Confederate Flag Loving, Noose Owning Republican a Racist. Oh, the Shock.
Aug 15
Huh. Who’da thunk it?
Democrat James Webb’s Senate campaign accused Sen. George Allen (R) of making demeaning comments Friday to a 20-year-old Webb volunteer of Indian descent.
S.R. Sidarth, a senior at the University of Virginia, had been trailing Allen with a video camera to document his travels and speeches for the Webb campaign. During a campaign speech Friday in Breaks, Virginia, near the Kentucky border, Allen singled out Sidarth and called him a word that sounded like “Macaca.”
“This fellow here over here with the yellow shirt, Macaca, or whatever his name is. He’s with my opponent. He’s following us around everywhere. And it’s just great. We’re going to places all over Virginia, and he’s having it on film and its great to have you here and you show it to your opponent because he’s never been there and probably will never come.”
After telling the crowd that Webb was raising money in California with a “bunch of Hollywood movie moguls,” Allen again referenced Sidarth, who was born and raised in Fairfax County.
“Lets give a welcome to Macaca, here. Welcome to America and the real world of Virginia,” said Allen, who then began talking about the “war on terror.”
(Macaca, in case you did not know, is an old and well worn racial slur) Well, everyone, actually, who had been paying attention. Several months ago, TNR did a piece on Allen that clearly marked the man as, at least, a racist sympathizer.
Campaigning for governor in 1993, he admitted to prominently displaying a Confederate flag in his living room. He said it was part of a flag collection–and had been removed at the start of his gubernatorial bid. When it was learned that he kept a noose hanging on a ficus tree in his law office, he said it was part of a Western memorabilia collection. These explanations may be sincere. But, as a chief executive, he also compiled a controversial record on race. In 1994, he said he would accept an honorary membership at a Richmond social club with a well-known history of discrimination–an invitation that the three previous governors had refused. After an outcry, Allen rejected the offer. He replaced the only black member of the University of Virginia (UVA) Board of Visitors with a white one. He issued a proclamation drafted by the Sons of Confederate Veterans declaring April Confederate History and Heritage Month. The text celebrated Dixie’s “four-year struggle for independence and sovereign rights.” There was no mention of slavery. After some of the early flaps, a headline in The Washington Post read, “governor seen leading va. back in time.”
… But he also found himself repeatedly voting in the minority on a series of racial issues that he seems embarrassed by today. In 1984, he was one of 27 House members to vote against a state holiday commemorating Martin Luther King Jr. The Richmond Times-Dispatch reported, “Allen said the state shouldn’t honor a non-Virginian with his own holiday.” He was also bothered by the fact that the proposed holiday would fall on the day set aside in Virginia to honor Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson. That same year, he did feel the urge to honor one of Virginia’s own. He co-sponsored a resolution expressing “regret and sorrow upon the loss” of William Munford Tuck, a politician who opposed every piece of civil rights legislation while in Congress during the 1950s and 1960s and promised “massive resistance” to the Supreme Court’s 1954 decision banning segregation.
Now keeping mind that Allen is not a native of the South — meaning he came upon his love of Confederate symbolism and disdain for civil rights and civil rights’ leaders from California at a time when those symbols were being explicitly used to defend institutional racism. All of those incidents might be explainable, but taken together, the picture was clear. A non-Southerner adopts the symbols and history of the Confederacy, then litters his public career with actions that show, at a minimum, a vicious disdain for the struggle for equality in the middle of the 20th century. Well, clear to anyone who isn’t emotionally or politically invested in believing that the Southern Strategy isn’t about racism:
As it happens, I am also writing a profile on Senator Allen. In the middle of this yesterday, I read that the New Republic has a piece on Allen coming out. ABC News’s The Note carried excerpts hours before TNR published it on its website. TNR must have released it to them. So it thinks it has a pretty hot story on its hands.
The article is a hit piece. Lizza brings up the old stories about Allen hanging a Confederate flag in his Earlysville home and a noose in his law office. He dutifully reports that Allen, like many Virginians, opposed placing Martin Luther King Jr. Day on Lee-Jackson Day. He joined a “Richmond social club with a well-known history of discrimination” (sounds like Augusta National).
That was a pretty typical response on the right, when the piece wasn’t ignored outright: ignore the bigger picture, ignore Allen’s history, and focus on explaining away one or two portions of the piece with semi-plausible explanations. Except now the obvious has come out and Allen’s racism is so obvious as to make any attempt to minimize it ludicrous.
But the signs were all there. Ryan Lizza even connected them for all but the most willfully blind to see. And Yet Webb remained the GOP candidate for Senator of Virginia and remained on the short-list of GOP Presidential hopefuls. Neither of the facts speaks terribly well of the modern GOP. And neither of those facts are the creation of the big bad liberal media — the right inflicted Allen upon itself.
#1 by Fred at August 15th, 2006
| Quote
Blah, blah, blah. Yada, yada, yada. (That’s all the comment that such rubbish deserves.) Grow up.
My father had a swastika that he kept in a box of items he brought home as souvenirs from WWII. According to your narrow-minded smallness, I guess you would call him a nazi. (Do it and you had better hope I never meet you.)
#2 by wkmaier at August 15th, 2006
| Quote
This sentence: “And Yet Webb remained the GOP candidate for Senator of Virginia and remained on the short-list of GOP Presidential hopefuls.”
Should probably read “And George Felix Allen remained…”
#3 by Pejar at August 15th, 2006
| Quote
Fred, I’m guessing that your father would never even have considered putting the swastika on the living room wall though, am I right?
I’m not saying the confederate flag is racist - I’m from the UK so it means nothing to me. But your comparison is disingenuous.
#4 by wkmaier at August 15th, 2006
| Quote
And dishonest.
#5 by wkmaier at August 15th, 2006
| Quote
Full disclosure: I have a Nazi flag wrapped in a t-shirt and then in a plastic bag, in my spare bedroom where I’m not even sure I could find it in 2 minutes. It’s not hanging on my living room wall.
#6 by Ted at August 15th, 2006
| Quote
I have an Abba album similarly squirreled away.
Wkmaier. Note that if you had any political aspirations, they are now shot.
Pop quiz: who reading this can honestly say they knew that macaca is a racial slur? And who can explain the use of a Belgium slur for blacks used in Virginia when addressing someone of Indian descent? Racism is a serious issue. Trivializing it in the way done in this post is counter-productive, IMO.
#7 by Kevin at August 15th, 2006
| Quote
Ted
I can honestly say thatI had heard it before. You, obviously, have never had the pleasure of running into groups like WAR.
And, for that matter, Allen speaks French and his Mom is from Tunisia — where the slur is pretty common.
Wkmaier
Why the heck do you have a nazi tshirt????
Ted
Whay the heck do you have an Abba album?????
#8 by SayUncle at August 15th, 2006
| Quote
“Macaca, in case you did not know, is an old and well worn racial slur”
It is? I don’t see it on the link you listed. I see Macaque, which is a term for blacks I’ve never heard of. And from the article you linked:
“Asked what macaca means, Mukherjee said: “What it means, I don’t know. But it’s going to cause him some grief.”
Yes, we don’t know what it means so it must be RACIST!
#9 by Fred at August 15th, 2006
| Quote
Pejar Says:
August 15th, 2006
Fred, I’m guessing that your father would never even have considered putting the swastika on the living room wall though, am I right?
Fred: I have seen Swatikas in several historical collections hanging on the walls of meusems. Are you suggesting that anytime anyone hangs a flag on the wall in a historical collection that he is a nazi lover? The dishonesty is in trying to portray Allen as displaying the Confederate flag in a way which suggests he is longing for the days of slavery. The looney left seems to always see things through the prism of their predjudices and narrow bigotry. Their view is the only allowable one. Diversity is just a word that means “conform to our way or you are a racist.” Racism is real and should be eliminated. This tempest in a teapot does nothing to help.
#10 by Kevin at August 15th, 2006
| Quote
Uncle
First, the original article has the phonetic spelling. The phonetic spelling that is a common mispronounciation among racists.
And the racist certinaly seme to now what the word means:Here
And Allen speaks French and his mom is a French colonial from tunisia, where tword is a racist slur along the lines of n*gger.
Any more excuses?
#11 by tgirsch at August 15th, 2006
| Quote
Uncle:
It seems that George Allen called some Indian fellow a Macaca. I didn’t know what that was either. Turns out it’s a species of monkey.
So calling someone with dark skin a “monkey” isn’t racist? I guess I must have missed that memo.
Frankly, in context, it’s absolutely clear that Allen intended his remarks to be insulting and/or demeaning (why else couple in the “Welcome to America” shtick?), so if Allen didn’t have any racial motivation for using “macaca” or whatever, I think he’d be well suited to make it abundantly clear exactly what he did mean, and why he used the term.
#12 by Marchant2 at August 15th, 2006
| Quote
I don’t know about the rest of you, but if a US Senator — someone who should display high standards of etiquette — referred to me as a “macaca”, even if I didn’t know what that is, I’d still be obsessing over the “caca” portion of the slur.
#13 by wkmaier at August 15th, 2006
| Quote
Kevin,
(it’s a nazi flag) It was given to me by a friend. He didn’t want it in his house anymore, what with the 3 young kids (I have no kids). I accepted rather grudgingly, figuring I can burn it or pass it to some reputable historian. I’ll politely decline to say how he came to own it, but let’s say it was nothing he intended to have i his possession.
BTW, I have 2 ABBA Best Of CDs. Yeah, you never thought they had enough BEST material for 2 CDs, right?
Again, I don’t have the flag hanging in my LIVING ROOM, or in my Senate office.
#14 by Matt at August 15th, 2006
| Quote
Fred: The dishonesty is in trying to portray Allen as displaying the Confederate flag in a way which suggests he is longing for the days of slavery.
Matt: That’s ridiculous, Fred. I mean, c’mon. Be honest.
He isn’t “longing for the days of slavery”. lol!
But if you want to get political about it… He is, perhaps, longing for the days of racial inequality, or — at the very least — pandering to the group of people that does. You see, contrary to what you may think, a person can personally long for those days and not be a proponent of slavery at the same time.
Address the other stuff if you want to make a cogent argument. It’s not like the fact that this man’s flag was on his wall was the only thing “those ‘loony’ leftists” have as evidence that the man’s a panderer to racists, as seems to be the crux of your proposterous argument.
And just to mention… You draw up the comparison to the Swastika, and you talk about how, if someone displays it, it doesn’t necessarily indicate that they believe in Nazi ideals…
What you neglect to mention is that, in Germany, it is not decent to display a Swastika in private homes no matter what. It is frowned upon to even utter the name “Nazi” or “Adolf Hitler” on the streets of Munich.
FYI
#15 by S.W. Anderson at August 15th, 2006
| Quote
Kevin Phillips’ excellent book, “American Theocracy,” explains how and why a person born and raised outside the South — say, in California — can still be very much a product, and example, of southern culture.
That said, Allen’s slur was mean-spirited and intended to insult and belittle, obviously.
His saying “macaca” sounds like Mohawk is his way of telling us all, “I think I’m enough of Big Deal that I can blow you off with a ridiculous explanation and, (A) you’re so gullible you’ll buy it, or (B) you won’t be able to do anything about it even if you don’t buy it.”
This kind of glib, dumb, kiss-my-butt response actually ID’s Allen as a logical follow on to George W. Bush. He’ll appeal to the same people
#16 by SayUncle at August 16th, 2006
| Quote
‘Frankly, in context, it’s absolutely clear that Allen intended his remarks to be insulting and/or demeaning’
On that, I agree. But things can be insulting and not racist. I doubt most people know that macaca is a monkey.
#17 by Fred at August 16th, 2006
| Quote
Matt: What you neglect to mention is that, in Germany, it is not decent to display a Swastika in private homes no matter what. It is frowned upon to even utter the name “Nazi” or “Adolf Hitler” on the streets of Munich.
Fred: I didn’t mention what they do in Germany because it is not relevant. I live in the USA. American liberals living in Germany would lose a lot of their ability to talk about Bush if they were denied the use of “Nazi” or “Hitler.”
#18 by Janusz at August 16th, 2006
| Quote
Of course, as Matt alluded to, the display of the Confederate flag is not in and of itself the issue, the sum of various racist behaviors is, as identfied in the post. I think any reasonable person would conclude Allen is not sympathetic to civil rights and minorities, and the use of a racist slur is nothing short of offensive.
I remain very conflicted as to whether the battle flag is a racist emblem or a symbol of regional pride, probably because alot depends on context. I’m neither a southern white or african-american, so I probably don’t have the same visceral reactions to the flag. But you can’t blame the “looney left” on identifying the battle flag with racism; it was Strom Thurmond and the Dixiecrats who adopted the flag in their battle against desegregation in ‘48, and the emblem was added several southern state flags during the civil rights era in the ’50’s, clearly as a symbol of resistence to integration. Whatever associations the battle flag had before then is overshadowed by the racist behaviors of the right during the civil rights era.
#19 by tgirsch at August 16th, 2006
| Quote
Uncle:
Well, then, if he wasn’t using it in the ethnic slur sense, and he wasn’t using it in the monkey sense, then what exactly did he mean by it?
#20 by Fred at August 16th, 2006
| Quote
Jesse Jackson should have told him to say the man was from “Hymietown.” Then everything would have been okay.
#21 by Ted at August 16th, 2006
| Quote
Re stars and bars: I do not think displaying the flag is inherently racist. However, to do so is at a minimum a very insensitive action. The flag might stand for a variety of things, but one of the things it symbolizes is the oppression of millions of people. Thus, to display the flag is to disregard the effect it has on the oppressed and their descendants. I believe that the caring, considerate thing to do is err on the side of consideration and lose the flag. (And please don’t bother with the sophomoric replies about museums.)
Relating this to Allen, for me it comes down to this: do I want to support a politician who has a lack of empathy for a significant percentage of his constituency? Especially when those same folks have a history of being wronged by our society in general and the government in particular. I don’t choose insensitive people as personal friends, and I don’t support them as politicians.
Note that by formulating the initial discussion in terms of racism, Kevin’s approach had me thinking of ways to defend Allen. I don’t like to see the concept of racism cheapened by applying it to less significant offenses, and I don’t like to see people accused of racism when they have been in public view for decades and have never done or said anything that is actually, specifically racist. By setting the bar so high (“Allen is a racist”), his opposition creates an acceptable space for him to operate - below the racist standard but beyond the realm of decency. Overreaching condemnation turns real flaws into defensible characteristics.
Don’t tell me Allen is a racist because of flag, noose, macaca, etc. Tell me he is insensitive to blacks and minorities because of flag, noose, macaca, etc, and his state is 25% non-white.
#22 by Brooklynite at August 16th, 2006
| Quote
Jesse Jackson should have told him to say the man was from “Hymietown.” Then everything would have been okay.
Because, you know, Jackson suffered no political fallout from that incident. The Macaca incident should no more derail Allen’s presidential ambitions than the Hymietown comment derailed Jesse’s.
#23 by Fred at August 16th, 2006
| Quote
If “Macaca” is such an offensive word, why are you liberals repeating it so much? I notice you don’t use other offensive racial slurs? You ***** or “n word” or some other way to pretend you are too good to write the offending word. Maybe you should start referring to the “M” word or M*****.
#24 by Brooklynite at August 16th, 2006
| Quote
Fred, I just did a Google search on this site, looking for uses of the phrase “the n word.” I found no instance in which one of the blog’s triumverate used it. Searching on “nigger,” on the other hand, turned up one of them quoting Martin Luther King using the term, tgirsch using it in comments, and so on. (I didn’t check all the hits.)
So you’re wrong, as usual.
#25 by Brooklynite at August 16th, 2006
| Quote
I dug a little deeper, and Kevin, Tgirsch, and KTK have all posted the word “nigger” here. None has ever used the term “the n-word.”
#26 by Ted at August 17th, 2006
| Quote
brooklynite, not that it matters much, but scroll back up and peruse comment #11…
#27 by Fred at August 17th, 2006
| Quote
Remember Hillary Clinton’s comments in St. Louis in January 2004. Here they are:
ST. LOUIS, Missouri (AP) — Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton apologized for joking that Mahatma Gandhi used to run a gas station in St. Louis, saying it was “a lame attempt at humor.”
The New York Democrat made the remark at a fund-raiser Saturday. During an event here for Senate candidate Nancy Farmer, Clinton introduced a quote from Gandhi by saying, “He ran a gas station down in St. Louis.”
#28 by Fred at August 17th, 2006
| Quote
How about Joe Biden?
Biden: “You cannot go to a 7-11 or a Dunkin Donuts unless you have an Indian accent. I’m not kidding.”
#29 by Fred at August 17th, 2006
| Quote
brooky: I dug a little deeper, and Kevin, Tgirsch, and KTK have all posted the word “nigger” here. None has ever used the term “the n-word.”
Fred: Dig back to comment #11.
#30 by Fred at August 17th, 2006
| Quote
How about this racist ad?
Aug 16, 10:30 PM EDT
Democratic Web Ad Angers Some Hispanics
By SUZANNE GAMBOA
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) — A Democratic political ad is under fire from Hispanics who say it unfairly compares Latino immigrants to terrorists.
The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee sponsored a 35-second ad on its Web site that shows footage of two people scaling a border fence mixed with images of Osama Bin Laden and North Korea President Kim Jong Il.
Pedro Celis, chairman of the Republican National Hispanic Assembly, said in a statement Tuesday that the DSCC should remove the ad because it vilifies illegal Hispanic immigrants and is “appalling.”
Houston City Councilwoman Carol Alvarado, a Democrat, sent a letter to DSCC Chairman Sen. Charles Schumer of New York asking that the ad be pulled. She said it could alienate Latino voters.
“To liken Latino immigrants to bazooka-toting terrorists not only undermines the positive relationship our party has with this community, but also lowers us to a despicable level as breeders of unfounded fear and hatred,” Alvarado wrote.
The ad opens with the words “Security Under Bush and GOP?” It features scenes of a masked man with a bazooka, scenes from terrorist attacks and police inspecting a subway train. It also shows Osama bin Laden, Iran President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and a docked ship as it claims “4 times as many terrorist attacks in 2005.”
Then comes footage of a person climbing over a corrugated metal border fence and another preparing to climb it as the words “millions more illegal immigrants” form on-screen. In the following scene, viewers see the words “North Korea has quadrupled its nuclear arsenal” with footage of a tank and North Korea President Kim Jong Il.
The ad ends with the words, “Feel safer? Vote for change.”
“Equating these undocumented migrants to the very real threats of terrorism is inexcusable and only serves to fan the flames of anti-immigrant sentiment in our country,” Celis said in the statement.
#31 by Fred at August 17th, 2006
| Quote
Here’s a good one about the “first black president”:
July, 2000
“Funky President Clinton may have gotten a little too far down last weekend at Martha’s Vineyard,” explained an isolated report on the New York Daily News gossip page, Sept. 10, 1997. “White House image tenders are praying that photos of Clinton wearing a vintage Afro-wig won’t see the light of day.
“On Friday, Clinton made an appearance at a party at the Hot Tin Roof, a Vineyard nightclub co-owned by Carly Simon. Kicking the jams out at the affair were ‘The Boogies,’ a band fronted by Carly’s fetching daughter…..
“One of ‘The Boogies’ thought it was proper to tug onto the Prez’ head a floppy wig that would have done Sly Stone proud.”
The Washington Post’s gossip maven Al Kamen picked up the action from that point:
“Clinton’s finely honed political instincts immediately shot his hand up to snatch the wig off. But sometimes with Clinton, unlike other skilled pols, goofiness prevails. Clinton put the Afro back on.”
Kamen reported that several off-duty press photogs had captured the Afro-bedecked Clinton image on film, but were warned by the White House that there would be retaliation if they printed it. “Arguably it was the most undignified picture in the history of the presidency,” observed Kamen, who finally obtained a copy of the sensational pic himself 11 days later.
The Post buried the Clinton Afro-wig pic, along with Kamen’s final column on the episode, on page A 21. The rest of the press completely ignored the story. Not even the New York tabloids, including the News, which had teased Kamen’s account, dared to run the photo.
Do the same reporters now hysterically covering Christie Whitman’s faux pas as the race crime of the year, still think a picture of the leader of the free world prancing around at a yuppie minstrel show is irrelevant? What about Rev. Sharpton — has he been asked to comment on the Clinton Afro-wig photo? (Answer: Are you kidding?)
Surely the Martha’s Vineyard photo becomes even more relevant when one remembers that as governor, Bill Clinton was an ardent and unabashed supporter of racial profiling along Arkansas’ highways — the very same practice Gov. Whitman has banned.
“[Clinton] approved the profiling of Hispanics by Arkansas State Police as part of a drug interdiction program in 1988,” reported the Washington Times in June 1999. “The Arkansas plan gave state troopers the authority to stop and search vehicles based on a drug courier profile of Hispanics.
“A lawsuit and a federal consent decree ended the practice — known as ‘the criminal apprehension program’ — the next year, and Gov. Clinton criticized the court’s decision and, at one point, threatened to reinstate the program despite the court’s ruling.”
“The states’ position was to give away a program we’re now trying to get back,” Clinton said after the court struck down his racial profiling plan.
#32 by Fred at August 17th, 2006
| Quote
Al Sharpton, democut&run presidential candidate, is a favorite of the left.
The race-baiter in the campaign
By Jeff Jacoby | November 9, 2003
LAST WEEK, the Democratic candidates forced Howard Dean to furl the Confederate flag. Now perhaps they’ll take on the real race-baiter in their midst: Al Sharpton.
Whatever sins Dean may have committed in his 54 years, he has a long way to go before he can touch Sharpton’s repulsive history of racial demagoguery. For instance, did Dean ever go out of his way to share a stage with the likes of Khalid Muhammad — a gay-bashing, Jew-hating, anti-Catholic racist — or praise him as “an articulate and courageous brother?” Of course not. But Sharpton did.
Nor did Dean — or any other candidate — ever go on the radio to demand that a “white interloper” — the owner of a Harlem clothing store — be forced out of business, or whip up a racial protest that ended with seven people dead in a horrific arson attack. But Sharpton did.
#33 by Ted at August 17th, 2006
| Quote
Fred, what is your point?
#34 by Brooklynite at August 17th, 2006
| Quote
Re “n*gger”: Oops. My point stands, though.
(Kevin can speak for himself, of course, but when I see “n*gger,” I think “someone’s trying to foil search engines,” not “someone’s bowdlerizing.”)
#35 by Fred at August 17th, 2006
| Quote
Brooklynite: “when I see “n*gger,” I think “someone’s trying to foil search engines,” .”
Fred: That’s even worse. If it wasn’t for search engine restrictions, it would be okay to use the words?
#36 by Brooklynite at August 17th, 2006
| Quote
Fred. Let’s go through this slowly. You said that us liberals don’t spell out the word “nigger,” and that since folks here were spelling out the word “macaca,” that must mean it’s not a slur. I demonstrated that each of this blog’s proprietors has in fact spelled out the word “nigger” on this very blog. So clearly us liberals do spell out the word “nigger,” and your claim about “macaca” was based on a false premise.
I don’t even know for sure what you’re trying to get at with your latest if-then, but your original one has been debunked.
#37 by Fred at August 17th, 2006
| Quote
Brooklynite: I demonstrated that each of this blog’s proprietors has in fact spelled out the word “nigger”
Fred: I stand corrected. Liberals do use racial slurs. I forgot that they are special people who live under different rules than those expected of others. I’ll try to keep that in mind. Thanks.
#38 by Brooklynite at August 17th, 2006
| Quote
See, Fred, it was to preclude exactly that kind of silly gotcha response that I used the phrase “spelled out” rather than “used.” When Kevin posted the word, for instance, he was quoting from MLK’s “Letter from a Birmingham Jail.”
Take another swing.
#39 by tgirsch at August 18th, 2006
| Quote
Actually, now that I live in the South, I feel it’s important to point out that the word “nigger” isn’t necessarily racist. It depends on how it’s used. Sure, some people use it in a racist fashion in some situations, and it’s virtually always been used in a racist fashion historically speaking, but that shouldn’t take away from the word’s otherwise proud heritage. Think of all the positive things it has historically stood for! Heritage, not hate, people! Get with the program!
(If you’re snark-impaired, disregard the above…)
#40 by Fred at August 18th, 2006
| Quote
Brooklynite Says:
August 17th, 2006
See, Fred, it was to preclude exactly that kind of silly gotcha response that I used the phrase “spelled out” rather than “used.”
Fred: That’s okay. You don’t need to defend the use of racist words by liberals. When the great god of liberals, Bill Clinton, doesn’t know the definition of “is” how can the common liberal be expected to refain from using racist words?
#41 by Bob at August 18th, 2006
| Quote
Fred’s dad is a racist. Yadda yadda yadda.
#42 by Janusz at August 19th, 2006
| Quote
Fred wrote: “When the great god of liberals, Bill Clinton, …”
Hmmm…Bill Clinton is a “liberal”? That’s a new one. From what I remember, he (and Hillary) is (are) very moderate in their views, centrist/conservative even. In fact, that’s why Republicans hate them so much…they filled the vacuum in the political center when Gingrich pulled the Republicans to the looney right with his Contract on America.
#43 by Ted at August 19th, 2006
| Quote
Janusz, in the black and white world where Fred, KTK, and many others live, moderate is an indiscernible position. Clinton is a dem, therefore he is a liberal. There is the correct position, and all others must be on the opposing fringe.
I suppose this is an outcome of our two party system. Us against them. Politics for the simple-minded.
I am always fascinated how seemingly intelligent, informed individuals comply so willingly to the prescribed position on so many issues. Take 10 self-described liberals and 10 conservatives and give them a list of 20 prominent issues. Gun control, abortion, death penalty, estate taxes, affirmative action, wire-tapping, Israel, Palestine, global warming, immigration, etc. On the face of it, these are pretty diverse issues with no common denominator. But I would bet 10 out of 10 liberals would come down on the same side of each issue, and 10 out of ten conservatives on the opposing side.
Group think is very appealing to many people. Just ask Jack Rosenberg. (100 points to anyone who gets that reference without Google assistance, 1000 points to anyone under 50.)
#44 by Janusz at August 20th, 2006
| Quote
Ted:
It is funny how that seems to happen, that people let their identification with a group decide their view on an issue. I’ve had people become extremely upset with me when I didn’t conform to the position they thought I would.
Some issues, of course, don’t always fall so neatly into the right/left spectrum. Look at the “liberals” who supported the invasion of Iraq. The pro-gun lobby is a favorite issue among our friends on the right. But ask any conservative, dyed-in-the-wool-Republican New York City policeman how he feels about the issue, I guarantee he’ll come down on the gun control side. For him it’s a life and death issue.
BTW, I have no idea who Jack Rosenberg is…
#45 by Fred at August 21st, 2006
| Quote
Ted Says:
August 19th, 2006
Janusz, in the black and white world where Fred, KTK, and many others live…
Fred: Okay. You caught me. I confess that I believe in right and wrong.
#46 by Michael Bunch at August 24th, 2006
| Quote
I am trying to locate the bill or ammendment to the US flag Code 36 U.S. C. sections 171-178 ammendment that president Bush signed in 2002 or 2004 that prohibited proterty owner associations from regulating how a home owner displays a US Flag. can you tell me the number, name etc of it so I can get a written copy, Thanks, Michael drmichaelbunch@aol.com
#47 by Jim at August 27th, 2006
| Quote
I am both a Southerner and a loyal American and very proud of it. To me, the Flag, even more than Old Glory, represents the valor, honor, and integrity of my forbears. It is a symbol of the very American fortitude Southerners displayed during their struggle for liberty. No other section of the country has had to deal with that kind of destruction, privation, and upheaval, but we did. Now. it is an historical reminder of those men and women who were in a way the South’s own “greatest generation.” I realize that the Flag can be offensive to many blacks, but why should we be forced to surreder our pride and history for the sake of their sensibilities? Do we lower the US flag simply because some Indians might be offended at its implication of oppression? Further, why should Northerners even be involved in this debate? They are foreigners and it should be none of their concern. This issue should be decided by Sourthern voters and them alone. Not by courts or pressure groups.