In this campaign we are likely to see conservatives and Republicans pushing – in ways both implicit and explicit – that the problem with Sen. Obama is that he’s an uppity black who has gotten too big for his britches. Already, MSNBC’s Pat Buchanan has twice dipped his toe into those Klanesque waters.
On Morning Joe, Pat Buchanan praised an attack ad by the McCain campaign that refers to Sen. Barack Obama as “The One” and said the ad “goes right to an enormous vulnerability that Barack has created for himself with his grandiosity.” Echoing a comment he made last week, Buchanan said: “The question’s now becoming, ‘Who does this guy think he is?’ … I think that is the real question.”
Of course, as a guy who has been rapped in the past for expressing revisionist history and an admiration for Hitler, we must ask who the frack does Pat Buchanan think he is offering up his opinion on anything unchallenged?
Ooh, thanks for the news flash — Pat Buchanan’s an asshole! Lots of people, from all across the political spectrum, have been saying it for years.
Watch carefully, though. Pat will go right up to the edge of open racism, but catch himself just shy of being flagrantly racist. That is his modus operandi, and he’s a master of it. By getting that close to the edge, he keeps plausible deniability while the real psychos he’s talking to all say “hey, Pat’s with us! He just can’t come right out and say it because the kikes/niggers/spics/fags/whatever will get him if he does speak the truth!”
He’s doing it with blacks now. He’s done it in the past most frequently with Jews, as well as Hispanics and gays, just to name a couple of examples.
The man is complete and utter scum. He needs to be ignored, and ignored hard. He lives for the spotlight, for the attention, to be the center of controversy. Deny it to him, then watch him shrivel up and die.
J.
Right, becuase attempting to give a speech at the Brandenburg Gate where only presidents have given major speeches is not presumptous or anything.
He’s doing it with blacks now. He’s done it in the past most frequently with Jews, as well as Hispanics and gays, just to name a couple of examples.
News Flash: This is what Republicans do. Before and since Lee Atwater. Before and since Buchanan.
Is it possible for a man with dark pigmentation to be arrogant? If so, then what terms are we “allowed” to use?
JWG
Didn’t you get the memo. There can be no criticism of Obama. You’re a racist if you do.
JWG, the meme is in. If you’re critical of Obama, you’re a racist.
How pathetic is it that Bill Clinton had to sit there and say, “I’m not a racist” with regard to things said about Barack Obama.
The cries of “racism” will only get louder and louder as it gets closer to election day.
In the meantime, the only one injecting race into the campaign has been Obama.
Is it possible for a man with dark pigmentation to be arrogant? If so, then what terms are we “allowed” to use?
Well, according to the Republican Electoral Guru:
So at this point, “presumptuous” should fit the bill. Good luck!
Israel have used a similar tactic for years. Don’t like what they do? You are an anti-semite!
Well, if you guys would discuss issues or ideology, but the right is obsessed with gender and race, so we live in the world you’ve made.
attempting to give a speech at the Brandenburg Gate where only presidents have given major speeches is not presumptous or anything.
Did the 200,000 Germans in attendance, many waving Americaqn flags, seem pissed about that? No?
Well then, there you have it.
Anyone who can draw 200,000 people for a speech ought to give that speech. It almost seems like the rest of the world wants Obama for president, and that if he is elected it will improve our relationships with all the countries Bush has insulted. Seems like a good thing to me.
Come on, admit it. The only reason you think this is reprehensible is because McCain can’t fill a living room for a speech.
Jealous much?
If you’re critical of Obama, you’re a racist.</i
Not true, and you know it. If call him “arrogant” or “uppity” or suggest that he is acting somehow above the station in life you want him assigned to, or use whatever dog-whistle racist adjective you choose, then you are racist.
Discuss his policies and plans, disagree with them or whatever, and you are not racist.
Your choice.
Well, if you guys would discuss issues or ideology, but the right is obsessed with gender and race, so we live in the world you’ve made.
Not so. It’s gotten to the point where the left has been able to frame just about any issue around race.
Tax cuts? Racist.
Welfare reform? Racist.
Immigration reform? Racist.
School choice? Racist.
Voter reform? Racist.
You were one of the sensible ones on that McCain ad, but many on the left were yapping the ad was racist.
Like I said, Obama raised the race issue (Presidents and currency) without anybody else going there, so that is just a mere indication of what we are going to see. Of course, Obama was supposed to be the candidate that transcended race, but knowing now that he’s basically just a Chicago machine politician, he’s going to whip that card out of his pocket any chance he gets.
Somewhere in deepest Hell, Lee Atwater just smiled in Jay’s direction. Keep on keepin’ on!
Per usual, Jay brings up some awesome points.
Here’s one he somehow missed: McCain has a pretty much insurmountable lead in South Carolina among white people who belong to country clubs. Why? Because Obama is such a presumptuous, arrogant, racist. Obviously.
Tax cuts? Racist.
Welfare reform? Racist.
Immigration reform? Racist.
School choice? Racist.
Voter reform? Racist.
As usual, Jay, I ask you to back this up. I saw Obama bring up the spectre of his race because McCain’s recent spate of attack ads–which have nothing to do with issues and everything to do with Obama as a person–were about portraying him as uppity. (Something which David Gergen recently admitted was code to a Southern man like him.)
And I’m asking you about Obama, not the nebulous “left” who may or may not have said jackassed things. They aren’t running for President; Obama is, and I want to see all this race-card playing that you seem to think Obama has done on the above issues.
I can’t recall when Obama made those claims either, SpiderJ. But you know who did? Lee Atwater.
…and he should know.
I believe it’s actually:
Tax Cuts? Elitist
Welfare Reform? Racist.
Immigration Refom? Racist
School Choice? Elitist.
Voter Reform? Racist
You left out
Gay Marriage? Bigotted
Anti-Affirmative Action? racist.
Jay? intentionally blind
I saw Obama bring up the spectre of his race because McCain’s recent spate of attack ads–which have nothing to do with issues and everything to do with Obama as a person–were about portraying him as uppity.
Oh please. You’re going to ask me to back something up and you follow it up with this drivel?
And I’m asking you about Obama, not the nebulous “left” who may or may not have said jackassed things.
Yeah well, I said the left and it was in response to Oliver when he said:
Well, if you guys would discuss issues or ideology, but the right is obsessed with gender and race, so we live in the world you’ve made.
In other words, it’s not Obama bringing up the race card left and right. Thanks.
>Well, if you guys would discuss issues or ideology, but the right is obsessed with gender and race, so we live in the world you’ve made.
Huh?? Women’s studies and race studies departments on college campuses are filled to the brim with lefties, and yet its the right that is obsessed with gender and race? Surely you meant something else?
Oliver said: Well, if you guys would discuss issues or ideology, but the right is obsessed with gender and race, so we live in the world you’ve made.
Gee, which candidate brought up Obama’s “funny name” and how he “doesn’t look like those other presidents?” Hell, who first compared Obama to Britney Spears? Why it was Obama himself.
I got a lot of color-related problems with Obama.
Green — he wants my money.
Green — he buys into the environmental extremist bull.
Green — he’s apparently taking illegal campaign contributions from Palestinians affiliated with Hamas.
Red — he wants to socialize a huge chunk of the economy.
Blue — he’s the champion of the Nutroots.
Yellow — he’s refusing to engage in town hall style debates with McCain.
And I wish there was a color associated with his hypocrisy, one that represents his astonishing ability to hold two contradictory positions at the same time and deny any paradox.
Please. There are plenty of reasons to not want Obama for president. Skin color doesn’t even enter into it.
You wanna talk about issues? How about NAFTA? Senator, do you support it or oppose it? “It depends on whether I’m running in the primary or the general election.”
Senator, do you support DC’s gun ban, or do you think it’s unconstitutional? “I support it, but I also agree with the Supreme Court that it’s unconstitutional.”
Senator, do you support the Israeli position that Jerusalem should remain their undivided capital, or do you support the Palestinians who say that at least a part of the city should be given to them as their capital? “That depends on whether I’m talking in Israel or not.”
Senator, you also talked about how the Palestinians deserve a “contiguous” state — meaning that the West Bank and the Gaza Strip should be physically connected. How would you do that? Would it involve cutting Israel in two? Would Israel have to give up its southern border — including its only Red Sea port at Haifa — for a Palestinian corridor?
Senator, you said that if Americans just kept their tires properly inflated, we could save as much gas “”all the oil that they’re talking about getting off drilling.” Could you please cite some sort of source for where you get those numbers?
Senator, your proposal to give a $1000 tax rebate to every American, funded by a special windfall profits tax on oil companies — could you explain how you would keep the oil companies from just raising their prices to cover that tax?
Senator, if you’re so concerned about your wife and children being attacked politically, why did you pose with them for the cover of People magazine? Why do you keep having your wife give campaign speeches on your behalf if you don’t want her exposed to criticism over what she says?
But no, we can’t have any of that. Instead, let’s just howl “racist!” at people who simply repeat what Obama says. Or, even better, examine every single thing people say about Obama through a microscope and find some way — no matter how implausible — to make it about race. For example, when someone mentions Paris Hilton or Britney Spears, it’s not because they epitomize vapid, self-obsessed, worthless twits, but THEY’RE WHITE WOMEN!!!!!!!
J.
J.
Gee, which candidate brought up Obama’s “funny name” and how he “doesn’t look like those other presidents?” Hell, who first compared Obama to Britney Spears? Why it was Obama himself.
Why do you lie?
Green — he wants my money.
Translation: “The government should work for free!”
Green — he’s apparently taking illegal campaign contributions from Palestinians affiliated with Hamas.
Liar.
Yellow — he’s refusing to engage in town hall style debates with McCain.
Again liar.
Red — he wants to socialize a huge chunk of the economy.
Coming from the party of socialized vengeance, I find this laughable.
Green — he buys into the environmental extremist bull.
So you SUPPORT poisoning the air and water? Gotcha.
Jay Wryyy, why do you hate America so much?
Talk about Obama Derangement Syndrome…
Zython, if I linked every single one of them, my comment would be stuck in Approval Purgatory. But here are a few references:
Barack Obama, Jacksonville, Florida, June 21: “They’re going to try to make you afraid of me. He’s young and inexperienced and he’s got a funny name. And did I mention he’s black?”
Damn, i was wrong. Obama didn’t compare himself to Britney, but Paris. Washington Post, February 24, 2005: “”Andy Warhol said we all get our 15 minutes of fame,” says Barack Obama. “I’ve already had an hour and a half. I mean, I’m so overexposed, I’m making Paris Hilton look like a recluse.”"
According to FEC records, in 2007 two brothers, Monir and Hosam Edwan, donated $27,000 dollars to Obama. They listed their address as “Rafah, GA.” There is no Rafah, Georgia, but there is a Rafah in the Gaza Strip. And in Rafah there are two brothers named Monir and Hosam Edwan, who say they gave the money to Obama. They say that they are not Hamas supporters, but quite a few of their relatives are very prominent in that terrorist group.
Back in May, McCain proposed a series of town-hall style debates with Obama leading up to the two parties’ conventions. Obama said “I think that’s a great idea.” Now he says he’s comfortable with the three traditional format debates in the fall.
OK, you called me a liar four times. There’s documentation on three of them, and a correction for confusing Britney Spears and Paris Hilton (who, quite frankly, I find interchangeable anyway). I apologize for that mistake.
NOW why don’t you discuss the actual issues I brought up in response to Oliver’s challenge?
Why do you hate truth and reality and substance so much, Zython?
J.
Zython, if I linked every single one of them, my comment would be stuck in Approval Purgatory.
How conveniant…
Back in May, McCain proposed a series of town-hall style debates with Obama leading up to the two parties’ conventions. Obama said “I think that’s a great idea.” Now he says he’s comfortable with the three traditional format debates in the fall.
Firstly, no source. Secondly, where’s the rejection?
OK, you called me a liar four times.
Thee times, liar.
…
Damnit!
Maybe I can sneak one link through the moderation:
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hjmksVl2byqc_-Lkbri0QQWkgUwgD92AFT400
As far as the counts… I said four points, you called me a liar three times. Two points of mine were combined into a single response.
1) Obama first brought up the “funny name” and “hey, he’s black” thing.
(documented with time and place of remarks)
2) Obama first compared himself to Britney Spears (revised to Paris Hilton — not a lie, an error that I acknowledge and correct)
3) Obama has apparently taken illegal donations from Palestinians in the Gaza Strip (documented)
4) Obama backed out of debates with McCain (documented through link above)
So, Zython, why won’t you discuss Obama’s position (er, positions) on gun control, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, NAFTA, and the current energy situation? I’d call those “real issues,” but you apparently disagree.
J.
Ooh, thanks for the news flash — Pat Buchanan’s an asshole! Lots of people, from all across the political spectrum, have been saying it for years.
Funny thing, though – he keeps getting face time as a Republican’t spokesweasel on major media outlets. Even though he is seemingly considered an icehole by all sorts of people with all sorts of political viewpoints.
I wonder why someone like that would continue to get called back to appear on mainstream media outlets as a public spokesperson for a particular political point of view? Especially if they’re considered to be so unacceptable across all areas of the political spectrum.
I’ll tell you, Tom. Because Buchanan’s damned good on TV. He’s quick-witted, he’s charismatic, he’s articulate, he’s intelligent, and he knows how to behave on television. Putting Buchanan on means that you can count on good, entertaining TV.
That takes precedence to the fact that he’s a racist, sexist, anti-Semitic asshole.
I loathe the man. I’ve made that abundantly clear on numerous occasions — I’ve written at least three pieces on him at Wizbang. (”I Just Can’t Stand Pat,” “It’s Pat,” and “Hey, Pat: Just Die Already”) But I am very careful to never underestimate him, or deny him his abilities and talents and intelligence.
If you don’t like my explanation, Tom, here’s a crazy conspiracy theory: Buchanan is so repugnant to so many people, the big media outlets go to him specifically to discredit the positions they get him to champion.
Alternately, you could try asking the people who keep putting him on, instead of those who can’t stand the guy.
J.
Not true, and you know it. If call him “arrogant” or “uppity” or suggest that he is acting somehow above the station in life you want him assigned to, or use whatever dog-whistle racist adjective you choose, then you are racist.
Great. So to call a black politician arrogant is racist.
Got it.
Mark that down Jay Tea and add it to the big book of racist dog whistle words.
Jay the beauty of a “dog whistle” is that everybody can just hear what they want. It is very egalitarian that way.
Personally, I am waiting for a response to the question “What do you call a voting block of one racial group that votes 90% for a single candidate from that same racial group?” Do you call them something different if that group is white and voting for McCain, or black and voting for Obama? Hmmm….what does THAT “dog whistle” sound like…..?
Questions swirl
They say that they are not Hamas supporters, but quite a few of their relatives are very prominent in that terrorist group.
“Quite a few of their relatives” is bullshit of the highest order. If you can’t make a better case than that, then throw this talking point away.
Or, explain to me how everybody whose brother joined the Latin Kings is themselves a gangbanger. For that matter, explain to me how every Yankee whose brother joined the Confederacy was actually a Confederate soldier.
What do you call a voting block of one racial group that votes 90% for a single candidate from that same racial group?
Ah yes, the lovely “N*ggers are Racists!” argument. Goddammit I love this country.
Minor point though, Jay, that comment Obama made about “not looking like the other presidents on currency” is actually a reference to a commercial the McCain campaign produced which had Obama’s face in place of Washington’s on the dollar, so if you’re going by that as your “who did it first” then it does seem to have been McCain.
Not that I would agree thats the first time race became an issue though, Jay Tea quotes him with the “…funny-sounding name, did I mention he’s black?” line, which was of course a response to the prevalence of that meme being played out in the “libbrul” media perpetually (”Tonight, is Barrack HUSSEIN Obama Black enough?”) and so on backwards through this election. Who started using it first at the very beginning? Who’s used it the most? Who gives a flying monkey fuck!
Of course, internet being what it is, I realize how little good it will do to just stand here and ask “can’t we all just get past the petty crap and be reasonable” and have anything come of it (cue mccann showing up to call everyone who doesnt live inside his head a che-loving marxist) since the only fight worth fighting is the fight about fighting itself, as though we’re all a really bad couple looking for a reason to split or something, but for fuck’s sake, all… Ok, I have no idea how successful this may be, but fuck if I’m not trying it.
Jay Tea, your “argument” against Obama seems (and in fairness I stress it onle seems so) to consist of vaguely applicable buzzwords, the kind that the smaller-minded may use to pigeon anyone into being an environmental-extremist-hamas-loving-nutroot-socialist, irrespective of whether any of those labels actually apply. I’m not going to ask you to justify those labels (not least of all because you may believe that detailing them would only give us all the more reason to vote for him) so I’m going to try this coming from the other side, just to see how reasonable we all are.
Jay Tea, without using the aforesaid pointless-fucking labels, can you explain what exactly Obama would have to do for you to consider voting for him? This is not a rhetorical question, and honestly I’d like to know for certain that everyone here has an answer that applies to either candidate. One that goes beyond “stops being a socialist,” certainly.
Great. So to call a black politician arrogant is racist.
Got it.
Mark that down Jay Tea and add it to the big book of racist dog whistle words.
It is racist when he is called arrogant FOR DOING EXACTLY THE SAME SORT OF STUFF EVERYBODY ELSE HAS FUCKING ALWAYS DONE you complete fucking idiot
Minor point though, Jay, that comment Obama made about “not looking like the other presidents on currency” is actually a reference to a commercial the McCain campaign produced which had Obama’s face in place of Washington’s on the dollar, so if you’re going by that as your “who did it first” then it does seem to have been McCain.
It was not a reference to that video which just re-surfaced (and it wasn’t Washington on the single, it was Franklin who last time I checked, was never a President). Obama’s own campaign admitted it was a reference to race. They’re attempting to backtrack now and make it seem like the barely seen web video is what they were talking about, that’s nonsense. Here’s Obama’s full quote:
“Since they don’t have any new ideas, the only strategy they’ve got in this election is to try to scare you about me. They’re going to try to say that I’m a risky guy. They’re going to try to say, “Well, you know, he’s got a funny name, and he doesn’t look like all the presidents on the dollar bills and the five dollar bills.”
That’s almost verbatim of what he said in June: “They’re going to try to make you afraid of me. He’s young and inexperienced and he’s got a funny name. And did I mention he’s black?” John Kerry in MTP was using the same language (”They’re trying to scare people”). And that’s no accident.
That’s a campaign strategy.
Actually, the “who does he think he is?” is a pretty good question to ask about Obama, but not with the “isn’t he an arrogant, presumptuous little jerk?” intonations?
Who does Barack Obama think he is? What is his self-image? What does he stand for?
Does he stand for or against gun-banning?
Does he stand for or against NAFTA?
Does he stand for or against seating the Florida and Michigan delegates?
Does he stand for an Israeli Jerusalem, a Palestinian Jerusalem, or a divided Jerusalem?
He’s answered all of those, with different answers depending on the setting and circumstances. Where does he stand, in his heart of hearts?
Who does Obama think he is? And will he let us know before the election, so we can properly assess his fitness for president?
J.
Pat Buchanan would lose his job if not for all the mentions he gets in the liberal blogosphere. He’s an idiot whose opinion would be as irrelevant as it is ridiculous, if he didn’t have his soap box on Fox. The worst thing you can do to a hate-monger with a tv spot is to ignore him. Do so and he’ll lose the only thing that keeps him in his job.
That’s a campaign strategy.
That’s knowing your enemy, and dealing with the evil that is John McCain and the Republican Party. It’s also telling the truth, which Republicans only do by accident.
Not true, and you know it. If call him “arrogant” or “uppity” or suggest that he is acting somehow above the station in life you want him assigned to, or use whatever dog-whistle racist adjective you choose, then you are racist.
How about if people think Obama is acting like he’s the president rather than the presumed Democratic nominee for President that he actually is (which I guess would be his “station in life” as you like call it) and are calling him arrogant for doing so? If you want to argue that he wasn’t being arrogant, that’s fine, knock yourself out. But how exactly is this particular criticism racist? Trying to justify it as a racist comment just confirms the charge that ALL criticism of the Obama is being spun as racism.
Minor point though, Jay, that comment Obama made about “not looking like the other presidents on currency” is actually a reference to a commercial the McCain campaign produced which had Obama’s face in place of Washington’s on the dollar, so if you’re going by that as your “who did it first” then it does seem to have been McCain.
Actually, it’s not. Jay is correct.
Obama Aide Concedes ‘Dollar Bill’ Remark Referred to His Race
Again, which campaign is injecting race into their campaign?
Ah yes, the lovely “N*ggers are Racists!” argument. Goddammit I love this country.
Way to dodge the question with a “racist” accusation.
So you agree that ‘90% of whites voting for McCain’ is 100% equal and completely equivalent to ‘90% of blacks voting for Obama’? If not, why? Please explain why one group is racist while the other is not.
“How about if people think Obama is acting like he’s the president rather than the presumed Democratic nominee for President …”
How, exactly, is Obama acting like he’s president? By visiting foreign countries?
Obama is trying to appear presidential. Every candidate for president does that including McCain. It’s part of the image every candidate tries to project about themselves. The main line of conservative attack has been up until this point that Obama is not, in fact, presidential because he lacks experience. This, of course, is just an attempt to paint a certain picture of Obama. I don’t remember experience being such a conservative rallying cry in 2000. How much experience did Bush have before he ran for president? He was governor of Texas for five years and his life before that isn’t exactly a beacon of public service. I know that conservatives would like to say that, well, times have changed and we live in a more dangerous world as if the world wasn’t and hasn’t always been a dangerous place. 9-11 changed everything. Yeah right.
So when Obama counters the right’s attack with a successful campaign to appear presidential, what’s McCain to do but attack that image by distorting what Obama is doing: He’s arrogant, he’s presumptuous, he doesn’t know his place. Please.
As for whether this is racist or not, it certainly has undertones of very well known slights against blacks in this country.
And, Jay, you can say all you want about the “obscurity” of the McCain video in which Obama’s face was superimposed over Ben Franklin’s but the fact of the matter is the McCain campaign inserted that imagery into the campaign first.
It is racist when he is called arrogant FOR DOING EXACTLY THE SAME SORT OF STUFF EVERYBODY ELSE HAS FUCKING ALWAYS DONE you complete fucking idiot
Really? Who was the last candidate who asked to give a speech at the Brandenburg Gate (even though he was forced to compromise at the Victory Column instead)? Who was the last candidate who planned his nomination acceptance speech in a 75,000 seat stadium because the convention hall just wasn’t big enough for all of his screaming, adoring fans? Who was the last candidate to create a faux presidential seal? Had a reserved seat on his campaign plane (O-Force One!!!) with “PRESIDENT” embroidered on the headrest?
And if it IS racist to call someone arrogant, why don’t you explain exactly HOW it’s racist to do so rather than just braying “RACIST!!!” like a ‘complete fucking idiot’?
He’s arrogant, he’s presumptuous, he doesn’t know his place.
Show us where McCain or any Republican has said Obama “doesn’t know his place” or something equivalent. And none of this bullshit “well that’s what they meant” or “that’s what their ‘arrogant’ dog whistle code speak is actually saying”. How about an actual quote?
You do know that Franco-phile Kerry was called “arrogant” back during the 2004 election, don’t you? And the last time I checked, Kerry was white.
Has anybody else noticed a lot of references to Sen. Obama as ‘this guy’ from conservative media types? My theory is that the construction is an implicit strategy to demean the Senator. You can almost see them derisively jerking a thumb toward him. I’ve heard Limbaugh, Hannity, Monica Crowley, Laura Ingraham, all their stand-ins, many of their callers and now Pat Buchanan use it, often followed by ‘wants to be president.’ As if he’s some schmuck on seventh street saying ‘gee, wouldn’t it be neat if I was the president.’
I find it hilarious for people to get all up in arms about any candidate’s arrogance when we’ve lived through years and years (before Bush, even) of espousing the message that “America is the best country, Americans are the best people, and the rest of y’all can go suck it.”
We don’t need your languages, your cars, your nothin’. Your food tastes terrible and doesn’t come in large enough portions.
We kicked Hitler’s ass in World War II. We outlasted the Soviet Union. Our guns be the biggest baddest guns ever and our Marines would make the ancient Spartans shit their loincloths.
Disagree with our policies? Fuck you. We’re the Alpha Dog.
Any American who doesn’t think these things to the core of their heart is not a real American and they can go somewhere else to have their gay sex and bicycle commutes.
(And suddenly you clowns want to tell me that Obama offends you because he lacks humility? Give me a fucking break.)
And, Jay, you can say all you want about the “obscurity” of the McCain video in which Obama’s face was superimposed over Ben Franklin’s but the fact of the matter is the McCain campaign inserted that imagery into the campaign first.
Fine. You win at the, “But they did it first!” whine-fest. Get your ribbon.
The problem is, it had nothing to do with the ‘imagery.’ In the same ad, Obama’s face was also inserted into the Statue of Liberty and Mt. Rushmore. There is nobody who can argue (well, anybody with brain activity) that the ad in question had any racial element to it. They were poking fun at Obama’s use of a quasi-presidential seal and expanded on that. Big deal.
Obama’s reference to the dollar bills and faces was racial, and his own campaign admitted as much.
Who does Obama think he is? And will he let us know before the election, so we can properly assess his fitness for president?
Try here:
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/
Boy, I’d sure love not to talk about racial codes, but as was pointed out above:
“So you say stuff like forced busing, states’ rights and all that stuff.”
Your side opened that particular Pandora’s Box a long time ago. Sorry if it makes it so hard on you now, what with people assuming anything you say “might” be racist code. Once bitten and all that.
Calling the Democrat an arrogant elitist is an oldie-but-goodie. When I hear it I get a similar feeling to when I hear MC Hammer songs.
“America is the best country, Americans are the best people, and the rest of y’all can go suck it….”
You’ve got some issues there, Spider. Are you spending a lot of time hanging out at redneck bars, getting beaten up by drunken flag-waving hicks?
Please explain where I said that the McCain-voting white block would be racist inherently. Oh I never said that? Well how about where I implied it. Anywhere? No? Hm.
Now, IF the blacks were voting for Obama because they thought McCain, for no other reason than his being white, was unqualified, then that’d be racist. Likewise with the white people who won’t vote for Obama, specifically because he’s black (I’m not saying its a majority, but lets not pretend such people don’t exist) Just because a group votes largely for someone who qualifies as a member of it doesn’t make them inherently exclusionist. It’d be like if he managed
…like if he managed 90% of the christian vote and you called him anti-semitic for it. Quit that shit, its fucking stupid and reflects poorly on you.
Oh, and as far as who injected race first into the debate, I love how the responses to me saying it doesn’t fucking matter in the fucking slightest are still trying to convince me that Obama did it first, as though that makes race pivotally important now, goodness yes. Fine, know what? I seriously don’t care enough to argue. Press argues about if he’s too black or not black enough, he points out how stupid that is and he’s the one who started it. Fine, whatever, I can’t be bothered to dispute this. Its true. Its double super secret awesome true plus plus. I still give not one stagnant fuck.
I ask “can’t we get past race” and get “but he started it so it’s important”
I ask “can’t we get past labels” and get “not with this indecisive flip-flopper”
Petty childish fucks the lot of you.
Are you spending a lot of time hanging out at redneck bars, getting beaten up by drunken flag-waving hicks?
No, but the fact that you can pull up this image sorta proves my point. Arrogance and swagger is a part of the American character…unless you’re a Republican, in which case it’s actually strength and fortitude.
Oh, and you can only be arrogant and swaggery about certain things. If you’re proud of the Boston Symphony, you’re an “elitist.”
Oh, and as far as who injected race first into the debate, I love how the responses to me saying it doesn’t fucking matter in the fucking slightest are still trying to convince me that Obama did it first,
Yeah, who cares who did it first, what fucking matters is WHICH candidate’s campaign is CONTINUING to DELIBERATELY inject race into the election while trying to accuse the other side of being racist? That would be the campaign of the “post-racial” candidate. See Axelrod’s comments above.
Petty childish fucks the lot of you.
Oh boo hoo. Take your fucking toys and go home then.
No, but the fact that you can pull up this image sorta proves my point.
Actually, it doesn’t. You seem to think that the prevailing attitude in this country is the kind of macho flag-waving, chest-thumping bullshit that you would find at a redneck bar. You really need to get out more often. The vast majority of the country is not like that.
Oh, and you can only be arrogant and swaggery about certain things. If you’re proud of the Boston Symphony, you’re an “elitist.”
Being proud about the Boston Symphony or something similar doesn’t make you an elitist. Being proud about the Boston Symphony and wondering why the bitter, clueless hicks in flyover country continue to cling to their low-class non-Boston Symphony music does.
I ask “can’t we get past labels” and get “not with this indecisive flip-flopper”
You should address that question to his own supporters. SUPPORTERS TO OBAMA: STOP FLIP-FLOPPING!
Those people at the Nation are a bunch of racists!
I don’t think and didn’t say it’s the “prevailing” attitude. I think it’s “part” of the attitude. If you think it’s confined to the “rednecks,” (which is not a word I used, but whatever gets your point across), then you’re pretending to be ignorant of the Armani-wearing conservative class who say basically the same thing–America is Number One, and those who think otherwise are fifth columnists, America-haters, and terrorist-coddlers.
I admire patriotism. I have nothing but contempt for nationalism.
Being proud about the Boston Symphony and wondering why the bitter, clueless hicks in flyover country continue to cling to their low-class non-Boston Symphony music does.
I agree, but that’s hardly the nuanced message being sent out about Obama…which makes sense, since he didn’t actually wonder anything of the sort.
*headdesk* quote the letter where it says flip-flop, Dave. Please. Tell us where the supporters say he is “flip-flopping”. The article header doesn’t call it that either. You’ve just decided to apply the label for legitimate concerns about his positions that, hey, here’s a fucking wacky thing, I actually share. You labeled it “flip-flopping,” and did so in response to my statement that people can’t get past labels.
You, Dave, in your pathologically hilarious need to talk at length when thought is inconvenient, have demonstrated the very point I was making. Congratulations, you’re awesome.
That said, I’m forced to realize I had sort of done the same with Jay tea’s comment, as he never said “flip-flopper” either, so my comment about labels is itself sort of moot. Or rather, it was until Dave actually called him a flip-flopper. Makes you wonder, if I hadn’t incorrectly made that statement, would Dave have gone so far out of his way to prove it true? Hmm… I wonder… Oh well.
WHICH candidate’s campaign is CONTINUING to DELIBERATELY inject race into the election while trying to accuse the other side of being racist?
Hmm… Obama’s calling McCain Racist, you say? See, cause Right over Here at FoxNews he’s being clear thats not what he’s saying, just clarifying that McCain’s playing up the fear of the unfamiliarity in Obama’s biography.
Oh, wait though, I just spotted in there where he actually has the audacity to say, outright “I am African American.” How utterly racist of him.
wonder why someone like that would continue to get called back to appear on mainstream media outlets as a public spokesperson for a particular political point of view? Especially if they’re considered to be so unacceptable across all areas of the political spectrum.
28 Jay Tea, Aug 5th, 2008 at 6:58 am
I’ll tell you, Tom. Because Buchanan’s damned good on TV. He’s quick-witted, he’s charismatic, he’s articulate, he’s intelligent, and he knows how to behave on television. Putting Buchanan on means that you can count on good, entertaining TV.
I’m afraid I’m going to have to disagree with you there, JT. A farging icehole being a farging icehole on teevee is not what I would consider to be entertainment. He’s vain, arrogant, parrots a lot of boiler plate talking points, and behaves in an exceedingly rude manner to those he does not agree with. When he shows up, it’s a sign for me to change the channel.
I can understand why he would be put on the air over and over again by the mainstream media, even though he’s not what I would consider entertaining. He is very very good at catapulting Republican’t propaganda…
That takes precedence to the fact that he’s a racist, sexist, anti-Semitic asshole.
Actually, no it doesn’t seem to do so, when the person in question is not a conservative. Funny, that…
I loathe the man. I’ve made that abundantly clear on numerous occasions — I’ve written at least three pieces on him at Wizbang. (”I Just Can’t Stand Pat,” “It’s Pat,” and “Hey, Pat: Just Die Already”) But I am very careful to never underestimate him, or deny him his abilities and talents and intelligence.
You also do not seem to have a problem with his ‘abilities and talents and intelligence’ when those qualities are able to help further the conservative viewpoint.
If you don’t like my explanation, Tom, here’s a crazy conspiracy theory: Buchanan is so repugnant to so many people, the big media outlets go to him specifically to discredit the positions they get him to champion.
Hey, here’s another one: Buchanan is able to push the Republican’t viewpoint in any circumstance, so the media outlets go to him specifically and let him spew his dreck in a major media outlet.
Alternately, you could try asking the people who keep putting him on, instead of those who can’t stand the guy.
I thought I was talking to those who would utilize his talents regardless of their personal distaste in doing so. I have not yet seen anything that would disillusion me on that score…
It’s also telling the truth, which Republicans only do by accident.
Oh. What about people in the comment sections of blogs that make shit up about ads being run that supposedly showed Max Cleland’s face morphing into Osama bin Ladens face?
“Is it possible for a man with dark pigmentation to be arrogant? If so, then what terms are we “allowed” to use?”
Two words…
“Southern Strategy.”
The GOP has lost any right to whine about being called racist. It is the part of racism and has been since the civil rights movement when all the Dixiecrats joined.
I agree, but that’s hardly the nuanced message being sent out about Obama…which makes sense, since he didn’t actually wonder anything of the sort.
No, but I seem to recall him saying something to a well-to-do crowd in the Bay area about people in PA bitterly clinging to their guns and religion.
Hmm… Obama’s calling McCain Racist, you say? See, cause Right over Here at FoxNews he’s being clear thats not what he’s saying, just clarifying that McCain’s playing up the fear of the unfamiliarity in Obama’s biography.
Your Fox News link doesn’t work, but I assume it’s the recent quote where Obama said he was accusing McCain of “cynicism, not racism”. Note that this statement was given after Axelrod had already admitted (as noted in my link above), after the campaign initially tried to deny it, that it WAS in fact about race.
And as noted here, Obama specifically accused John McCain of making these statements.
So to answer your question, Rex, yes Obama was calling McCain racist by accusing him of trying to scare voters by pointing out that Obama is (GASP!!!) black.
I think Obama’s use of ‘they’ in the above quotation clearly refers to the Republican leadership at large. The clue is ‘well, we know we’re not very good but you can’t risk electing Obama.’
It’s an arguable point Dave, but I think you’re missing a change of subject. Paragraph one refers to McCain, paragraph two to the Republicans. If I remember correctly, members of that Republican leadership have made reference to Sen. Obama’s name, and used somewhat-less-than-subtle racist language (’that boy,’ etc.). Many in the conservative media have done so as well, more with regard to the name than race.
And the way the comment is constructed suggests to me that he was connecting the issue of race and a background (read: Muslim father) with which some may be uncomfortable. The ‘you know’ suggests a clarification of the previous point, at least it does to me.
But of course that’s all speculation.
“It’s also telling the truth, which Republicans only do by accident.
Oh. What about people in the comment sections of blogs that make shit up about ads being run that supposedly showed Max Cleland’s face morphing into Osama bin Ladens face?”
So we should excuse for McCain lying in his national campaign ads because some liberal in a blog comment thread lied about something some time? Awesome.
So we should excuse for McCain lying in his national campaign ads because some liberal in a blog comment thread lied about something some time? Awesome.
No Spicoli. People in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones. Mike knows exactly what I’m talking about.
So, in the context of McCain’s alleged racist attacks on Obama, how does the time McCain was being introduced by some schmuck talk show host fit in? I refer to the time when the host kept referring to “Barack Hussein Obama,” and McCain came out and verbally smacked down the guy — so hard that the guy ended up dumping his support for McCain?
Ethics aside, speaking purely pragmatically, McCain knows that race-based attacks on Obama will hurt him more than they will Obama, so he’s doing everything he can to avoid even the slightest appearance of that. Conversely, the Obama campaign knows the same thing, and is trying to inject racism into every single McCain move.
So far, the McCain people have been better at the fight than the Obama people. They’ve caught the Obama people out and forced them to admit what they’re trying to do — witness Axelrod cited above. And they’ve also very carefully couched the language and references to only those first broached by Obama himself — the Paris Hilton thing, the “don’t like like those other presidents” remark, and such.
This is a marathon, though, not a sprint. And while McCain is doing well at the outset, it is by no means guaranteed to win in the long term.
Oh, and for the record, I never called Obama a flip-flopper. Nor would I. A flip-flopper changes position for political gain, while denying any changes. Obama is trying to hold both positions simultaneously, while denying any contradiction. That’s so far beyond flip-flopping, it lacks a handy catchphrase.
I’m toying with “Whitmanning,” using the quote from Walt Whitman’s “Song Of Myself:”
Do I contradict myself?
Very well then I contradict myself,
(I am large, I contain multitudes.)
Or perhaps “Pulling a Janus,” referring to the two-faced god from Greek mythology.
It’s still a work in progress…
J.
Or perhaps “Pulling a Janus,” referring to the two-faced god from Greek mythology.
Our bad, message board warrior and part time blogger. We thought you were Pulling an Anus, where you have two assholes.
But thanks for clearing up that John McCain only wrecked 3 out of five planes, not four out of five where I said he he was a man of the people. Whew! That sure makes him a hero now.
I see why you belong to the “reality-based community,” PD100. It’s kind of like how Lifetime movies are “based on real events” — meaning it only bears a passing resemblance to what really happened.
I don’t understand why you’re so proud of how I caught you in a lie, though. Why would you think it would make you look good and me look bad to remind everyone of the time you tried to lie about McCain’s service record, and I proved you wrong?
It’s a simple question, PD100. If McCain is so bad, why can’t you content yourself with simply saying the truth about him? Why do you have to make shit up to bolster your opinion?
I’m sorry, that’s giving you too much credit. Why do you feel the need to repeat others’ made-up bullshit to bolster your opinion?
Oh, I just did a quick review of the published records on McCain’s airborne mishaps.
Crash 1: engine failure on landing approach.
“Crash” 2: Collided with power lines while flying in Spain. Landed plane safely.
Crash 3: Engine flameout over Norfolk. Stayed with plane until it wsa over safe ground, then ejected.
“Crash” 4: Sitting in plane tied to deck of aircraft carrier Forrestal. Possibly struck by stray rocket misfired from another aircraft (investigators unable to determine if rocket struck McCain’s plane or one next to it; both almost instantly engulfed in flame). Barely escaped from fire and explosions that ultimately killed 134 sailors. Was blown back about ten feet and wounded by flying debris when he was attempting to return and rescue another pilot.
Crash 5: After volunteering to leave the Forrestal (returning to the US for repairs) and join an understrength squadron staying off Vietnam, ignored warning alarms that he was being tracked by enemy radars and dropped his bombs on target, then was struck by a Soviet-made SA-2 missile that blew off his wing and sent his plane into a vertical inverted spin. Managed to bail out and parachute into captivity.
Hey, I just chopped you down by another crash! The “lost plane in Spain” just went down the drain! You really don’t know how to do your homework, do you?
Go properly inflate your tires, PD100. Single-handedly, you’re the cause of the gas prices going up so high.
J.
No, but I seem to recall him saying something to a well-to-do crowd in the Bay area about people in PA bitterly clinging to their guns and religion.
Yeah, I recall that. I recall also the way it got twisted and mutated into this “show of contempt” when all he was doing was stating a basic principle of humanity–when you’re desperate, you cling tightly to things that make you feel secure and stable. For rural Pennsylvanians, these things were God and guns.
It’s similar to the nonsense going around now about Obama’s tire-gauge ideas. The Republicans make noise about how “unserious” Obama is, and the truth of the matter is that he’s talking about increasing energy efficiency…which works better than just finding more fuel.
Personally, I am waiting for a response to the question “What do you call a voting block of one racial group that votes 90% for a single candidate from that same racial group?” Do you call them something different if that group is white and voting for McCain, or black and voting for Obama? Hmmm….what does THAT “dog whistle” sound like…..?
Ok, listen carefully. The reason that’s differant is because white people are the majority, sane people realize that they don’t need extra representation.
Or perhaps “Pulling a Janus,” referring to the two-faced god from Greek mythology.
I was gonna call you out on the fact that you most likely never played Chrono Trigger, but whatever.
Oh, and for the record, I never called Obama a flip-flopper.
Except for the part when you did.
Crash 1: engine failure on landing approach.
- When he plunged into Corpus Christi Bay while practicing landings.
“The engine was removed from the aircraft that afternoon, mounted on a test stand and a new propeller installed. [It] was flushed with fresh water and started. It ran just fine. So the theory of engine failure was proven false”
“Crash” 2: Collided with power lines while flying in Spain. Landed plane safely.
-Flying too low over the Iberian Peninsula.
Crash 3: Engine flameout over Norfolk. Stayed with plane until it wsa over safe ground, then ejected
–when flying a trainer solo from Philadelphia for the Army-Navy game. Sounds like a priority mission.
-You didnt derive that from your those 1/32 scale
model re-enactments?