiding the topic of race. We have MOVED ON and you haven’t. It’s ALL about race with you. Obama is not the President to you. Obama is the BLACK President to you. Who cares if someone is mixed race. I’m not asking them about it because I DON”T CARE what color they are I care WHAT they stand for. It’s easy to see now why you are going off on a tangent. It must infuriate you that we have all evolved past this discussion whereas you are content to continue making skin color an issue. It’s 2009 for God’s sake. Do you think Obama really wants to be remember for his skin color or his policies?

Aug 18, 2009 - 9:39 am 175. Delia:

161. Anonymous:

“I think we just witnessed the meltdown of Moho on this thread.”

A young Priest and an old Priest stat!

Trying to outwit and shout-down people with valid opinions that trump yours over and over? Frustrating!

‘The race card’? Priceless.

You can’t take away the Lefties ‘race card’, that’s all they have left when they have nothing else.

Aug 18, 2009 - 9:52 am 176. Isabelle:

MOHO:

You seem to be awfully fixated on race. Did yo have a difficult early childhood? The intensity of your anger suggests that you suffered from eneuresis for many years. The overwhelming shame associated with that condition, especially when it persists into the early teens often results in problems later in life. Is it still a problem? Sometimes talking it out helps to resolve the problem.

Aug 18, 2009 - 10:00 am 177. rich:

MoHo — you are the jockstrap to our dangling conscience. I for one am going to turn from my racially insensitive ways thanks to you. Thank you.

Aug 18, 2009 - 10:10 am 178. johnt:

moho, I just wanted to remind you of an exchange we had on the Fatty Sotomayor nomination.
You do recall your comment about when”people of color” run the country, and what a good thing that will be and how white people will be, say, less happy. You remember how I called you on your give away of the virulent racism that defines you, yes?

And here you are going on about the racism of others, schizophrenia is a terrible thing. Come on moho, the nurses are looking for you, time for your medication and your nap.
Considering the above truly you have spewed enough vomit on this thread.
See you pal.

Aug 18, 2009 - 10:16 am 179. Isabelle:

It serves no good purpose to attack Mr. MoHo. Childhood traumas can be very debillitating. Many, many young men have overcome the shame of bedwetting. As a community we should empathize with his problems and offer help. It takes a village. And MoHo appears to be the village idiot.

Aug 18, 2009 - 12:02 pm 180. jodetoad:

How about freckled people? Nobody asks me how I identify, nobody creates any affirmative programs for my benefit, nobody worries about offending me. But there are people who don’t like freckles, and even people who assume I am (gasp) a hillbilly! It is so painful! I’m relegated to the shadows! Freckled-Americans unite!

Aug 18, 2009 - 1:13 pm 181. Moho:

Thnkingperson…god you’re stupid:

“Who cares if someone is mixed race.”

Um…I excerpted the comment by someone who cares, his name is Larry G, and this is what he said.

124. LarryG:
How about these other people? Vijay Singh is Fijian and quite dark. Where is all of the adulation? Tiger? It’s assumed from his dark skin he’s black but, alas, he’s mostly asian but you see how all of this goes. Tiger is 1/4 Chinese, 1/4 Thai, 1/4 black, 1/8 Cherokee and 1/8 Dutch (?).So much for racism. It’s about behavior but don’t tell Jesse.”

Apparently looking beyond race is making sure about whether someone’s black or not.

Aug 18, 2009 - 1:24 pm 182. johnt:

Given the fantasies you people regularly engage in, I doubt whether any of that is true:

moho, I just wanted to remind you of an exchange we had on the Fatty Sotomayor nomination.
You do recall your comment about when”people of color” run the country, and what a good thing that will be and how white people will be, say, less happy. You remember how I called you on your give away of the virulent racism that defines you, yes?

I’m always suspicious when people comment on the looks of other people from behind the anonymity of the internet. It generally makes me think that its they who suffer from the issue in question.

Aug 18, 2009 - 1:28 pm 183. Moho:

Lol…Isabelle…

MOHO:

You seem to be awfully fixated on race. Did yo have a difficult early childhood? The intensity of your anger suggests that you suffered from eneuresis for many years. The overwhelming shame associated with that condition, especially when it persists into the early teens often results in problems later in life. Is it still a problem? Sometimes talking it out helps to resolve the problem.

You’re quite the expert on bedwetting. I don’t know anyone who has this level of knowledge of the malady.

Aug 18, 2009 - 1:30 pm 184. AThinkingPerson:

Again Moho…. Why the odd preoccupation with race? Just for the record….I could care less what race or species you are. Never asked, never will.

I guess not caring makes me stupid? I’d much rather be stupid than someone who cannot see past someone’s skin color. What does that make you?

Aug 18, 2009 - 2:12 pm 185. Margo:

MoHo:

As a professional, I will tell you that Isabelle is quite correct. I understand that you are sensitive about this issue, but you needn’t be. It isa common problem and help is available. The worst thing that you can do is to become defensive, deny the problem exists, and lash out. That might provide some immediate relief, bug the pain will coninue.

Aug 18, 2009 - 2:23 pm 186. Angel:

I do not understand why MoHo’s sexuality is being challenged. The only thing that matters is his intellect. Whether or not he wets his bed is irrevelant.

Aug 18, 2009 - 2:30 pm 187. Rudolpho:

MOHO. Just to let you know that if you need me, I am available.

Aug 18, 2009 - 2:41 pm 188. Karl:

MOHO:

Listen, you are not alone. There are a lot of us out there with the same problem. Successful professionals. Tenured academics. Very successful business execs. If you would log ongt imdamp.org, you would find a supportive community.

Aug 18, 2009 - 2:48 pm 189. Mr Lucky:

166. Moho. “Second, whatever race I am, I live in a divese community.”

Same here. It’s called the Universe.

Aug 18, 2009 - 3:12 pm 190. Mistah Magoo:

This is ridiculous. You have an article exclusively about race in which you’ve basically told the only other non-white person posting here [as far as I can see] that he’s focused on race. That’s not only racist, its stupid.

By the way, I don’t know anyone who isn’t racist. More importantly, I don’t have any friends that I respect who don’t admit that they’re racists. No matter what’s going on today, we live in a country that was founded on racism. There’s absolutely no way to dispute that, and we live in a society that inherited that outlook come rain or shine; we’re all racists, no matter what race we are. When I hear someone claiming they’re not racist, I usually think they’re protesting too much, and that generally they’re hiding something. Usually, they don’t want to think about what racism is, because they are so invested in a racist world-view that thinking about changing fills them with dread.

Aug 18, 2009 - 4:42 pm 191. Galigher:

There is one defense. Someone says Man you a Racist ! I simply reply , Who are you to call me a racist ? Did all the people of color in the world appoint you to speak for them ? Then who are you to call me a racist !

Aug 18, 2009 - 5:21 pm 192. vivo:

159. GED:

“Socialist, communist, liberal, fascist, are derogatory words?”

You know this well, it’s not WHAT you say, it’s HOW you say it.

171. Kevin B:

The Conservative Message . . .

The Liberal Message . . .

The Independent Message:
We don’t see any minorities, everybody is equal.
There is separation of Church & State.
The ability to achieve any of all things is dependent upon your health, education and perseverance.

180. jodetoad:

“Freckled-Americans unite!”

It’s about time!

* * *

Everybody:

I said it before, everybody is a racist, you can’t avoid it, it’s imbedded in your skin color.

Now, racial discrimination is just another thing.

Maybe we need an English Royal Academy . . .

Aug 18, 2009 - 8:45 pm 193. paul_unalaska:

moho, calling an entire group of people ‘racists’ for an ignoramus or 2 commenter is childish to the nth degree.

If this be the case, every Democratic Senator is racist. Ala John Kerry:

‘John Kerry says bluntly that Barack Obama has the potential to “bridge the divide in religious extremism” because he is black….’

Though I love this diddy which Frank J. Fleming nails to a tee (this is further discussion with John Kerry): “And everybody still knows that issues of skin and discrimination still exist.”

This ‘exists’ because a moronic bureaucrat such as Kerry keeps the cut, wound infected with dribble such as that! Though it’s good for those pesky Government subsidence dependents. i.e. Democratic votes.

Victim hood is a tactic favorite. It’s what keeps the ACLU, La Raza, the Black Caucus, NAACP, Nation of Islam, PRLDEF et al. cash. Yours and mine EARNED money. The Government deems it appropriate to give these groups a lot of your ching, which in turn these special interest (if these groups aren’t racist I don’t know what is..) groups trickle it out to those in need of it, knowingly, and those who put into this very system are still catcalled ‘racists.’

As long as empathy is the law of the land, people will eat up the term ‘Racism.’ Even when it isn’t valid or warranted so.

It seems to be a knee jerk response for many people who can’t or won’t better their situation.

Placating blame is easier for some than defeating and owning it..

Aug 18, 2009 - 8:59 pm 194. Delia:

190. Mistah Magoo,

MoHO is a brain-washed Libtard who is as white as snow.

Trust.

Aug 18, 2009 - 9:18 pm 195. Jim Baker:

Please don’t feed the troll. I am tired of reading the resulting diatribes.

Aug 19, 2009 - 8:14 am 196. pappy:

racism will never die as long as people are continually accused of being racist. you can’t call a spade a spade without someone taking it,(as the politians claim), out of context. surley racism spans far more than pigmentation, it can be because someone looks like peloosi or has some other oddities about them that a person may find humorous or disgusting or cool. how do we legislate that?

Aug 19, 2009 - 10:59 am 197. deguello:

They can’t;the libtards have only three “arguments”:1 you are a fascist/nazi!,2 It’s Bush’s fault!,and 3 You are a racist!( good one coming from turds who support reverse discrimination. If they abandoned the racist mantra,they’d lose 1/3 of their arguments,and become critically disoriented.It’s taken their limited brains years to memorize this rant;there’s no intelectual energy left in their drug addled brains to memorize a new one in their lifetimes.

Aug 19, 2009 - 2:52 pm 198. deguello:

The only real racism left in the US,is government and business-sanctioned discrimination aimed at better-qualified whites and asians.Until this is smashed, the country can fairly be described as “racist”.

Aug 20, 2009 - 6:33 am 199. deguello:

#34 BIBIO 44: BIBIO,dear,it’s not necessary in PJM,to post your IQ after your handle;PJM bloggers can can easily deduce your mental level by reading your posts.

Aug 20, 2009 - 6:38 am 200. deguello:

PAUL,DELIA,KARL,ISABELLE,RE:MOHO:Obama and the dems, ARE racists, promoters of antiwhite,antiasian reverse racism.Obama spent his life lickspittling and conning the white liberal massa,to make sure he got onto the affirmative action gravy train.How else do you think that this manifest cretin ,and stumbling boob got into Yale?I suspect that you are equally limited, and that some white libtard helps write your posts,as they write material for Obama’s teleprompter .Nice parallel here,MOHO,Obama is the sock puppet of the US corporate left at the national level, you are its lackey on the web,trying to demoralize us with your race obsessed leftist drivel.How does it feel to be so easily manipulated?

Aug 20, 2009 - 6:57 am 201. texexpatriate:

I loved paragraph six. That says it all. One has to be pretty dumb to be a Democrat. As to racism, I’m seventy-two years old and have observed a steady decline in racism throughout my life. Fifty years ago plenty of people expressed their race prejudices. Today few do.

Aug 20, 2009 - 7:41 am 202. Moho:

This is really amazing:

Obama spent his life lickspittling and conning the white liberal massa,to make sure he got onto the affirmative action gravy train.How else do you think that this manifest cretin ,and stumbling boob got into Yale?
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/doesnt-the-left-get-tired-of-calling-obama-opponents-racists/#comment-200

You’re really going to pretend that its everyone but you all who are racists, when this comment floats comfortably in this bowl without one contrary remark?
Please. You people are so obvious, it almost makes me feel sorry for you.

Aug 20, 2009 - 8:56 pm 203. deguello:

202 MOJON:OOH ,BOO HOO,BOO HOO,HELP ME SOMEONE;FREE SPEECH HURTS SOO MUCH!PLEASE, SOMEONE,STOP IT!OR I’LL CALL YOU A RACIST! Stop trying to suppress relevant observations,by calling them racist.Are you denying that Obama hasn’t benefited from reverse racism?Your race slander/libel trope,has become risible through absurd overuse.Refute my point MOJON!Do you think that a white kid with Obama’s pathetic CV could ever get into Yale?Tell the white libtard ghostwriting your little trolleries(your analog of Obama’s teleprompter)that he needs to do better.Try writing them yourself.Oh, I forgot,you are probably a victim of libtard-run government schools ,and instead of teaching you how to think and write, they gave you the meretricious charity of affirmative action,instead,while stoking your race obsession.?You know it’s really sad, when you are reduced to substituting obsolete libels,for reasoned arguments.It’s sad,but that is what happens when you allow libtards to indoctrinate you.As to Obama,his numerous public inadequacies will continue to go from absurd to embarrassing;He’s been reduced to channeling God:REALLY AMAZING, God! What a joke!

Aug 21, 2009 - 11:21 am 204. deguello:

#34 BIBIO44: “Better a troll than a ahole”First, you tell us your iQ(44),now you reveal your life’s ambition,wait,don’t tell me: Your’re a liberal! Am I right?

Aug 21, 2009 - 11:49 am 205. deguello:

MOHO#202 Floats comfortably in the bowl?I see you’re an expert on water closet aquatics! I knew that when I renamed you MOJON (Spanish for turd) I was on to something!

Aug 24, 2009 - 2:59 pm 206. bun:

i think most hard workin blacks are beyond this racist crap. they love America and work toward gthe American dream, in spite of affirmative action, welfare, and all the hand outs that are really meant to take away their pride. We’ve come a long way in spite of government, certainly not because of it. I love and trust in God and the American people, no matter the color. Together we will defeat the socialism/facsism/marxism/communism that is trying to take a hold of our country. United, we can and will succeed!

Sep 16, 2009 - 7:02 am