Scared White

We all knew the facade of civility would eventually come down, but oh how lovely it was for a time, wasn't it?

We knew the Repugs would all have partial birth abortions themselves if only to hurl the gooey bits at the presumptive Democrat (I'm embracing the framing -- and it feels damn good!) nominee. That's basic Repuglican politikkin'. Yee and may I say ha.

But were we really prepared for Hillary's West Virginia appeals to the gun toting, Skoal-spitting Caucasoids, essentially making it okay for Bush at the Knesset to use the original N-word -- Nazi -- and grotesquely imply that Obama is a an "appeaser", triggering all the knee jerk responses he and every enemy to truth could muster? It sets the tone for the course ahead and indicates clearly that the stakes, having been high in the past, have never been this high.

Obama's opponents can't impugn his smarts or his ability to lead so they must -- must -- play to the basest card: race fear. It is all they have, luring the primal white terror of the black man from its dank hole, giving it a quick wash and a seventy dollar suit and sending it out to play havoc. It is a tactic that transcends Atwaterian shrewdness. It is the the true nuclear option making all the lurid attempts to ascribe illicit sexual behavior, bastard children or unhinged spiritual advisors so lame and ineffective that it is used as the last resort, obliterating all things in its toxic, molten mushroom cloud. And those who use it to define the contest are in effect defining themselves as scared and white, no more, no less.

Hillary: just a scared white woman? If it wins her the presidency, she is. Bush we already know is scared. If he were a woman he would have at least something going for him.

Comments

[Binx101]

First off - while I often enjoy your articles - you gave me the dry heaves with the Bush gender visual, and secondly, you're a better writer than that - there's no need to abase the entire Caucasian denomination because the WVA appellation is so skewed. There are a lot of reasons for that and positive influence will deliver a lot of Chris Farley moments ("stupid, stupid") when WVA is liberated from its neocon masters.

That being said, the BushCo board operates right out of the Goebbels handbook. In fact, it is the centerpiece of Karl Rove's playbook. Suppress truth in order to live the lie. Bush is the lie. Every single fact about this man is fabricated into another dimension, that in a bittersweet sort of way, has proven to fray uncontrollably. But let's not forget - he's still got the Nuclear Football until next January - and this functional imbecile is realizing that if not for Saudi's, no librairy.

We should be concerned. Deeply concerned about our National nose dive.

The president of our Nation is an idiot, and day by day .... he has less to lose. He already is a confirmed drug and alcohol abuser that lies with reckless abandon ... not exactly a sign of someone in recovery.

We should be concerned. I agree ... scared isn't good - but we should challenge everything that comes out of the White House from this second, including "Good Morning."

Binx101
The Almost Daily Binx
http://binx101.wordpress.com

[BillZBubb]

You are doing the Obama campaign a huge disservice with an article like this. The absolute worst thing for him is to run in a general election campaign where race is a central issue. Even worse, stirring the pot by accusing his opponenst of racism is a sure way to lose the independent vote and a lot of disgusted Democrats too.

[StephenJK]

I think he's already got one disgusted democrat right here. Being labeled a racist and looking back on my life I've lived disgusts me to no end. Now, when someone tries to label me a racist I just laugh and move on. I'm all about the non-ado, now.

[Jax6655]

I know this is hard for some to understand. . . . Barack is a Black man, his race is always going to be an issue for some. If Hillary had won, her gender would always be an issue for some.

As I move through the world, every once in awhile, someone will remind me of my race. Following me in a store, calling me the n-word (last week latest) for a traffic incident. In that case, I just laughed and said, "is that all you've got?" When it happens, it's like someone threw cold water in my face. To quote Maya Angelou, "and still I rise . . . "

What this primary season has done is wake folks up. I am sure that some discovered they had racists beliefs they didn't even realize.

Sometimes it's not easy to accept the truth about ourselves. Ask any recovering addict how hard it was to admit they had a problem. It's the same with bigots, that's why they can say Obama is a muslim while condemning him for spending 20 years in a protestant church and not see the absurdity of that , or admit that it's really because he's Black.

We can't ignore the fact that Obama is a Black man, it just shouldn't matter. Nor should gender, sexual orientation, disability, income status or anything else.

Hopefully as time goes on, there will be less ignorance and more open-minded people.

[mikekev58]

Any analysis of what drives peoples' voting decisions always include a variety of factors, including race, gender, sexual orientation, perception of character and personality. In fact, forces like the above are probably more determinant than where the candidates stand on issues.

Barry and Hillary aren't that far apart on the issues, yet almost half the Democratic primary votes still voted for Barry. Why?

Young people saw a rock star who appealed to their idealism, college educated people went with the arugula guy, and 90% of blacks went for a member of their race.

Were there other considerations? Perhaps. But non-issue motives are what activate the nerves and muscles to make the choice once the curtain closes on the voting booth.

[clevelandchick]

The Hillary campaign wouldn't be pulling the race fear card if they weren't so afraid they couldn't win without it. And that was what became her whole problem to begin with. Millions of feminists very uncomfortable with her campaigns' racial bent refused to endorse her for that reason. I know, I am one of them.

I am blown away by this whole hilariously disingenuous tack by the Mediacracy and Clinton Coalition that the voters of WVA actually will matter in an electoral college battle in the fall. That state doesn't vote Democrat, period.

What makes Hillary or these pundits think WVA would pick a white woman over a white man when they'd reject someone over race? Is the population of WVA harboring some large militant racist stealth feminist voting block waiting to break out and let themselves be known? Computer says No.

Newsflash Hillary supporters: WVA is not going to turn blue in the fall even with Hilary as the candidate rather than Obama. If the population is racist, dollars to donuts they aren't exactly Gloria Steinem in a trucker hat either.

[BillZBubb]

You are wrong on so many levels, it is hard to know where to begin. First, the Clinton campaign is pointing out the obvious--Obama has won the nomination by garnering almost all the African American vote and adding only a slice of the other Democrats to that bloc. He hasn't carried a single major state except Illinois IN THE DEMOCRATIC primaries. Historically, that means defeat in the general election.

He has won the nomination piling up delegates in states sure to go to McCain and has done poorly in the purple states needed to win in November. He isn't losing white working class voters because he's black. He's losing them because on the economy he offers NOTHING. They know what the Clinton economy was like and the Republican economy. Obama's economic proposals are a joke--he's got a right winger in Goolsbee making all kinds of center right comments.

Newflash to you--Hillary Clinton would easily win West Virginia in November. EASILY. And you are wrong West Virginia has long been a solid Democratic state with two Democratic Senators. ONly recently with Gore and Kerry has it gone Republican. Clinton won there twice. Hillary Clinton would win it in a walk. Obama will have to fight like hell to win there.

[cheforacle]

NC is a big state. Many of his victories (Iowa, Colorado and CT) are mostly white states. He will win NY and CA easily. There is no correlation between victories in the primaries and the general. He will have to fight to win PA and OH but he will win some states that don't normally go Democratic.

[Parkhurst]

clevelandchick wrote:
"I am blown away by this whole hilariously disingenuous tack by the Mediacracy and Clinton Coalition that the voters of WVA actually will matter in an electoral college battle in the fall. That state doesn't vote Democrat, period."

----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­--------

Well that is plain false. This yahoo just talks out of her assets. No democrat has won the presidency Without winning WV in 92 years. What is this buffoonery?

Clinton WOLUD win WV against McCain, polls indicate. Obama would not.

[ladyv]

Yes. And the world never changes, and everything today is exactly the same as it was 92 years ago.

Hey, didja know that Senators never get elected as President?

[mikekev58]

Bill Clinton won it twice.

The fact is that in some races - LBJ's '64 or Reagan's 2 blowouts - WV didn't play much of a role.

But in close races, it does, along with a few other larger electoral college states like Ohio, Michigan and Pennsylvania.

Barry was not the preferred candidate in any of those states.

He has an uphill climb if he's the nominee and anyone who thinks he doesn't is a mindless rah-rah. Get out of the echo chamber and see how close the contest is between Barry and John McCain at this point. Will that change"? No doubt, but don't assume that the change will be in Barry's favor.

And don't shoot the messenger.

[cheforacle]

The winning of WV (and its 5 electoral votes) is coincidental not dispositive. Many of those victories were by a margin of much more than 5 electoral votes.

[DrFinkster]

Well, W. VA actually almost always has voted Democrat, but for most of those years since 1916, Democrats in W. VA were the party of the conservative white southerners -- the Dixiecrats. Until the 1960's, only African Americans in W. VA supported Republicans, the party of Lincoln, if they could vote at all.

The civil rights laws of the 1960's spurred a mass migration of the southern white racist voters over to the Republican party. The fact that current W. VA Democrats are so racist is really a product of the fact that, unlike most other southern states, it still maintains a large contingent of Dixiecrats. This is evidenced by the fact that they still elect Robert Byrd for Senator, even though he was for many years a member of the KKK.

W. VA won't matter in the fall not because it is a swing state per se, but because it is so small and because it will not vote for a Democrat unless that Democrat is white and "from the neighborhood".

[cfreedom]

All they have? Opponents - including John Edwards - have been railing against his inexperience and naivete since day one. Weber is another elitist, a guy who makes his living speaking other people's words, and you keep giving him this forum so he can show us his own inexperience and naivete. Here he's preaching to like-minded, narrow-minded drones. Keep him here. Don't let him out. Or shut him up. Just don't let America hear this garbage. We need to win in November and we can't do it with simple, biased, empty-headed thinking like his.

[23000Days]

Don't worry! it's not Steven we're desperate to be rid of.....

[mawrm]

The "experienced" politicians like Clinton and McCain supported Bush in his disastrous decision to wage war on Iraq based on FALSE claims of ties to Al Qaeda and WMDs, pulling our focus from defeating Al Qaeda in Afghanistan and instead creating the self-fulfilling prophesy of Al Qaeda in Iraq. The "experienced" politicians like Clinton and McCain tried to pull wool over voters eyes and sucker them with their gas tax proposal. It failed.
Seems these "experienced" politicians are what's wrong with America and we need new _honest_ politicians who just don't tell the American people what they want to hear or do what's politically popular but make principled and well-informed decisions.
BTW, Sen. Edwards is endorsing Sen. Obama and contrary to your lie, Sen. Edwards has NEVER railed against Obama's "inexperience" - even a cursory review of their resumes would reveal Obama has MUCH MORE political experience than Sen. Edwards.

[StephenJK]

"Obama has MUCH MORE political experience than Sen. Edwards"

PFFFFFFFFF­FFFFFFFFFF­FFFFFFFFFF­FFFFFFFFFF­FFFFTTTTTT­TTTTTTTTTT­TTTTTTTTTT­T

You ever hear Einstein's expression: It's all relative?

They both have practically NO experience COMBINED.

[PioneerKing]

McCain's desire to continue the Bush/Cheney legacy of cowboy style diplomacy is repugnant. McCain's comments: "bomb, bomb, bomb Iran" and "I'm going to sit the Sunnis and Shiites down and tell them to quit the bullsh*%" along with a vast array of questionable statements that McCain has made lend credence to the fact that McCain has not articulated an economic policy, national security policy nor foreign policy that that is substantive.
McCain offers America irrelevant sound bites that mirror the Bush/Cheney failed policies, on these matters McCain is simply wrongheaded and his policies are not what America needs.
What has become clear over the past few months is that the portrayal of McCain as the "straight talking maverick" is a shallow myth and the contrivance of the main stream media and republican spin machine.
McCain's 28 years of experience in Washington have not produced an erudite politician who exhibits the type of judgment that America needs. What has been revealed is that McCain"s chronological age does not equate to better experience that supersedes the cogent perspectives of Sen. Obama.
Although Obama is younger he has exhibited a far superior acumen on what America needs, much more so than McCain has. Sen. Obama's finely nuanced judgment on a host of issues such as economic, social justice, national security and foreign policy topics is a testament to Obama's wisdom and capability to better serve this nation.

[NoFactsJustTruth]

I'm with you completely, Steven, as I frequently attack ANY bigotry head-on.
I got scrubbed from a hyper thread yesterday for explaining this critical difference to another commenter. I said:

"If you didn't see it, one of the WV ladies interviewed on the tape used last night on The Daily Show, said she could NEVER vote for someone of 'that' race.
If someone can't figure out that being prejudiced against BIGOTRY is a lot different than being prejudiced against race, religion or sexual orientation ...guess what, THEY'RE a BIGOT."

Those saying you go overboard or look down on others by fighting or ridiculing racism and bigotry, at EVERY opportunity, are WRONG.

While I never demean the beliefs of those that follow the 'red-letter' words of Jesus, I have zero regrets telling 'old testament biblicans' that discrimination against EQUAL civil rights for same sex couples is displaying blatant religious 'bigotries' from faith in a fairy tale. While I understand fearing fundamentalist extremists of ANY religion that preach harming unbelievers, it's NEVER acceptable or honest to believe one can know the integrity or humanity of another by the color of their skin, or the origins of their ancestors.

ALL you say about knee-jerk reactions is perfectly on target, as is your conclusion that hypocritical politicians WILL USE bigotry if they think it will help them win.

When I see a gauntlet of TRUTH thrown concerning any 'bigotry', sir, my reaction is ALWAYS ...wa and may I say hoo.

[StephenJK]

So generalizing using the words of one wisdomless woman in WV is A-OK? You're uppity post is indicative of the same LACK of wisdom. You don't fight bigotry with bigotry. You LOSE that way. You fight it within yourself and once you've won there you fight it on the outside with love, compassion and understanding. If you want all out race war keep on doing what you've been doing. Fight hate with hate. **shakes head, turns and walks away**

[NoFactsJustTruth]

Racism IS bigotry, prejudice against racism is NOT.

Thank you for reiterating my point by failing that understanding.

[mikekev58]

I think you may have been scrubbed from the hyperthread due to incoherency rather than the direction of your argument.

Ay, caramba!]

[NoFactsJustTruth]

I'm not surprised in the slightest by the only two commenters that have expressed inability to comprehend the imbedded previous quote, which even explains 'why'.

[verlaine]

Another great column by Steven!
Hillary is losing because she ran a race-baiting fear-mongering campaign employing Rove Atwater tactics and using George Wallace, Jesse Helms rhetoric.

It's time to break this banana republic mentality of switching back and forth (Bush Clinton Bush Clinton) from one corrupt junta to another.

Get out of the way Hillary! You're time has come and gone!

[BubbaC33]

Ms. Clinton is not running a race-baiting campaign, that is a false and disreputable sort of accusation to make.
What is interesting is how Obama supporters condemn Ms. Clinton while engaging in worse tactics or in the very tactics they accuse Ms. Clinton of using, which is never true. For example, Weber ddescribes the typical WV voter as a simple-minded redneck, a person who is a bigot. The manner in which Weber attacks these folks is bigoted and racist, an untrue portrayal of folks he does not know or understand. And the fact is this is typical of Obama supporters. Anyone who does not conform to their thinking is uneducated, bigoted, small-minded. It isn;t true, but Obama bigots repeat it so often the MSM writes about it as if it were true.
Under the rules Weber and Obama follow it is acceptable to be an anti-middle class bigot, but any mention of the race of a black person is wrong. This is a logic disconnect. If one is true so is the other.

[RichLiberal]

It is called "reverse race baiting": purposely taking an otherwise neutral statement that has some relationship to racial matters and implying the motive behind the statement is a hidden racist agenda.

Such a tactic might be appropriate in cases where there is evidence of racial discrimination and that an attempt to cover it up might be in progress, but that is not the case in anything that the Clintons have said in this campaign.

James Clyburn of South Carolina, #3 in House Dem leadership, is the one who launched this attack on Hillary after she made the MLK/LBJ comment on the relationship of the President to advances in Civil Rights in conjunction with Martin Luther King. Hillary's comment had no racial component or insinuation, however Clyburn used it as an opportunity to advance Obama's campaign.

[StephenJK]

It's actually MRS. not Ms.

[Parkhurst]

This clownish buffoonery is so typical of Obama's attacks.

". . . race-baiting fear-mongering campaign employing Rove Atwater tactics and using George Wallace, Jesse Helms rhetoric. "

Great - that really is going to bring Hillary and her supporters to your candidate. You could not be that dumb . . . but alas, you are. You clown.

Unbelievable.

[txbyrd]

The issue of race is far more subtle and complicated than your essay seems to suggest. I've always thought HIS gender (ie: not a macho man) was an issue but this has been brought up on other blogs.

Here is what the game plan looks like to me: "Obama is a naive Marxist wuss" All over the conservative political forums. When race comes up is is couched as "Obama wants to give minorities the advantage"

If people continue to insist this is primarily about race, you're going to miss the left hooks that are already being thrown.

[mikekev58]

txbyrd...y­ou are right on both points.

In the primary season, it has been the "boys club" perception that has alienated so many of Hillary's supporters from the Democratic party. And the alienation has not been limited to women but also to men, like me, who know all too well the misogyny that is at the core of many men. The imagery used by anti-Hillary pundits and bloggers clearly demonstrate this. She is a witch, or the girl you take to dinner for a break up who insists on finishing the meal after you've dumped her, Glenn Close in "Fatal Attraction", or as a maddened co-worker shouted in my face the other day, "the bitch".

Barry's gaffes on the other hand are not cast in gender terms. "You're likeable enough, Hillary" deeply offended Hillary's supporters, but got little play outside a column by conservative Charles Krauthammer.

With boys - and ga-ga dames like MoDo - covering the campaign, I guess we should've expected this vagina dentata reaction.

Come the general campaign, if Barry is the nominee it will be man-to-man combat. And we know that one of the candidates actually knows a bit about combat. The image of a war hero - even an aging war hero - standing next to a guy who hems and haws about the defense of Israel will come down to a perception of manliness.

"Progressives" are very nuanced about manhood; the vast majority of Americans are not.

[jpcline004]

I feel like this is just fanning the flames. Can we stop talking about race and start talking about McCain and the general election. I am guessing that is what Sen. Obama would want us to do...

[Diana]

Brilliant, as always, Steven. But I disagree that race is the 'true nuclear option.' I'm afraid that with these all-powerful degenerate criminals, the true nuclear option is ... the nuclear option.

[NoFactsJustTruth]

Great point, Diana, we see neoCONS like the preznutz, his veepy dick, LIEberman, and even McSame all saying it's preferable to threaten and even BOMB Iran, rather than trying to talk to them, AGAINST the current (this week) advise of their Secretary of Defense.

Yet by the very definition of 'appeasement', we also see the indirect, back-door, bribery offers to the regimes of North Korea and even Iran itself, though labeled a states sponsoring terrorism, to give up WMD programs.

It's a blatant rovian 180-spin tactic that 'suggested diplomacy' is redefined as 'appeasement', while the accepted definition of 'appeasement', "To pacify or attempt to pacify (an enemy) by granting concessions", is ALREADY blatantly being employed by the current administration.

Voters must wake up that pro-corporate neoCONS and neoliberals LIE because they DON'T want terrorism to ever end, they NEED perpetual war for those 'profit margin$'.

[elizaW]

Steven

You know Steven, in person you're not this full of hate and paranoia. What is it about politics that turns you into an irrational beast? You're hoping Obama isn't weak ...but he might be. You're hoping Obama isn't a fake...but he might be. You're hoping Obama isn't a one trick point..but he might be. There's no evidence to prove he's anything but a good campaigner. His record in the senate is terrible and he's done nothing else. So given these facts why are you so quick to demonize any politican who doesn't share your hope? Maybe they're being caredful, sensible and pointing out things about Obama that Americans have a right to know.

[StephenJK]

No one wants to see those things about Obama. The inexperience is the biggest insecurity the Obama movement has about their candidate. Why do you think they roll out that ridiculous piece of propaganda about sponsoring or co-sponsoring exactly 1,839,298,­432,292,11­9 pieces of legislation in a world record 5 minutes? Obama WILL lose the general election. That is without doubt. Why is America all of a sudden diving back into the racialist society? What happened?

[mikekev58]

I love the trillion pieces of Obama-sponsored legislation reference.

Conveniently, his voting record on Iraq, along with his "I don't know" answer to how he would've vote on Iraq had he been in the Senate when the vote was taken, are never cited.

I don't see myself voting for McCain, but as I chose Hillary over Barry in the PA vote, it will be difficult to cast a vote for Barry in the Fall.

He and his supporters aren't making that any easier.

[cheforacle]

How is his record in the senate terrible? Do you oppose his ethics reform? Reduction of lead in toys or limits on mercury? Do you oppose his measures to secure weapons in former Soviet republics.

[JulieSA]

"That's basic Repuglican politikkin'. Yee and may I say ha....
But were we really prepared for Hillary's West Virginia appeals to the gun toting, Skoal-spitting Caucasoids, ..."

Wow. Obama supporters are known for their contempt of working class/rural people. Here's a perfect example. The McCain campaign thanks you.

Didn't you get the memo? Ixnay on the obberysnay.

[mikegoodyearaz85338]

Please keep calling white voters racist and insulting them.

[Parkhurst]

Yeah, they're almost guaranteeing a McCain victory by this buffoonery. Alienate the Hillarycrats so that they will be even more inclined to vote for McCain - works for me.

[BillyT]

Hello:

Are you a racist?

If not, those racist WV comments should not influence your vote.

Why should Hillary's argument that "He will not win because he's black" convince you to also stoop lower to become a racist?

Those videos of WV white voters are just despicable and scary. One woman said "When it comes down to it, he's another race, and I just don't like that." The other uttered "He's probably muslim or something. How do I know?"

Now Hillary's argument is: there are enough dumb racists in the US, we should go along with them??

Let me ask you again: DO YOU AGREE WITH THE WHITE RACISTS OF WV??

And if you even think "I am afraid Obama will lose because of those comments..­.." and let that sway your vote, you have just become another WV white racist. Pure and simple. Congratulations.

[sistermoon]

Well said, Billy.

[mikekev58]

I am not afraid Barry will lose because of the selective use of racist comments of some white voters who supported Hillary.

I know Barry will lose because of what Barry says, how Barry acts, and how obnoxiously his supporters often behave.

Point in case: "Now Hillary's argument is: there are enough dumb racists in the US, we should go along with them??"

For those of us who still support Hillary, how does that kind of nonsense persuade us to shift our loyalties to Barry?

[lostnusa]

No I don't. I see them as still supporting the democratic party. The party that embraced people of different color, social and demographic backgrounds, and yes even prejudice people. Remember civil rights? Clinton has been involved since the 60s. Pushed womens issues. What do I see out of Obamas group? You better believe anything I say and don't disagree or your a racist. Is this the new slogan of the extremist left? Commentators and people in here are determined to split our party. I know exactly what she meant by "he can not win". She is referring to the elitist, extremist, I am smarter than you image that his supporters on these sites portray. Democrats calling democrats racist, man the party has come full circle. Remember when the southern democrats turned republican? The republicans will bring up every comment on the internet to tear him up come november. The party has missed its chance to make history by not electing Clinton.

[Jax6655]

I also could care less why "toothless hillbillies" as you call them hate Blacks. Screw 'em.

[grendl]

Okay, I say screw them too.

But those toothless hillbillies are putting out generations of racists, who if educated might not be.

I'm talking about reaching out to the salvageable souls of the party. You can't just paint them all as hopeless. I've seen people climb from the depths of ignorance to enlightenment. It's possible.

Its the fencesitting racially curious, or nervous that Barack needs to address. He says he's willing to talk to our enemies, well the enemy within this country can be found in those towns and mountains of West Va. Engage them. Challenge them. Make them articulate their ignorance for all the world to hear.

Engage that enemy Mr. Obama. And talk to them in terms they understand.

[jpcline004]

So he is supposed to appease the racists?

hahaha I am totally kidding I just couldn't resist that!!! I agree 100%, diplomacy is the right answer. My father grew up in a racist household in GA but he turned out fine (he's one of the most tolerant people I know), so we shouldn't just give up on WV. And lets stop with the name calling too people

[Breni]

Just as I am sure those 'toothless hillbillies' as you call them, could care less that Blacks hate them. I'm sure it was no shock to them when they saw the rev. Wright on t.v. - it probably only cemented their 'suspicions'.

[Jax6655]

To: grendl, blaqntelligence et al:

Love you guys. With all due respect, you are obviously not black because a black person would never ask this question, they know why Barack doesn't say, in effect, "you're attacking me because I'm Black."

Because, among other things, that would put him right in the camp with Rev. Wright (with MSM, as well as "Regan" Dems and fervent HRC supporters) They'd say he's playing the race card. (!!) That he's an angry Black man, etc. etc. etc. He's whining. Whatever. Been there my entire corporate life. Can't win that one.

Look, those so called "downscale" Dems who think he's a Muslim, who will never vote for a Black man, who talk about his middle name. . . . . they're not going to change. Certainly not before November. That kind of ignorance and bigotry is wired in their DNA. Funny about those middle names, my A-A father's middle name is Adolph! He was named that in 1932. I bet no one is named that anymore. Trust me, he is neither a Nazi nor does he have Nazi leanings.

The solution is to register as many people as possible. The overwhelming numbers will shut all this stuff down and we can get on with the business of changing the direction of our precious country.

[grendl]

I'm not black but blaqntelligence is, if her posts are accurate.

But I don't need to be. And Barack doesn't need to be white to be a decent leader.'

We're all the same underneath it all. But if they're going to attack and undermine him based on skin color, which again is all they've got, it's important to ask them.

What are you afraid of?

And are you less afraid of a Mulatto gentleman, because he's only half black. It's time this country started addressing these issues instead of skirting them. It's time to ask those toothless hillbillies in West Virginia just why they hate a race so much.

Ignorance of course is the base of such fear. They won't be able to articulate any other reason other than someone looks different to them. But its important to weed those unsalvageable and pathetic souls, from the fencesitters, those semi-racially biases individuals who flirt with the possibility of openmindedness. Therein lies the key to winning the national election.

Not avoiding questions of race.

[Jax6655]

grendl:
I know you're sincere in your beliefs and I actually agree with you. It's just not that easy. In case you missed it, I am Black and not afraid. I'm speaking from experience.

I didn't mean to imply that it shouldn't be addressed, I just said Obama (or Michelle) can't address it because of the reasons stated earlier.

I love the new awakening that's taking place in America. I'm a Boomer, a feminist and an Obama supporter. I never thought I'd see what I'm seeing today. Like I said, we're on the same side. . . . just getting the context right.

BTW: "mulatto gentleman" is actually an insulting term to African Americans. It goes back to slavery times. Mulattos were the illegitimate children of slave women and massa.

And just so you know, when you ARE ACTUALLY BLACK, avoiding questions of race is not an option.

I'm a believer!

[StephenJK]

"That kind of ignorance and bigotry is wired in their DNA."

I hope that this was tongue-in-cheek. Because there is NO POSSIBLE way that ignorance and bigotry is "wired" into our DNA.

You think this country is precious? It's becoming a precious hot mess.

[missusam]

Somebody wake up StephenJk, he is talking in his sleep