David Frum, who should actually be the face of the Republican Party is troubled by the way the radical wing of the GOP has reacted to Michael Steele:
"During an appearance on "Meet the Press" Sunday, Frum, who served as an adviser to President Bush, was asked whether Steele's view on abortion -- as exhibited during a GQ interview published this week -- was acceptable under the tent of the GOP.
"It should represent a view within the Republican Party," he replied. "It should be permissible to say such a thing. I speak as a Republican: we need Michael Steele. He's exciting. He's warm. He has a marvelous TV presence. That's the face that our party should be presenting to the country and we need to support him. And the very fact that he is opening up, talking to constituencies that need to be reached -- these are valuable and fresh things. And I'm sick about the kind of level of attack he's taking. Because we need him."
Later in the program, Frum argued that Steele's appeal was far more than just racial or political superficiality."
The radical wing of the Republican Party continues to believe in their own myth--that Limbaugh represents mainstream America. He clearly does not. He has VERY HIGH disapproval ratings and is demonstrably unpopular with a majority of Americans. This majority is tired of his bigoted rants and has turned away from his extremism.
The other darling of the radical GOPers is A. Coulter, whose popularity is strong with the base, but who has little support for her clownish blatherings elsewhere. Her book sales have tanked. The trash that she tries to pass off as reading material just isn't selling like it used to.
"According to Portfolio Magazine, just over 100,000 copies of the book ["Guilty"] have sold during its two months on the market. While that number far surpasses most politically themed books, its sales to date rank far below those of other Coulter polemics.
Portfolio reports 2006's "Godless: The Church of Liberalism," sold 279,100 copies in hardcover, 2003's "Treason: Liberal Treachery from the Cold War to the War on Terror," sold 396,600 hardcover copies, and 2002's "Slander: Liberal Lies About the American Right," sold 333,100 copies and an additional 108,300 in paperback."
America has reached its saturation point with radical demagogues and is saying NO! to their divisive, cranky vitriol.
That the radical right of the GOP continues to ignore this fact only ensures that they will continue to be seen as a regional party of mostly old white guys--Rush's core constituents.
The GOP will never win an election with only 26% of the American people voting for them.
63 comments:
I've moved this comment from the post below to here because it deals more with what is in this post than the one about a song:
It is from a commenter who calls herself Beth. She has a blog, but only allows registered commenters to read it, so I do not have the opportunity to go to her blog and comment as she has to come here and vent her frustrations. Here is her comment in its entirety:
I've been reading your "NOTABLE QUOTES FROM THE HEAD OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY" on the top of your blog. And you know what!
I'm so damn sick of you and your bitching about Rush and white's that offend YOU.
I'm sick and tired of you expecting everyone to pander to you and your PC crowd.
I am damn sick and tired of biting my tongue, forced into saying stupid these “new” terms every year like African American, etc, and this latest dumb one "Progressive" I can't stand more than any of them ......And now the "Undocumented Worker" phrase!! You people are fricking illegal’s and that's that, and that's what I'm calling you, and if you don't like it head for the border and back to whence you came from and get back in line like my family had to do to come to this once great country and city that's now a third world hell-hole. I've had it with crap as you can tell and I'm not playing along anymore!
And if you don't like that all you PC freaks out there in Barney Franks little world, than you all go screw yourselves and the damn donkey's you rode in on ..........
From now on I'm gonna do whatever I can to offend as many liberal do gooders as I can, starting with this damn ridiculous story below about a young kid who wanted to do more than anything a skit about his hero, who happens to be Barack Obama as misguided as that is, that's this child's little wish. And on the other hand here we have his school that won't let the little white Romanian kid wear a frickin mask of the Affirmative Action president.
A man who (while on the subject of schooling) got everything he ever achieved in this land and life handed to him on a silver platter from misguided and unfair affirmative action laws, paid for by the white guilt government at our mother luvin' expense (by the way as no one paid off my hundred thousand dollar education, first and foremost the damn government, mostly because I'm white.)
So why can't little Johnny wear the Obama mask in his little skit that he himself wrote and choreographed, too young and innocent to even have a racist bone in his body until the dumb PC lib adults chime in that is....?
Because his wearing this rubber Obama mask who the Halfrican himself wore on SNL MIGHT just offend someone, not that it has, or not that it did, but that it just might and most likely will offend some black child, and some little pansy white kid, and any other folks they can throw in there while they're at it.
I'm sure if the mask were of Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan or better yet George Bush the verdict would be all systems go, say whatever and do whatever the hell you want little boy, mock away.....
So you're telling me that wearing a mask of the Half White Obama is offensive to black people? I think first of all that 99% of them would say that that's bull, and they would not be offended by it, unless of coarse there was some money in it for them or a day off of work. But because of reverse racists like Al Sharpton and Jesse The bandit Jackson, the entire human race has to stop and bite their tongues before they offend these two pieces of human waste?
Well I say the hell with them, the hell with this school and it's PC "so called" leaders who will suppress the free speech of a white kid just to appease a few potential black whiners out there.
It's high time to get over slavery and all this other so called offensive crap associated with it and everything else these damn do gooders pick for their "hate White America" project of the week. These people today are somehow ridiculously more offended and opportunistic about the short period of slavery in this country than the poor people that had to live through the most offensive parts of slavery ever were, EVER..
What the hell is that about?
Money, opportunity and free shit in the form of reparations..... that's what it's all about, just like Obama has gotten all his life pulling race cards left and right like Houdini doing card tricks.
The country is only 230 years old and slavery was during a very small but certainly painful and most regrettable period, a time of which we're all sorry ever took place but sadly did, where slavery still takes place all over the world today all around us as they quibble and bitch, and yet we don't hear a peep about crap like this slavery story from a week ago....., and yet the USA is the worst place on the planet all for that short and regrettable period of time in the grand time scheme of world history. A period of which by the way no one living on this earth today had anything to do with. Get over it already! We all have bad things happen to us in our past. And it WAS the past so it’s high time to let it go.
Neither I or anyone else alive today had nothing to do with slavery in America or elsewhere, and I'm damn sick and tired of sucking up to the people that are offended by every little thing and every little stick and stone, period. And so to you opportunistic and think skinned people out there this fine morning I again say screw it, your not neutering me anymore, that's for damn sure.
Now let the frickin little innocent kid wear his little Obama mask and let's move on to bigger fish to fry, like Obama and his minions stealing our country and it's treasure right from under our feet while we all whine and quibble over rubber masks and monkey cartoons in newspapers..
Boy have times changed in a few short months, when the rubber masks of Bush and Nixon were the best sellers and monkey cartoons in the newspapers daily.
March 16, 2009 8:35 AM
Beth needs to try decaf next time.
Beth wrote: "I've been reading your "NOTABLE QUOTES FROM THE HEAD OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY" on the top of your blog. And you know what! I'm so damn sick of you and your bitching about Rush and white's that offend YOU."
Actually, Beth, you should be offended by Rush's words. Those are HIS racist remarks, not mine, and you seem awfully upset by the fact that I have given his racism prominence on my blog. Would you prefer that we keep it hidden?
Also, your reference to "..bitching about Rush and white's that offend YOU." Shouldn't you be offended by his racism as well? If not, why not? And please give me evidence of other "whites" who I've said offended me. What are you talking about? Why do you bring race into your rant?
Exposing Rush's racism is not expecting people to behave in a PC manner, Beth. You seem to have difficulty understanding the difference.
And our African-American citizens have asked to be referred to as African-Americans, and that should be respected. I didn't give them that term. Why do you have a problem with it? Should you or anyone other than African-Americans decide how they should refer to themselves?
And you don't like "undocumented workers?" Really. Don't you have more important things to be angry over than what people are called?
Your rage at the story about the child and the mask is misdirected here. Why don't you write a letter to wherever this silliness occured and tell the people involved how irate you are. I had nothing to do with it, nor had I heard of this nonsense.
You seem to carry a lot of rage, anger, and fear in you.
That also appears to be a disease that infects the radical wing of the GOP.
Too bad. People do stupid things when they're under the influence of anger, fear and misinformation.
BTW: I allow you to come here and rant and fill up my comment section with your irrational cri de coeur, but I do not have the privilege of responding in kind on your blog.
What are you afraid of?
Shaw Kenawe said..."BTW: I allow you to come here and rant and fill up my comment section with your irrational cri de coeur, but I do not have the privilege of responding in kind on your blog.
What are you afraid of?"
YA MEAN LIKE Lynne
@beth: "....bitching about Rush and white's that offend YOU.........Barney Franks little world..."
One mistake with an apostrophe is a typo. More than one, and it looks to me like you need to learn how to use them.
@beth:"Obama mask who the Halfrican himself"
Hafrican? I made a big deal elsewhere over someone digging at Jindal for his race. I think that this "hafrican" racist stuff is at least as bad. Hint: Beth.... surely it is possible to talk about President Obama and to criticize his policies without bashing him for this ethnic heritage/race???
@shaw: "And our African-American citizens have asked to be referred to as African-Americans"
I use that term more than otherwise, and when I don't use it I use Black. I never use Afro-American, which refers to a haircut and probably had the shortest life of any of the terms.
@beth: "misguided and unfair affirmative action laws"
I sure agree with Beth on that. No policy discriminating against people on the basis of skin color should be supported.
Beth makes a very good point in he comment...when she said the there is a “new” term every year that the blacks want to be called. Like African American, or Black, you can't dare and use the term negro anymore.
The word negro, now considered by many as archaic and offensive, is used intentionally to suggest that the archetype is a racist throwback, an update of the “Sambo” and “savage other” stereotypes. Spike Lee popularized the term, deriding the archetype of the “super-duper magical negro”
Good comment Beth
Um. I'd let Shaw (and the rest of you) on my blog IF I HAD ONE.
LMAO,
Lynne already gave you a rebuttal on your remark about her non-existent blog.
Beth hosts a blog where I cannot comment.
Lynne doesn't have a blog.
Get the diff?
Good.
American Power,
Why do you or why does anyone care what a group of people wish to be called? Or how many times a term is changed. Normally, a civilized person uses a term that a group wishes to be called and leaves it at that--unless there's some underlying prejudice that causes a person to dislike anything a member of a particular group does for him or herself.
BTW, there isn't a new term EVERY YEAR either for our African-American citizens. Y'all have a real hang-up on names. Look into the reason for your anger.
WhitePower ahem... AmericanPower: "when she said the there is a “new” term every year that the blacks want to be called"
That would mean 9 or 10 of these terms in this decade alone. Do you care to list these, and the year in which they rose and fell? You can't: you were blowing smoke.
Check this page for the reality. The term has been current for the past 20 years. That's one term. Just one. Not 20. not one every year.
(I know that "people of color" is used sometimes. I avoid this, because (1) all people have color and (2) it is just another way of saying "colored people" which I don't use either unless quoting something)
"people of color"...Another beauty!
"People of color" is an acceptable term and not at all insulting.
"Although the term citizens of color was used by Martin Luther King, Jr. in 1963, and other uses date to as early as 1818, people of color did not gain prominence for many years. Influenced by radical theorists like Frantz Fanon, racial justice activists in the U.S. began to use the term people of color in the late 1970s, and the use spread such that it was in widespread circulation by the early 1990s. Both anti-racist activists and academics sought to move understandings of race beyond the black-white binary then prevalent."
AmericanPower:
Your true colors are quite evident.
American Power wrote:
"people of color"...Another beauty!
You and Beth must have a really tough time living in the 21st century.
Can't wait to see the usual suspects getting their race baiter acts all polished up today to attack this German company who hasn't figured out the racial nuances and crap we deal with all the time here now in America.
Making sure we don't offend the new face of Black America, the half white president who judging by all the uproar so far is blacker than coal and the most African American in the African American community, and is forbidden to mocked or ridiculed in any way whatsoever as that then is an affront on ALL Black America. Which we can all be sure they're now figuring out some way in the White House in name only to silence any satire directed at the One as we speak be sure as they're already hard at work silencing dissent on the radio airwaves as we know.
So here we present Obama fingers, their finger licking good!! Oops, better change that, as we don't wanna piss off the Colonel.
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_H_rVDlsennM/Sb56g0Zb-wI/AAAAAAAALus/L2ImcSNSRSM/s1600-h/obama+fingerlicking+good.jpg
PS...I don't have a tough time living in the 21st century, because I don't get offended from pettyness. It just pisses me off when people "Play the Race Card"
Shaw: Language-wise, "people of color" means the same thing as "colored people". Just the same as "people of Indonesia" means the same as "Indonesian people". I choose not to use either colored term. It makes no sense that one is OK and the other is not.
Lynne: You see his true colors, shining through?
WhitePower: Do you find it impossible to bring up any criticism of President Obama without referring to his race/ethnic heritage? So far, it appears to be so.
They must have some writing classes available there in the looney bin, I mean, obviously they have WiFi.
American Power
I bet you're the first to forward emails with watermelons growing on the White House front lawn, or with Barack Obama munching one as he flies Air Force One in the shape of a watermelon.
That German ad for fried chicken using Obama's name is offensive because of its reference to an white American stereotype that identifies African-Americans as eating only fried chicken and watermelon. I, personally, don't find that particularly offensive anymore than say seeing an Italian eating spaghetti, or an Irishman with a pint of plain in his hand.
But since some AAs may feel offended because the association with fried chicken or watermelon has been used primarily in the past to RIDICULE this group, then I'd respect their feelings around this.
Unlike you, many people don't spend their time getting enraged over what a particular group of people consider an insult or a slur.
Why don't you take up a hobby that would interest you--like pulling wings off of flies, for example.
dmarks: What I mean is, they pretend they're offended by all the political correctness but you know it's a disguise for their distaste for "people of color". I was going to say racism, but I parsed my words.
lynne: "They must have some writing classes available there in the looney bin
shaw: "Why don't you take up a hobby that would interest you--like pulling wings off of flies, for example."
I wonder if we have Renfield among us?
Sometimes I feel bad for stooping to their level, then I realize how ugly their hatred and racism is, not just for blacks, but gays, etc. It makes me sick.
Racial descriptions has nothing to do with actual colors.
In fact I have never seen a person who is white, or black. If Albinos had no color then they would be physically invisible. Albinism simply refers to the absence of pigmentation which most people have.
"People of Color" and "Colored People" have totally different meanings since their origins are different. Colored People, in American cultural context refers to Black People, or African American People, or for that matter negro is the official word used to describe black on legal documents
You realize you are arguing with the Nutty Professor and his gang of wingnut trolls - in fact, all these people might be one and the same.
In the words of Hermoine Granger, "Ignore them, just ignore them..."
This juvenile behavior is not conducive to serious debate and adult conversation.
I get up early, check your site and it has three comments, two from you,
I get to work and just check back, and it is loaded with stuff.
I have always thought that if someone says they are offended by a term, it is best not to use it. No matter the reason, and even if I cannot, or will not understand their reasoning.
It just seems as if in a pluralistic society, that would be the approach Miss Manners would take.
And yes, I know that is a rather quaint approach.
Rant: Regardless, I choose to use neither term. That works out best for what Dave describes as that qaint concept, manners.
Once again Brothers and Sisters, let us not confuse bigotry with stupidity.
I happen to like Beth. Her lame arguments keep me sharp when I get accosted in public by one of the many deluded right wing fools that used to hound me.
Beth I hear you calling...
You may like her but she sounded like a dingbat to me. I'd bet she's a Sarah Palin supporter.
You're startin' to sound like me, 101...
Love thy neighbor... ...even if s/he be an ass.
Africa was not the only continent Americans got slaves from. American slaves were of darker pigmentation, of many different hues.
I don't like hyphenated descriptions of citizens of any kind. A group can call themselves whatever they want, but I consider these terms incorrect. They seek to separate themselves from the rest of our population, but they are simply Americans.
Whether a segment of our people were treated badly or not, whether people were foreign born or not, even if some were forced to America, we are now, all Americans, except for those awaiting citizenship, or those here illegally.
The idea that we owe special treatment to those we did treat badly is correct, not only in our laws, but also in the morals we project.
Not only did we treat people badly, but we used those people to build our society, our industries, and our wealth as a nation.
Not only without payment to them, but against their will, and with torture like physical pain.
We cheated our own professed capitalistic system and morals.
We went against our own good words stated in the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence.
We were hypocrites, there is no other word to define our actions.
Beth seems to not be aware that slavery was a blight on this country for more than a century before we became the United States. Of course her ignorance shows in many ways.
The question of reparations has been asked since reconstruction.
The harm done to slaves went well beyond their emancipation and in fact, our racism continues today.
We owe them what we denied them for hundreds of years. Some of what we owe is tangible, some is not.
We certainly can pay the tangible, we must live with the guilt of not being able to reinstate the intangible.
We benefit today from what our forefathers built then. So how can we not try to replace what the slaves had taken from our forefathers then.
Reparations is a tricky thing. Who, where, when, etc., etc....
If America can compensate our citizens who we wrongly interned during WW II, then we have set a legal president for reparations. The only decision is how and who will be compensated next.
One can argue that laws like affirmative action laws, are partial compensation.
One can argue that Native Americans should be the first compensated.
One cannot argue, that there was no wrong committed, or that as descendants we have no obligation to correct the wrongs of our fathers.
Beth is simply, a racist.
"One can argue that laws like affirmative action laws, are partial compensation."
It won't be a very good argument, though.
"If America can compensate our citizens who we wrongly interned during WW II, then we have set a legal president for reparations."
That's a place to start: look at actual victims.
"One cannot argue, that there was no wrong committed, or that as descendants we have no obligation to correct the wrongs of our fathers."
One problem with that is, even if we assume that whites are guilty of the crimes of their fathers, then, what of the whites whose ancestors never owned slaves, or, more importantly, immigrated to the US long after slavery was over? Is Lee Iacocca, for example, exempted from reparation payments due to his ancestry situation? Are slavery reparation payments due to Barack Obama, for example, whose African ancestry does not connect to American slaves or even to Jim Crow?
How about leaving indivdual responsibility out of this and making it the responsibility of the US government for allowing American citizens and Native Americans to be deprived of their inalienable rights?
The US government is supposed to protect its citizens. In the case of African Americans, it didn't. It allowed the individual states to commit murder (lynching) with impunity upon American citizens and nothing was done to stop it for decades and decades. That's a disgusting indictment on this country's avowed love of liberty and justice. It wasn't so in love with those two ideals when it came to people with dark skin.
And the same goes for our Native Americans. We stole their lands from under them, relocated them to hideously arid areas that had nothing to do with their ancestral lands, and broke every single treaty we ever made with them.
We love to pat ourselves on the back as the world's Beacon of Liberty, but we shouldn't be so arrogant in doing so.
We need to show a bit of humility in that regard.
That sounds like a better way to put it: a problem with the county as opposed to "our ancestors."
I don't trust the government at this time, however, to do a good job of implimenting the best reparations plan. After all, look at the AIG bailout. Look at what a mess it is, and the President (like the one before) can't be bothered to shut down the bonus debacle.
Actually, dmarks, he is doing something about shutting down the bonus debacle:
WASHINGTON - President Barack Obama declared Monday that insurance giant American International Group is in financial straits because of "recklessness and greed" and said he intends to stop it from paying out millions in executive bonuses.
I usually feel that leaving a comment off the subject of the post is in bad manners, but in this case the comments have effectively become their own post.
The notion that a new name for 'those people' is made up every year is more a complaint about the aggregate effect of PC than any one group. For example, I am still not entirely certain what the current 'correct' term is for homosexuals. Hopefully, homosexual itself has not become offensive while I was not paying attention. And that is not entirely an exaggeration.
Not using intentionally offensive terms to describe someone is simply common decency. Expecting people to keep track of changing terminology as the politics of various demographic groups evolves is something different.
Labelling people who honestly do not care about race or whatever else people do or are as racist because they do not use the correct words is obnoxious, but it is also counterproductive. Calling someone racist when they are not blurrs the lines, hides those who really are racist.
PC has made some subjects almost impossible to discuss in an open, honest fashion because if any of the facts portray some group in a bad light, it is required to spend a bunch of effort to cover your butt, or else be labeled. If someone does not want to deal with uncomfortable facts, no amount of covering will stop them from calling you a bigot anyways.
I do not believe that we 'owe' those that have been treated badly by society in the past. I am not put together in such a way that allows me to feel guilt for things I did not do myself.
I do however think that it is neccessary to address the results of that treatment, and to take such steps as are appropriate to ensure that is is neither continued nor repeated. This can be justified from economic benifits, crime reduction, but really because it just the right thing to do.
(On a side note, anyone who thinks slavery was a long time ago and a brief period seriously needs to do some research on the civil rights movement. There are people alive today who remember when a LAW was required to make them 'people'.)
Shaw said it.
This is not an individual responsibility.
Can you imagine having to compromise on slavery to get the government started? That's what happened.
Then some 70 years later the grandsons of the forefathers had to fight and die in a Civil War to settle the dispute and correct the mistake.
If my government has done a wrong, it is my responsibility to help correct that wrong.
As a citizen of a democratic government I have a share in what my government does, even if I disagree with what my government does.
We give our leaders the right to act on our behalf.
As I said,
"Reparations is a tricky thing. Who, where, when, etc., etc...."
So I agree with the idea of the government enacting laws that allow preferences for a group that has been wronged, rather than trying to trace (impossible) the descendants of actual victims.
We acted (as a country) in the wrong, we must (as a country) act in correcting that wrong.
OpenMindedRepublican: I believe the correct term for homosexuals is "people".
Thank you very much Beth, I especially like your comment here, it says what I think, I believe that the election of a racist like Obama along with Eric Holder and company have set racial relation back 15 years.. I believe the (some) black people such as Eric Holder, Al Sharpton, Jessie Jackson, Rev. Wight and the likes of them are the ones perpetuating racism and keeping it alive. So many of us see people for who they are not what color they are, but so many black people are still looking to capitalize on a "wrong" that wasn't even committed against them personally. And I have ALWAYS wondered about that African American thing! What is that all about? We all know very well that most American Blacks do NOT originate from Africa.
I also really like that this attack on the NY Post because of their cartoon... I follow a lot of political blogs and sometimes it gets to be a bit much.
The scariest thing is the number of people who. didn’t care and voted for him just because he is black.. anyway. Someday they will understand their blind support for him will not save them from what’s coming down the line.
They voted for his as if they were voting on American Idol, completely clueless people.
His cabinet has more tax cheats than O'Reilly's in a Dublin phone book.
As for the Rush Limbaugh thing, I think that It is beneath the office of the presidency to go after a mere broadcaster,a journalist, a commentator, a radio personality, and private citizens on such a personal level,is a disgrace.
In short, Obama is scaring the hell out of everyone every time he opens his mouth, the stock market nosedives.
But considering how he treated ordinary citizen Joe the Plumber, why should we be surprised!
Either LeighB lifted her entire comment from this blog or this is her blog. http://therightwingpolitics.blogspot.com/
LeighB wrote:
Thank you very much Beth, I especially like your comment here, it says what I think, I believe that the election of a racist like Obama along with Eric Holder and company have set racial relation back 15 years..
It’s easy to label someone, anyone actually. But you don’t offer an example of Barack
Obama’s “racism.” So you’ve started your comment off on a weak point.
I believe the (some) black people such as Eric Holder, Al Sharpton, Jessie Jackson, Rev. Wight and the likes of them are the ones perpetuating racism and keeping it alive.
Again, you state what you “believe,” but offer no examples. I believe you’re a cryptic racist.
So many of us see people for who they are not what color they are, but so many black people are still looking to capitalize on a "wrong" that wasn't even committed against them personally.
Again, all you offer is a generalization—no evidence, just your opinion. And your premise gets weaker and weaker. Exactly how many of these "so many black people" are you talking about? Where do you get this information?
And I have ALWAYS wondered about that African American thing! What is that all about? We all know very well that most American Blacks do NOT originate from Africa.
Actually, we ALL originated from Africa, but that’s for another discussion. And can you document for us where you got that little gem of truthiness? And here we have another angry commenter who is irritated over what a group of people choose to be called. Should YOU decide how our African-American citizens should refer to themselves? And if you do, what do you prefer. Please share with us your paternalistic choice.
I also really like that this attack on the NY Post because of their cartoon... I follow a lot of political blogs and sometimes it gets to be a bit much.
Your discomfort with criticism of that repulsive cartoon is noted.
The scariest thing is the number of people who. didn’t care and voted for him just because he is black.. anyway.
Really, this is getting tedious. Again, you throw out your biased opinion and expect the readers here to take it as fact? Tell us exactly how you know that the millions of Americans who voted for Mr. Obama voted for him just because he is black. Did you vote for George Bush just because he is white? Oh, and did the millions of our African-American citizens vote for white presidents over the last few decades just because they were white? You truly are remarkable in your jerktitude.
They voted for his as if they were voting on American Idol, completely clueless people.
And that bit of fantasy makes you feel superior? This is the sort of junior high school reasoning that makes the guy who no one likes or wants to hang out with feel that he’s right and the world’s all wrong. Comical.
As for the Rush Limbaugh thing, I think that It is beneath the office of the presidency to go after a mere broadcaster,a journalist, a commentator, a radio personality, and private citizens on such a personal level,is a disgrace.
More exaggeration and stupidity. Mr. Obama simply advised members of Congress to do their own thinking and not listen to a bigoted former drug addict who dropped out of college because, according to his own mother, he couldn’t even pass ballroom dancing. That gasbag is popular with 26% of the American public—mostly old frightened and angry white men. And rest assured that Limbaugh loved every minute of the spotlight on his greased and sweaty brow.
In short, Obama is scaring the hell out of everyone every time he opens his mouth, the stock market nosedives.
Mr. Obama enjoys very high support from the American people, a fact you in your fantasy world cannot face. It’s called cognizant dissonance. Look it up and find out what ails you.
But considering how he treated ordinary citizen Joe the Plumber, why should we be surprised.
Joe the Plumber, you mean that charlatan whose name isn’t Joe and who isn’t a plumber? Ha! You guys have great heroes. A charlatan and a former drug addict.
Mr. Obama didn't "go after" that faker. And he's made himself a small fortune out of playing the victim. What suckers you all are for these people who play you for fools and make themselves rich in doing so.
Anonymous,
I visited that site. It's full of adolescent scribbling. (It has a photo of Chelsea Clinton with a tasteless caption over it.)
Really. They are pathetic. It apparently tickles their puerile sense of humor to make fun of a young woman who has grown up to be a contributing member of society.
But in a way their continued demonization of all things Clinton is understandable.
I finally understand that what makes them happiest is to be angry and make fun of women.
For examples see how Lauara Ingrham went after John McCain's daughter, Meagan, for speaking her mind, and calling her fat for doing so.
These are the same conservatives that howled over the sexist treatment of Sarah Palin.
Meagan McCain dared to speak her opinion and what did Ingraham do?
Attack Meagan for her weight!
Wow! Just wow!
Yes, they refuse to understand that our attacks on Sarah Palin had NOTHING to do with her gender, it was her brains (or lack thereof).
"I visited that site. It's full of adolescent scribbling. (It has a photo of Chelsea Clinton with a tasteless caption over it.)
Really. They visited that site. It's full of adolescent scribbling. (It has a photo of Chelsea Clinton with a tasteless caption over it.)
Really. They are pathetic. It apparently tickles their puerile sense of humor to make fun of a young woman who has grown up to be a contributing member of society.. It apparently tickles their puerile sense of humor to make fun of a young woman who has grown up to be a contributing member of society."
===================================
I didn't see the site you referred to BUT!
Really. What the hell has CHELSEA CLINTON ever done to contribute ANYTHING to society?
And how about your friend's blog
http://truthshallrule.blogspot.com/
with those 2 fat lesbian slobs that he referred to as Laura Ingram saying ""Kiss our fat asses Bitch!"
I suppose that was really class!
More Liberal Hypocrisy!
And I guess you think that Your blog's picture with the picture of Rush and Ann saying "You must obey vat ve say!"
Is cute?
Well suck it up feller, the best is yet to come.
You Obama lovers here are not only wacko's and you do not only drink the kool-aid, it also sounds as if you smoke the wacky tobaccy as well.
Re: Always Right, Beth, LeighB, Anonymous-
Well done Shaw. You've attracted some of the very best minds from the conservative right to your blog.
'Waccy tobaccy' shows a remarkable grasp of the language, and indeed, the very tenor of our times.
You're up against some very talented opponents.
The kreem of the crop I'd say.
Note to Arthurstone
I have always thought that Liberals were more than just a little nuts, now I know it.
Anonymous at 11:01 wrote:
I didn't see the site you referred to BUT!
Really. What the hell has CHELSEA CLINTON ever done to contribute ANYTHING to society?
It's a safe bet she's done more than you have.
BTW: Mr. Truth101 and I have never met, we know each other only through blogging. What on earth do his blog posts have to do with me?
Ms. or Mr. Anonymous, you really must get a hold of yourself, your hysteria is all over the place--try to focus it, say on the super secret citizen police force that Mr. Obama has monitoring your thoughts through the plutonium wire taps his Marxist/Commie/Muslim/America-hating/Socialist agents implanted in your third molar.
Always Right,
When it comes to Kool-Aid drinking, we bow in your general direction at the awesomeness of your wingnuttery.
You and your angry friends [Open Minded Republican excepted] offer not one constructive thought or idea. All you do is pop into liberal blogs and throw crap bombs in the comments then slink away.
This sort of behavior was cute in junior high school, for adults, it is deeply tragic.
However, we liberals can be thankful that only a small percentage [26%] of Americans are so afflicted.
Eowyn said...
Note to Arthurstone
I have always thought that Liberals were more than just a little nuts, now I know it.
Tell us, Eowyn, when you had that thought, did it hurt?
"You Obama lovers here are not only wacko's..."
What is it with these guy's who do not know how to use apostrophes? I wonder if its the same person each time.
dmarks: Punctuation is the least of their problems.
I think they use the apostrophe more as a decorative touch than as a punctuation mark.
Hang in there Shaw. Apparently civil, though spirited discourse, is above the ilk you are attracting.
I was particularly amused at the "the best is yet to come" warning.
I assume that is what you have deleted.
Very professional it was I am sure!
Dave: I thought "removed by author" meant that the commenter removed their own post.
I am thinking that the commenter tried to use apostrophe's correctly in they're comment, but could'nt do it, and gave up after 3 try's.
Lynn:
re 'I believe the correct term for homosexuals is "people".'
True, in the end the correct term for 'people' is 'people'. But sometimes it is neccessary to be more specific to address issues specific to certain groups.
Actually, what really gets me in trouble is the astonishing number of everyday terms that have been used by bigots of one stripe or another over the years. And they keep that second meaning for years. For someone who is neither racist nor heavily involed in race politics, it is unnervingly easy to say something that will get me in trouble.
I'm just anxious for the day when sexuality is a non-issue.
OMR,
I agree. The correct term for people is "people." And, yes, we have to occasionally use a specific term that distinguishes a certain group of people when we are discussing particular issues. Someday, I believe, that won't be necessary.
It's kind of strange. In our family, we just refer to our relatives by name, and we have a family of Catholics, Protestants, Evangelicals, Jews, Buddhists, Mormons, and Nonbelievers. We also have a number of races mixed in and gay members who are embraced and accepted as naturally as any member of any family would be. And there are, here and there, conservative Republicans among us as well. ZOMG!
I never thought about it, but now I do. We refer to ourselves by our names only, not by what group we belong to.
It would be nice to live in a world like that. It works in my family, why not hope for it as a universal ideal someday. It can't be that far off.
My parents and grandparents came from Europe, from a very conservative Catholic culture. And here we are, after two generations in America, a veritable olio of every religion, race and political stripe, and it works. We pretty much get along. Actually, we're a big sprawling, boisterous extended family, ready to support one another if needed.
I just wanted to thank anonymous 10:53 for stopping by TSR. Best hit day I ever had here. I look forward to doing more posts about PEOPLE that want Laura Ingrham to kiss their asses.
Thank you for the opportunity to schill Shaw.
And he thought of those he angered,
For he was not a violent man,
And he thought of those he hurt
For he was not a cruel man
And he thought of those he frightened
For he was not an evil man,
And he understood.
He understood himself.
Upon this he saw that when he was of anger or knew hurt or felt fear,
It was because he was not understanding,
And he learned, compassion.
And with his eye of compassion.
He saw his enemies like unto himself,
And he learned love.
Then, he was answered.
Truth: What's TSR?
Schill Shaw? Sure!
Sorry Dmarks. Truth Shall Rule. Truth be told, I don't like the site name but Progressive Eruptions was already taken.
Post a Comment