News-Record.com

Also. Gender. I went to a Hillary event the other day and a woman thrust a pin in my hand that said:

WOMAN
FOR PRESIDENT

It's Time!

It didn't even say Hillary on it.

Being the polite young man that I am, I took it and gave it to the first older lady that came near. I'm not voting for the Hillz because she's a woman. I'm voting for her because I think she has the best chance of beating John McCain and I'd really rather not have him.

By the way, I'm going to see Obama in Charlotte on Friday. Hopefully I'll get to see who's got softer hands...him, Hillary, or Bill...but I'm betting on Bill.

I'd be happy for a clue about the meaning of "loving America" and "conservative principles" - that's about as hocus-pocus as one can get.

Wrongo Elizabeth, in the hard core liberal mind if you are a conservative and don't support Obama it's because you are a racist.

Here is an example from just yesterday:

THE LIBERAL CONSERVATIVE
Yes, because not matter what Obama said, or who he hung out with, these two close minded individuals would NEVER vote for him. Reverend Wright gives them cover in which to hide, but the real reason is quite evident.

Posted on April 30, 2008 6:42 PM

***************************************************

"However, if one votes for someone only because they are black, as some in the media seem to want, this is just as much a problem, or doesn’t this go both ways?"

It doesn't go both ways, you are spot on here in pointing out the double standard.

From the Penna primaries:

"Obama drew more than 90 percent of the vote among Pennsylvania's black voters, who are heavily concentrated around Philadelphia."

African-Americans made up about 14 percent of Tuesday's vote.

But whites made up about 80 percent -- and voted 60-40 for Clinton.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/04/22/pa.primary/index.html

So blacks made up 14% of the total yet 90% voted for Obama. Yet no problem here with Demon Deacon and other race baiters.

This is a laugh out loud letter.

James, "conservative principles" refers to wearing a flag pin on your lapel and claiming you love the baby Jesus and hate everything counter to the GOP.

As for "loving America" only 'conservatives' do this.
They love to wave the flag, claim they support the troops and support a President and members of congress who don't even want to give returning soldiers the care they deserve. Being an american to a "conservative" means you overtly display a ribbon for the soldiers, which gives you good cover to cut their healthcare benefits. Being an american to a "conservative" means wearing the flag lapel pin and talking about your love of Jesus--while at the same time, supporting a war ginned up by Bush, denying global warming, and supporting the torture of our enemies. All in the name of our great country. In loving America, 'conservatives' will attack the patriotism of those who actually served our country (John Kerry, Max Cleland,Jeremiah Wright et al) while holding up an AWOL, cocaine sniffing "C" student as being a good "Christian" man.

Just look at how little Danny cannot understand his own racism. Rather than try to understand it, he wraps it in the flag, tosses in some religion and sweetens it with "Looky, looky! I adopted a black child from Tanzania". No, I'm not buying the hate he and others are selling. You can disguise it in code, and shelter it with official sounding terms from a political website, but that does not change it. The sad thing, is that most who harbor those feelings, are not the brightest bulbs in the box. But of course, we already knew that. :)

Oh, and Danny boy, before you go out on a tangent, why don't you stop your disingenuous comments if you are truly not a racist? You wouldn't vote for Obama no matter what, so why not lay off the manufactured reasons---the reasons that make you feel better inside.

You are so transparent. You were orgasmic over Reverend Wright's "God D_mn America" sermon and tried to make him the symbiotic twin of Obama. You have much in common with Wright---narcissism is the trait you both share. He wanted to be in the limelight, and he had his 15 minutes of fame. When you found out that Wright had served his country in ways that your "conservative" heroes had not, you pivoted and tried to find new ways to spin the old story.

Racism, in any form is dispicable. But when it is legitimized by politicians, it is ugly. Note John McCain's response to the ads being run by the N.C. GOP---his reaction was NOT the same as yours. He actually looked presidential in denouncing them. For that he gets my respect. You, on the other hand, cannot admit your racism because you have to rail against black leaders, immigrants etc with whom you disagree, and call THEM racists.

"You can disguise it (racism) in code, and shelter it with official sounding terms from a political website, but that does not change it."

See how it works Elizabeth? Race baiters are quite easy to detect. Simply disagree with them and presto you are a racist.

Here's another good one:

THE LIBERAL CONSERVATIVE said:
"Dan: "You are the worst kind of racist, one who won't admit he was pre-loaded with racism by his parents and hasn't changed much since."
Posted on October 3, 2007 12:28 PM

BTW, it works the same with homosexuality as well:

Denzien,
He does not read, and is a homophobe of the worst kind--
Posted by: DemonDeacon at November 25, 2006 10:54 AM

Or you can combine the two:

Danny,
"Have you told your children "why" you always looked up to Jesse Helms? Was it his homophobia or was it his racism? Oh! I get it now---you always liked the way he "kept the ni__ers down"!"
Posted on January 28, 2008 8:14 PM

Too much fun.

Politics aside people . . .

When a gang of people stand up and applaud the assertions that ". . . the USA invented HIV . . . or compares the USA to a terrorist group" shouts of approval and bobbling thier heads in approval, one must step back and view a bigger picture here.

What are these people educating themselves on? Are they going to be the voices of our future America . . . of your future America.

Alan Keyes. Would this be the same Alan Keyes who disowned his lesbian daughter?

What are conservative principles? Would Jesse Helms be a standard bearer for conservatives? Also, how do you measure one's love for America? Do President Bush and Vice President Cheney love America less because they did not do their military duty? Do we all have to wrap ourselves in the flag like Lee Greenwood?

THE LIBERAL CONSERVATIVE said:

Mr. O'Brien,
Your letter is a day late--Wright is now in the dust bin. He is now but a orgasmic memory of the right wing nutz! Posted on April 30, 2008 8:07 AM

"He wanted to be in the limelight, and he had his 15 minutes of fame."

Todays N&R front page headline:

Obama hurt by furor over ex-minister.

I guess that means Charles Babington of the AP is a right wing nut for writing this piece. Ditto the N&R staff from printing it.

One long 15 minutes.

~

I am always amused when someone trots out the "past military service" of some socialist bozo as a sort of "permanent proof" of his patriotism. We saw a lot of this in the last Presidential campaign.

It puts me in mind of another great patriot who served valiantly in the Army over the course of two wars. Initially, as a Captain, he was always quick to "do his duty." His rise within the ranks was rapid ... first to Colonel, then Brigadier General and finally to Major General. He was considered one of our finest military tacticians by his commanding General, as was brilliantly successful in several strategic battles during the war.

After being seriously wounded in battle, he was remained a furious fighter and a courageous leader. He was rewarded with commendations and important assignments by Congress, including command of a major city. He was later made the commander of our finest military institution.

His name? Oh, I imagine you've guessed it by now. But if not ... it was Arnold ... Benedict Arnold.

So don't tell me John Kerry, Max Cleland, Jeremiah Wright, John Murtha, Al Gore and other pissant liberals are somehow "permanently patriotic beyond all doubt" just because they once served in the armed forces. What they are doing and saying TODAY is what counts.

~

~

Oh, yeah ... you can add Jimmy Carter to that list as well!

~

While I usually don't bother to argue about who's patriotic because it's such a loaded word that means different things to different people, I have to disagree that only what people say and do today matters in the determination of patriotism.

A patriotic track record that includes military service is a good place to start when looking for a patriot, but not necessarily a definitive sign. Lack of one doesn't imply that one is not patriot. I've always thought that the true sign of a Patriot is one who loves his country, not necessarily for what it is now, but for what it could be, believes in the nation's capacity for good, and works to change the nation for what they feel is the better in small or large ways and increase that capacity for good.

You also want find me screaming about most people being overtly racist like TLC does. I do think most people are a little racist; it's human nature. I think the better people realize their inherent biases and keep them private, often realizing that they aren't logical. Of course, there are those who are overtly and outspokenly racist, but, from what I've read from other folks on this board, I don't believe that anybody here fits into that extreme category. (Yes, TLC, that includes Dan, Neo, and even Tom Shuford).

I don't see anything racist about pointing out trends in racial crime, voting patterns, or similar issues.

However, I still believe that there are instances of institutionalized racism, although they are slowly shrinking, against non-whites in America that tend to be results of past, extremely overt racist policies like slavery and segregation.

Anyway, in Brazil, folks with one white parent and one black parent are referred to as White.

"A patriotic track record that includes military service is a good place to start when looking for a patriot, but not necessarily a definitive sign."

Agreed rahrah. After all Tim McVeigh was a decorated Army veteran and earned a bronze star.

"I've always thought that the true sign of a Patriot is one who loves his country, not necessarily for what it is now, but for what it could be, believes in the nation's capacity for good, and works to change the nation for what they feel is the better in small or large ways and increase that capacity for good."

Ronald Reagan comes to mind when I read this, Rev. Wright does not.

"You also want find me screaming about most people being overtly racist like TLC does."

Amen for that. There are many lefties on this blog, such as yourself, who can debate in an intelligent fashion without resorting to calling others who may disagree racists, homophobes, etc.

~

Mistake me not. Military service is a highly laudable achievement in overall service to one's country. It is to be honored for what it is. But it is not a "permanent badge of patriotism" that can be trotted out for political gain at the whim of the candidate or his minions."

Nor is lack of military service a negative sign.

I do have to take some issue, however, with the idea that " ... the true sign of a Patriot is one who loves his country, not necessarily for what it is now, but for what it could be ...."

I would rephrase that to say, "The true sign of a Patriot is one who loves his country, not only for what it is now, but also for what it can become."

~

Voting patterns and racism are a little more complex than just saying that 90% of blacks voted for Obama.

Do I think that part of their decision was because he is "black" in their eyes? I really do.

However, if Condoleeza Rice or even Colin Powell were running against Hillary Clinton in the general election for President, how many blacks do you predict would support a black republican over a white democrat?

I guess I'm saying it isn't that cut and dry. All things being equal (or close), I think color does make a difference with our black brothers and sisters.

And yes, I'd agree that most do have some prejudices or preconceived notions based on color.

A black man or woman wanting to finally have a president who looks like them and shares some of the inherited issues of being black is completely natural and understandable (all things being near equal). I think you could say the same things about white people but I don't think that white people share the history of persecution, slavery, mistreatment as social outcasts, etc as black people.

"...if Condoleeza Rice or even Colin Powell were running against Hillary Clinton in the general election for President, how many blacks do you predict would support a black republican over a white democrat?"

I can see your point Earnestine and agree with your post, but you are comparing a Democrat to a Republican in your question.

In the Penna primary it was a Democrat versus a Democrat. Not just any Democrat mind you, but the wife of Bill Clinton, whom most black people adored.

The military careers of John Kerry, Max Cleland, Jeremiah Wright, John Murtha, Al Gore and Jimmy Carter earned them the right to choose to be “pissant liberals.” Especially Cleland, he left two legs and most of one arm in Vietnam.

“but I don't think that white people share the history of persecution, slavery, mistreatment as social outcasts, etc as black people.” That's very sound reasoning. History bears it out.

LC, you've admitted in the past that your heritage was racist. How is it your apple fell so far from the tree, or are you just typing self-righteous, bloviating smoke and mirror pixels?

Wow! Talk about a race baiting magnet:

http://tinyurl.com/445zwh
and
http://tinyurl.com/4ty6w8

~

Conundrum, one cannot "earn" a right ... not even with "military careers" and regardless of how much one suffers.

Are you familiar with these words, Conundrum?

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

Rights are bestowed by their Creator ... not earned by military careers. Now they may have DEFENDED their rights to be pissant liberals. And no one advocates taking away their rights to be pissant liberals. So, I say, if they want to be pissant liberals, so be it. It is their UNEARNED right.

~

"Are you familiar with these words, Conundrum?"

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

If I am not mistaken, those words come from the Declaration of Independence. A document which bore the signatures of slave owners Washington and Jefferson. I think that what the signers meant, is that white men are created equal to each other. They certainly weren't talking about black men. These same astute men kept "equal" black men slaves for another 87 years. I have to hand it to Jefferson though, he shared his unalienable rights with Sally Hemmings.

~

Correct ... The Declaration of Independence.

Correct ... It bore the signature of slave owner Thomas Jefferson.

Ooops ... Washington did not sign it.

Left unsaid ... Over half of the signers did NOT own slaves.

Regardless ... the Rights existed for "all men." It was the Freedom of the slaves to exercise the Rights that was infringed upon. They still had the Rights. No man cannot take away the Rights.

One final point, then the floor is yours: Every time I reread your 12:12 LttE beginning with, "The military careers of John Kerry ...," I must pause, travel back from the Twilight Zone and pick myself up from the floor with tears of laughter streaming down my face. Conundrum, you should write for Jon Stewart's Daily Show, man. You're too much! ;-)

~

Conundrum,

I agree with your interpretation. If half of those signers really held those truths to be so damn "self-evident", then why didn't they let their slaves have those "unalienable" rights?

I think your interpretation of what many of them meant is dead on.

"After all Tim McVeigh was a decorated Army veteran and earned a bronze star."

Yes, Danny. And he and Ted Bundy were both registered Republicans too. In fact, Bundy was an ACTIVE member of the Young Republicans.

Just thought you needed a reality check after all your delusional posts. You can paint an outhouse, but the stink is still in there.
You've never once indicated you would vote for ANYONE who was:
1. Not a Republican
or
2. Not a "conservative" Republican

So, keep on with your disingenuous comments--they are quite humorous.

Welcome back Demon Deacon. In my 10:48 post we were discussing patriotism, not whom we vote for. Tough day at work eh?

But if you insist on discussing voting, at least I realize I can only vote for Senators running in North Carolina!!

THE LIBERAL CONSERVATIVE said:
Oh, and before "little Danny" weighs in with "What about Robert Byrd of West Virginia?", let me say that I didn't vote for him…”
Posted on January 28, 2008 11:12 AM

Glad to know you didn't vote for Sen. Byrd Demon Deacon!!

"You can paint an outhouse, but the stink is still in there."

You use this one quite often, painting outhouses on weekends eh?

I peed in an outhouse once, never painted one. I'll take your word as you seem to be an expert on the subject.

conundrum you said:
If I am not mistaken, those words come from the Declaration of Independence. A document which bore the signatures of slave owners Washington and Jefferson. I think that what the signers meant, is that white men are created equal to each other. They certainly weren't talking about black men. These same astute men kept "equal" black men slaves for another 87 years. I have to hand it to Jefferson though, he shared his unalienable rights with Sally Hemmings.

While I agree with most of this (except Washington's signature) you must remember this was the norm at that time. You can not impose today's standards on events of 250 years ago and expect different results, because that's the way it was.
This country was founded by white men who were land owners and slave owners. You may wish it wasn't so, but that doesn't change it.
And as for Jefferson and Sally Hemmings, DNA shows her children were fathered by a Jefferson, but does not prove it was Thomas.

Benedict Arnold.

Met a babe, squandered all his cash partying, felt others less qualified were being advanced up the ladder before him .. and this decorated soldier then flip-flopped for cash and vengence. i always heard e.v.e.r.y.o.n.e becomes more conservative as the age .. must not be universally true.

Tim McVeigh.

Actually, this decorated soldier WAS patriotic .. veng'ing over a government that had gone too liebural by attacking some good Christian folk in Waco. TX.

"So don't tell me ... Max Cleland [is] somehow "permanently patriotic beyond all doubt" just because they once served in the armed forces."

I too was taken aback by that comment, Conundrum. After all, Cleland did not sit back on his militay laurals .. he pulled himself up using his own boot straps, so to speak.

James,
Your points, above, are not lost on those of us who read and those of us, who value education.
Note that little Danny can't even face the music--he brings up a quote about Robert Byrd!?? That guy has some real problems with "reality".

All the "swiftboating" of Max Cleland, John Kerry, et al. came with a price.

McCain may pay the price this year. I don't condone it, but it will probably happen.

~

That's right! Generalizations, such as, "... e.v.e.r.y.o.n.e becomes more conservative as the age ..." are not universally true.

In fact, ALL generalizations are false ... including THIS one!

General Arnold was a deeply flawed man. His baggage included a persecution complex of the highest magnitude. No matter how high he rose, he was certain that he was being treated unfairly, that others were benefiting from his labor and at his expense, that "the man" had it in for him and that the government should do better by him.

He ended up partying, running around with a "babe," squandering his resources and ultimately going broke. He thought that the "US government" should fix it, 'cause it was someone else's fault. Ultimately, he resorted to treason for money in order to prove to himself that he was still relevant.

No one would argue that he had become more conservative.

Ask yourself this question: If General Arnold were alive today, for which political philosophy would he have the most natural affinity? Be honest with yourself in answering.

Thank you for amplifying my point.

~

"Your points, above, are not lost on those of us who read and those of us, who value education."

One would think those who value education would understand the proper placement of commas.