This how I started it:
Why do liberals always turn funerals into political pep rallies. My guess is that they can read the DNC talking points without the fear of anyone debating them. What are you guys going to do next kill Howard Dean to get another pep rally / funeral. By the way, if Howard Dean plans to run again, I would be happy to donate my time. Dean 08!!!!
Office Liberal (OL):
lol - I KNEW you were going to bring this up! Actually, I like Dean. At least he vents and then lets it go instead of starting a quagmire farm somewhere in the Middle East. Besides, he's as hawkish as half the Republicans in Congress. Seems like to me the conservatives could settle on him about as easily as the Dems could settle on McCain.
As for Correta's funeral yesterday, personally I don't know which was more crass: King George having the audacity to show his face, or the Dems going off on him and his policies. Really, our prez has trampled civil rights in the name of a greater police state, so to show up at the funeral of a civil rights icon was an amazing display of hypocrisy and political opportunity. I think Correta would've politely declined his attendance had she anticipated the reaction to her passing.
Why should this epitome of white privileged conservatism speak at the funeral of a black civil rights leader? My oh my, George just doesn't get it sometimes. Dubya is the very thing that Correta and her husband stood against! Unfortunately, the Dems also saw his participation as an opportunity to take some shots at his boneheaded policies, one they couldn't resist when self-control would've been the better judgement. But then King George has done anything but create positive bipartisanship in this country, so why should the Dems cut him any slack?
So the question is, who is more insensitive - the tacky Dems for turning a funeral into a political thump fest, or the rich white boy prez for using his position of power to speak at a gathering that otherwise didn't want or need him?
Hmmmm . . . On a side note though, the cultural niceties that surround funerals have changed over the last 20 years. More and more funerals are becoming platforms for personal and political agendas. I think you're going to see more of this, not less of it.
I don't expect the Dems to cut him any slack, he doesn't need it. The Dems should have respected Corretta and made the funeral a tribute to her life and not a bunch half cocked DNC mouth pieces taking pot shots at the President who was gracious enough to ignore their juvenile tactics.
As far as civil rights violations go, that is mainly something done by Dems. eg Wire tapping of MLK by JFK, hmmm Carter forget to mention it was his party that did that, Japanese Internment by FDR, The warrantless search of Aldrich Ames' home by Clinton.
So it seems to me that you conveniently forget civil rights violations when someone has a "D" after there name but make a judgement before all the facts are fully investigated if they have an "R" after your name.
The NSA spying with Bush is not yet concluded but you have judged him as guilty, remember "Innocent until proven guilty". If Bush was insensitive for showing up so was Clinton who is just as white and just as rich, except Clinton didn't have any blacks in high ranking positions in his administration unlike Bush.
hehe - ask any black congregation/delegation who'd they rather sit with, or who actually understands black culture, Clinton or Bush?
And yes, congrats to King George for elevating a black conservative mouthpiece of his own to a cabinet post. However, Dave Chappelle had it right when during his Race Draft skit, the white race drafted Condoleeza Rice. ;-) Of course there was Colin Powell, but he left with a "harrumph!" after getting back-stabbed one too many times by Big Dick Chaney and the CIA over "Iraqi Intelligence" (lol - what a euphemism!). Sorry, he doesn't count.
Otherwise, thanks for the history lesson. Sorry to see "No knock Nixon" didn't make the list of notable presidents who trashed civil rights in the name of whatever excuse was handy. But it was Bush speaking at the funeral yesterday, not Kennedy, not LBJ, nor even Nixon. You may see Bush's gesture as gracious, but only if you ignore black attitudes about him.
To say he is wildly unpopular among black voters is an understatement, bud. Again, to show up at a funeral for a person who stood against many of things George continues to pursue, well, that IS tacky! It hardly matters if he says nice things and tosses off a good speech when his cronies back at the White House continue to cut domestic health and education programs that would otherwise positively impact black communities.
Really, the man has only reinforced the racial divide since he's been in office. What else should he have expected? The whole Katrina thing is a perfect example of his pervasive ignorance. It doesn't matter whether you agree or not if FEMA's total incompetence was racially motivated. Bush doesn't understand what would cause black leaders to question FEMA like that, despite the fact that King Dubya stuffed FEMA with his political hacks. Naturally they would tie FEMA's performance to his opinion of them, Laura's indignation notwithstanding. And yes, she's clueless, too.
To put it as bluntly as possible, Bush represents the worst of our white male conservative culture. He sees the entire world through the eyes of White America, which ignores/belittles/or dismisses only 9/10ths of the remaining world population, not to mention minority communities here at home. He thinks everyone should adopt white (conservative) American values because they are the best - and that is an inherently racist attitude.
So here's a tip: If you're a powerful conservative white guy who ignores core black issues like civil rights except when you see a photo op - maybe you should resist the temptation and just stay away. But if you insist on coming to the funeral because nobody can tell the US president "no, please don't come," then take your beating like a real Texas Ranger, feel good about your effort to recognize this woman, and quit taking focus off the funeral and placing it on your bruised and fragile ego. Bah!
Most analysts will tell you that the increase in the Black vote that Bush gained in the 04 election was a key to his win. Also, More and More blacks are choosing to sit with him everyday. Black home ownership is up Black unemployment is down, things are good. I figured playing the race card on you would confuse you, but until you guys get rid of all your Klan members and stop having white men fill all the top level administration positions no one will take you seriously on the race issue. Anyway, Clinton's Economic Espionage Act of 1996, this allowed Clinton to spy on ,within the U.S. without a warrant,communications between American Citizens and foreign companies to help line his buddies pockets by being able to undercut the a foreign company while biding for contracts. Talk about embarrassing us to the rest of the world, this is worse than a no bid contract!!!! Another thought about racism, Liberals objected to Janis Rogers Brown (African American), Alberto Gonzales (Mexican American), Samuel Alito (Catholic), But Harriet Meyers (White) you had no problem with, just something to think about. here's the link to the article about the economic espionage
Nixon's actions were wrong and he deserved to be impeached that was domestic spying on your political opponents. JFK I believe did this with good intentions and I don't believe that he should have been impeached, I doubt that any Liberal will give Bush the same consideration. FDR should have been impeached for putting all the Japanese/American citizens in internment camps. I would not agree with the Internment of any American Citizen at all.
As for who a Black would rather sit with I don't care but I do know that if you look at history a Democrat and not a Republican is more likely to violate your civil rights. Secondly, Republicans are the Party of Lincoln, the party that passed the civil rights act, despite filibusters by Al Gores father and Robert "KKK" Bryd. So you can play the race card all you like but if you look at the facts it just doesn't jive.
This is why Liberals control not one part of our government, you call Bush a racist but have a known KKK member in your party. That's the biggest problem now for liberals, they can't change history or delete all their sound bytes, although Kerry did a really good job of buying up all the copies of "A Winter Soldier".
Why is it when black person succeeds liberals claim that they are a mouth piece or an Oreo, basically stating that it wasn't there abilities that got them there. It seems to be a racist attitude. So do you claim that Codi Rice and Collin Powell weren't qualified and were just given their jobs because they are black?
" I doubt that any Liberal will give Bush the same consideration. "
Now now, even if Georgie Boy has violated the law (which sounds more plausible than not), I'm not in the mood to roll out the impeachment wagon anytime soon - as long as he submits the wire tap request to the review of the courts as intended by the Constitution and Congressional law. Impeachment should only be used when the president intentionally broke the law for personal gain, like Nixon checking out the opposition for an election. This is not the time for Dems to pursue revenge and cumuppance through the tool of impeachment. A reprimand and promise to stop unauthorized domestic spying would be enough (in my book).
You're right about FDR. The whole Japanese internment things is nothing but a huge racist mark on our country that warrants about a paragraph in most high school text books. Guess it's not the rah rah Go Team USA we want our kids to accept? But don't think it was just FDR the Democrats that went along - the entire country did at that time. Republicans and Democrats. Everyone was on the wrong side of that equation.
Actually I think Colin was terrific at his job, but the administration totally hosed him in building its fictional case for an Iraqi invasion. Rumsfield and all the neocon warmongers at the Pentagon totally undercut his effectiveness, which left Powell no choice but to leave. I'd vote for him in a second if he actually ran for president.
As far as Condoleeza goes, I think she's smarter than her boss (hell, I'm smarter than her boss), and certainly has paid her dues to assume the position she has. So yeah, I think she's adequately qualified. I don't think she's seen by other countries as anything but George's mouthpiece, whereas Powell actually enjoyed the respect of his peers. But Oreo? Chappelle wasn't calling her Oreo, just flat out white in her outlook and attitude because she enjoys more popularity among whites than blacks. Her conservative attitudes scare him, and they scare me, too. Anybody who can hang with Chaney and Rumsfield has one helluva stiff back to put up with those curmudgeons. That alone raises my eyebrow - the ol' "takes one to know one" angle.
"Why is it when any black person succeeds liberals claim that they are a mouth piece or an Oreo, basically stating that it wasn't there abilities that got them there?"
Uhm, what's funny is that Republicans point to their token minority representation like the doors to the Club House have been thrown wide open, which is hardly the case. Typical over generalization that the participation of one token black person equals the entire black community's acceptance and support. Dems don't question the abilities of people like Rice, Powell, and Clarence Thomas. They just don't trust their motives. Big difference.
Oh, of course you're correct about the Party of Lincoln stuff, but this ain't your great granddaddy's Republican party in anything but name. On second thought, given all the influence pedalling scandals that surrounded the Radical Republicans back then (Care to own up to President Grant?), maybe some things are still the same. :-)
You call them token minorities I just think that they were the best person for the job. I think that we would both agree on the impeachment issue, I think that what Clinton did with Aldrich Ames was for the good of all Americans. I don't necessarily know about the Economic Espionage Program, I don't know all the details involved. In the case of FDR, you are right that the majority of the country was in favor of that but it doesn't justify it. The majority of the country is in favor of banning partial birth abortion but it was deemed unconstitutional, the "Mob Rules" mentality shouldn't violate any persons rights. I happen to disagree with the courts decision on Partial Birth abortion, but that is a different topic.
As far as being smarter than the President, he does have a history degree from Yale and an MBA from Harvard. If you would judge a person by the way they look and talk you would think that Steven Hawkins was the dumbest person in the world and it is quite the opposite.
lol - but I didn't have a choice to vote for Steven Hawkins or I would have. I've even read (one) of his book on Black Holes. Now that's scary stuff!
As far as Bush's education goes, well, he ain't puttin' it to much use, is he? A degree doesn't equate to practical intelligence. Or maybe it was all that pot and coke he did while in college that baked him a little too hard one night?
Regardless, I could still kick that punk in a game of Trivial Pursuit! Now that's a real IQ test. :-D
Oh my, Jesse Helms and Republicans have played the race card dating back to JFK's time (my memory doesn't go back any further). The are masters of turning "white fear" into white votes, and now the fear game has moved onto the international stage with Osama and the rest of the Arab world. Now it's the "terrorists" and "code yellow" alerts that scare white citizens into voting for guys with the imagination of Homer Simpson who are quick to bomb other countries and cultures in the name of self-preservation. Republican have fiddled with the race card for a long time. Really now . . . So Clinton did that eh(Economic Espionage)? Man I bet the Republicans are kicking themselves for not thinking of that first. But then Halliburton has direct access to the Pentagon and its budget. No need for spying and trickery. Just straight up corruption and yes, unabashed influence.Look, all those names you mentioned at the end of your response are more conservative than you. Sheez! Except Meyers, and the Dems let that one go because it was fun watching Republicans eat their own for once - and to come to grips with the goofball they put into office. Dems were quiet because they were biting their collective tongues to keep from laughing. One thing I will say about race and votes is that the Dems must stop taking black votes for granted or else they will lose them. But don't think they're going to vote for Republicans in that case, lol. They just won't vote, or will toss them to 3rd party candidates. The current Republican party will never make headway into the black community with their conservative white agenda. Republicans don't serve the interest of minority communities in this country, no matter how many conservatives of color they appoint. Tell you what - appoint Jesse Jackson as Ed secretary, or Louis Farakahn as the head of HUD, and then I'll be impressed.
Well we tried to get both Jesse Jackson and Louis Farakahn but they were both busy. Jesse had a full calendar of submitting DNA samples to track down his Illegitimate children and extorting Corporate America with threats of a black boycott on their products. Louis is still waiting on the mothership and trying to figure out how President Bush bombed the levies in New Orleans. So putting a con artist and a lunatic in charge of something would impress you, that explains how Howard Dean became the DNC Chairman. As far as the white fear and guys like me with the imagination of Homer Simpson, I am pretty sure that the 9/11 attacks weren't in my imagination. In reference to President Bush's education, are you saying that most people that receive degrees from Harvard and Yale aren't very bright, I think you might in a minority there. No response from the Liberal
This how I started it: