CSNbbs

Wow. This is from a party chair:

http://www.tampabays10.com/news/mostpop/...vider=top?

Now before someone jumps on my case, I know plenty of non-racist Republicans, that's not what I'm saying. But I have to say I am shocked at some of the things I'm seeing and hearing. Yesterday I saw footage of Palin supporters in Denver having their kids do an "Obama imitation". The kids started making monkey noises as the parents looked on proudly. There have been all sorts of other incidents this year. I really think the Republicans are going to have to deal with this issue after the election. Are they going to reject this sort of blatant racism or become the party of racism? It's their choice.

The Democrats are the ones who did not allow blacks to participate in their party for almost a century. They had to win a US Supreme Court case during World War II to be allowed to vote in the Democrat primary in Fort Bend County. The Republican party has been open to blacks since its beginning. I have voted for three blacks in a row on my ballot all republican because they were the best ones running for the position-Michael Williams for Railroad Commissioner and two State Supreme Court justices.

The Republican Party is the party of Lincoln and most blacks voted Republican until many fell astray for the give-aways offered by the New Deal and the Great Society.

I'm never surprised what one asshat local party chair from either party will say, given the opportunity.

here is the email

THE THREAT:

HERE IN TEMPLE TERRACE, FL OUR REPUBLICAN HQ IS
ONE BLOCK AWAY FROM OUR LIBRARY, WHICH IS AN
EARLY VOTING SITE.

I SEE CARLOADS OF BLACK OBAMA SUPPORTERS
COMING FROM THE INNER CITY TO CAST THEIR VOTES
FOR OBAMA. THIS IS THEIR CHANCE TO GET A BLACK
PRESIDENT AND THEY SEEM TO CARE LITTLE THAT HE IS
AT MINIMUM, SOCIALIST, AND PROBABLY MARXIST IN
HIS CORE BELIEFS. AFTER ALL, HE IS BLACK--NO
EXPERIENCE OR ACCOMPLISHMENTS--BUT HE IS BLACK.

I ALSO SEE YOUNG COLLEGE STUDENTS AND THEIR
PROFESSORS FROM USF PARKING THEIR CARS WITH THE
PROMINENT 'OBAMA' BUMPER STICKERS. THE
STUDENTS ARE ENTHUSIASTIC TO BE VOTING IN A
HISTORIC ELECTION WHERE THERE MAY BE THE FIRST
BLACK PRESIDENT.

THE COLLEGE PROFESSORS, PARTICULARLY IN THE SOCIAL
SCIENCES, FOR THE MOST PART HAVE LITTLE OR NO
EXPERIENCE IN THE WORK-A-DAY WORLD.
THEIR LIFE EXPERIENCE HAS BEEN MOSTLY ACADEMIC
UNDER THE TUTELAGE OF LIBERAL COLLEGE
PROFESSORS. FOR THEM, A LITTLE SOCIALISM AND ANTIAMERICANISM IS A GOOD THING. AFTER ALL, IF
TERRORISTS ATTACK US, WE MUST HAVE DONE
SOMETHING TO PROVOKE THEM.

YOU AND I UNDERSTAND THE DANGERS THE POTENTIAL
OBAMA PRESIDENCY PRESENTS TO OUR WAY OF LIFE.
THE SUPPRESSION OF FREE SPEECH, INTRODUCING
UNION INTIMIDATION IN THE WORKPLACE, INCREASED
DANGERS TO OUR NATION BY TERRORISTS, CUTTING
OUR DEFENSE BUDGET BY 25%, TURNING OUR TAX
SYSTEM INTO A NATIONAL WELFARE SYSTEM AND
ECONOMIC POLICIES THAT COULD DRIVE US INTO A
DEPRESSION.

THERE IS ONLY ONE WAY TO STOP OBAMA: VOTE !!!-------
(AND GET EVERYONE YOU KNOW TO VOTE)
ONLY YOU AND I CAN STOP OBAMA NOW ! !
SEVEN DAYS TO GO AND WE MUST ACT IMMEDIATELY..

A PLAN OF ACTION FOR YOU AND I:
• VOTE. OBAMA IS ADVERTISING ON TV ASKING ALL
HIS SUPPORTERS TO TAKE A DAY OFF WORK OR
CLASS TO VOTE.
• CONTACT PERSONALLY EVERYONE YOU KNOW
REMINDING THEM TO VOTE AND HOW IMPORTANT
IT IS. PARENTS, VOTING-AGE CHILDREN, IN-LAWS,
CO-WORKERS, CHURCH CONTACTS, SCHOOL
CONTACTS, BUSINESS CONTACTS. MAKE A LIST AND
CONTACT THEM.
• SEND THIS MESSAGE TO EVERYONE ON YOUR EMAIL
LIST THAT WANTS TO DEFEAT OBAMA.

YOUR EMAIL IS AN EFFECTIVE TOOL IF YOU USE IT WISELY
AND PROMPTLY. YOU CAN REACH 10,000,000 PEOPLE IN
THE NEXT SEVEN DAYS IF AS FEW AS TEN PEOPLE ON
YOUR LIST TAKE PROMPT ACTION AND TEN PEOPLE ON
THEIR LIST AND TEN PEOPLE ON THEIR LIST...YOU GET
THE IDEA.
LET'S ALL PRAY AND WORK AND WE WILL SURELY
CELEBRATE OUR VICTORY ON 11/5/08.

David A. Storck Chairman
Hillsborough County
Republican Party
chairmanstorck@earthlink.net


Offensive, yes, Racist, no.

He merely states his opinion that blacks are voting for Obama merely because Obama is black.

I dont see "N words" or any other derogatory references in the email.

WMD Owl Wrote:Offensive, yes, Racist, no.

He merely states his opinion that blacks are voting for Obama merely because Obama is black.

I dont see "N words" or any other derogatory references in the email.

I'm sorry... Unless this guy is actually tracking the cars from the inner city to the library, then "I SEE CARLOADS OF BLACK OBAMA SUPPORTERS COMING FROM THE INNER CITY TO CAST THEIR VOTES FOR OBAMA." is a statement based on racist assumptions.

Having said that, every (insert some category, e.g. party, religion, culture, college sports fan forum, etc.) has its extremist nutjob wings. I'm guessing most of the environmental terrorists in the US who don't want to waste a vote with the Green party are voting Democratic. That doesn't mean Democrats (or environmentalists) are supportive of environmental terrorists.

I think we saw plenty of racism in the Democratic primaries when the black Democrats would vote over 90% for Obama and the white Democrats would vote over 75% for Hillary. Racism must have played a part in that kind of disparity.

I know of two yellow dog Democrats who will be staying home rather than vote for a black man. This will be the first time since 1934 they haven't voted a straight democratic ticket. I doubt they are the only ones.

There are racists voting on both sides of this race.

IMO, basing your vote on race is racist, whether it is a vote FOR or a vote AGAINST a particular candidate, and whether the candidate in question is black, white, or other.

I have voted for a black man for president twice before, so I don't care a lot about "making history". I did not make it three times this election because of his policies, not his race.

OptimisticOwl Wrote:I have voted for a black man for president twice before, so I don't care a lot about "making history". I did not make it three times this election because of his policies, not his race.

I see something bad coming on the horizon…

Assuming Obama is elected President, anyone who comes out with strong opinions or opposition to his programs and policies will automatically be labeled a “racist” by Administration supporters.

JustAnotherAustinOwl Wrote:Wow. This is from a party chair:

http://www.tampabays10.com/news/mostpop/...vider=top?

Now before someone jumps on my case, I know plenty of non-racist Republicans, that's not what I'm saying. But I have to say I am shocked at some of the things I'm seeing and hearing. Yesterday I saw footage of Palin supporters in Denver having their kids do an "Obama imitation". The kids started making monkey noises as the parents looked on proudly. There have been all sorts of other incidents this year. I really think the Republicans are going to have to deal with this issue after the election. Are they going to reject this sort of blatant racism or become the party of racism? It's their choice.

Sounds like..."Some of my best friends are Republicans..."

I think there is a lot of racism in the democratic party, too, and it is possible that an energized, cohesive black wing of the democratic party will attempt to wield power that up to 2008 it did not realize it had, causing a schism. OTOH, maybe not. It will be interesting to see the internal power struggles over the next four years.

I live in an area that is 97% white and 68% Republican, yet in the last few years we have had a black city councilman, a black mayor pro-tem, and a black Chief of Police. Clearly we are a bunch of redneck racists.

I am really tired of these labels.

I didn't see your outrage over the hanged effigy of Sarah Palin, JAAO. Are the Democrats going to reject this sort of thing? All I hear from the left is amusement.

WMD Owl Wrote:I see something bad coming on the horizon…

Assuming Obama is elected President, anyone who comes out with strong opinions or opposition to his programs and policies will automatically be labeled a “racist” by Administration supporters.

Regarding your "concern trolling" that folks who don't agree with the Obamanauts will be marginalized as racist, me thinks there's little or no evidence of that in Obama, Biden, or the team surrounding them.

Posting pictures of black crack dealers/felons and saying this is Houston's Obama isn't OK. That's racist - it plays to a racist stereo type. I, and I assume others, won't take you seriously if you go there. Why should they?

Straight up arguments about tax policy are one thing (and I'm sure I've learned a lot more from you, Hambone, and Optimistic Owl, than you'd ever get from me if I didn't just lurk around here), the other crap is, well, just goofy for someone with your skill set.

Making monkey noises isn't OK -it's racist - see the post that started this thread. That's shocking.

Tired of "labels?" - There's racism in our society. Making monkey noises is racist. Why be tired of calling BS on that sort of crap?

I'm pretty f!#$$ tired that in 2008 folks seem to think it's OK to teach their kids that it's OK to make monkey noises about Senator Obama.

There's plenty of important voices on the right that need to be heard (and listened to) over the next 4 years if Obama is elected and if this nation is going to get back on track.

If the republican party decides to go to war with Obama as they did with the Clintons, there is VERY little prospect for political progress.

75Owl - your history lesson stopped in what, 1968? Little bit of Lee Atwater under the bridge since 1970.

Hopefully in 5 days, no matter what party we're supporting, if Obama is elected we can step back from the passion of the moment and recognize what an enormous moment this is for this particular nation, a nation born with the stain of slavery, the deaths of 700,000 in the civil war, a 100 year struggle for civil rights, the death of MLK, the segregation of many of our great cities.

I was as outraged by the Palin effigy as I was by the Obama effigy. That is, not much. (But can we at least admit that a hung effigy of a dark-skinned man has more historical connotations?) Actually, to me, the smug creep at the Palin rally in Ohio with the Curious George doll was more disturbing than vandal losers who try to shock with mannequins. But, no, I don't believe racism is behind much of the opposition to Obama.

But I get tired of labels, too. Labels like "anti-American," "pro-American," "real America," "Marxist," "true patriot," and "American president Americans have been waiting for." This "otherness" campaign has been much more overt and insidious than racism in this campaign.

And I'm bothered that it has become acceptable to treat the terms "Arab" and "Muslim" as insults.

ausowl Wrote:Tired of "labels?" - There's racism in our society. Making monkey noises is racist. Why be tired of calling BS on that sort of crap?

I don't condone what those individuals did. I also don't condone extennding responsibility for that attitude to the entire party. I am tired of being characterized as a racist because I oppose the policies of the party that most black people embrace. I don't oppose the policies because black people embrace them, I oppose them because I think they are wrong, either in principle or result.

I have heard many racist statements made toward my ethic group(s) that are not condemned as racist by the Democrats. Obama himself has made statements I consider racist. Racism is not confined to just one race. Any person can be discriminated against on the basis of race, and all such discriminations are reprehensiuble. Agree? Or not?

Before we ascribe all racism to Republicans, look at your own party. Why were there those discrepancies in black/white voting in the Democratic primaries? If there is another reason, tell us. I think it was racism. Prove me wrong. Bill the Saint was excoriated just for implying it.

Many of the people who are racist toward black people are lifelong Democrats, and many will vote for Obama just because he is a Democrat, but their attitudes will not change for that. It's just that they are more prejudiced against Republicans. During the primaries, it was anyone but Obama, so most of them were Hillaryites.

If you want to condemn the actions of those who did the monkey sounds, I will join you. If you want to believe that they are typical of the vast majority of Republicans based on a propaganda-driven stereotype, we will part ways.

Take the beam from your own eye...

S.A. Owl Wrote:But I get tired of labels, too. Labels like "anti-American," "pro-American," "real America," "Marxist," "true patriot," and "American president Americans have been waiting for." This "otherness" campaign has been much more overt and insidious than racism in this campaign.

When a Candidate promises you ‘hope” and “change”.. yet doesn’t specify what “hope” and “change” means, you have refer to the historical context.

Obama has been associating with unsavory individuals such as Rev. Wright for years, been associating with “terrorists” like William Ayers for years, and has been attending meetings with the like of Khalidi and Said, who invited the racist “President” of Iran to ‘speak” to Columbia University…

Because of this you have to ask questions, and because his legislative record indicates he is one of the most liberal voting members of the Senate, it begs the question…

What does Obama stand for?


(Ignore “change” and “hope” and ….?)

You listen to his public announcements, his criticisms of the US Supreme Court in terms of civil rights rulings.. and the “distribution of assets” and how he wants to “spread the wealth around” ,……

And it sounds like a sharp turn to the left to me…

Correct Comrade?

And I don’t think the American people signed up for that…

WMD Owl Wrote:When a Candidate promises you ‘hope” and “change”.. yet doesn’t specify what “hope” and “change” means, you have refer to the historical context.

Obama has been very explicit ini referencing both the historical context and his specific ideas. Not listening to or agreeing with such does not nullify their existence. See his website under issues.

WMD Owl Wrote:Obama has been associating with unsavory individuals such as Rev. Wright for years, been associating with “terrorists” like William Ayers for years, and has been attending meetings with the like of Khalidi and Said, who invited the racist “President” of Iran to ‘speak” to Columbia University…

I love this. First and foremost, I don't know if Obama ever met Said, but I would like to point out that Ed Said died 5 years ago. That was two years before Ahmadinejad became president of Iran and 4 years before he spoke at Columbia University. I seriously doubt he was in any way involved in inviting Ahmadinejad to speak.

Second of all, Khalidi is a well-respected American scholar, whether you agree with his positions or not. Like many scholars, he has complicated and nuanced views of the issues. He has been simultaneously critical of both the Israelis and the Palestinians, without being dismissive of either.

Third, if John McCain were so concerned about Khalidi and his ilk, he might have thought of that before the International Republican Institute, of which he was chair of the board at the time, gave $448,000 to Khalidi's Center for Palestine Research and Studies in FY1999. But you don't have to take my word for it... I've attached the form 990 for that tax year. (See p. 14 listing the grant under West Bank and p. 17 listing the members of the board of directors).

Lastly, if we want to talk about associations, you can make anyone sound bad with the unsavory characters from their lives -- or even the savory ones who you just include only one fact about. Let's see... shall we do McCain?

G. Gordon Liddy, burglar and would-be domestic terrorist (and host of a McCain fundraiser at his house... sound familiar)
Charles Keating, congress-bribing failed S&L exec (we'll just omit that McCain was largely cleared of everything but bad judgment and actually testified against Keating at his civil trial)
Wendy Gramm, See-no-evil member of Enron Audit Committee at time of collapse (OMG, this woman must truly be awful!!! I know this for a fact because clearly I would know more facts about what went on at the upper levels of Enron than members of the Audit committee did, right?)
Ted Stevens, convicted corrupt politician (these guys worked together for years!)
Ted Kennedy (I hear he killed his girlfriend!)
Barack HUSSEIN Obama (oh, wait, I take that one back)

WMD Owl Wrote:What does Obama stand for?


(Ignore “change” and “hope” and ….?)

Again, he has had his policy positions up for over a year now. Feel free to read them.

WMD Owl Wrote:You listen to his public announcements, his criticisms of the US Supreme Court in terms of civil rights rulings.. and the “distribution of assets” and how he wants to “spread the wealth around” ,……

And it sounds like a sharp turn to the left to me…

Correct Comrade?

And I don’t think the American people signed up for that…

Technically, they haven't signed up for anything yet -- at least not the 2/3 of voters who haven't voted yet. But for many of his supporters, we have read his policy positions and we DO know exactly what we've signed up for.


Lastly, as to the oft-repeated charge that he is one of the most liberal members of the senate, the ratings issued by publications and groups are especially flawed when it comes to the Senate. Why? Here are some of the votes used to calculate the National Journal ratings in which Obama was most liberal. Which vote on each of these would be liberal or conservative?

Quote:Establish a Senate Office of Public Integrity to handle ethics complaints against senators.

Table an amendment that would require the Homeland Security Department to screen 100 percent of cargo containers entering the country within five years.

Exempt extensions of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts from budget rules for offsets.

Limit federal, state, and local governments' eminent-domain power over private land.

Eliminate an immigrant guest-worker program

Allow certain immigrants to stay in the United States while renewing their visas.

Block funding for World Bank malaria control and prevention programs

The other big problem with that 2007 rating for Obama is that the threshold for being rated is having voted on 50% of the votes in all 3 categories. McCain was unrated due to missing the threshold in 2 of the categories due to his campaign. Obama was also campaigning, but returned to the Senate enough to meet the threshold for ranking. Of course, the times that he (and other candidates) went out of his way to return to vote were when the issues were most divisive and most partisan.

Unfortunately too much has changed since 1970, but that happened
after most of the black vote had been lost to the blandishments of
LBJ's Great Society hand-outs. Much of the GOP lost interest in reaching out to blacks after most of their vote was unavailable anymore, but it was remembering much of the political action during the Civil Rights fights from 1950s and 1960s. Many of the important court decisions were made by the Warren Supreme Court and the 5th Circuit. Warren had been a Repubican governor of California. One leader for civil rights cases was John Brown on the 5th Circuit who had been the Harris County Republican chairman. Eisenhower sent the troops to Little Rock to integrate Central High. There was more Republican support in the House (including George Bush 41 who was a representative with a Harris Coutry district) and Senate for the Civil Rights bill of 1964 than Democrat support.

When I say most blacks go Democrat now, there are still some enthusiast conservative Republicans including the vice-chair of the Texas Republican Party.

ausowl Wrote:

WMD Owl Wrote:I see something bad coming on the horizon…

Assuming Obama is elected President, anyone who comes out with strong opinions or opposition to his programs and policies will automatically be labeled a “racist” by Administration supporters.

Regarding your "concern trolling" that folks who don't agree with the Obamanauts will be marginalized as racist, me thinks there's little or no evidence of that in Obama, Biden, or the team surrounding them.

Posting pictures of black crack dealers/felons and saying this is Houston's Obama isn't OK. That's racist - it plays to a racist stereo type. I, and I assume others, won't take you seriously if you go there. Why should they?

Straight up arguments about tax policy are one thing (and I'm sure I've learned a lot more from you, Hambone, and Optimistic Owl, than you'd ever get from me if I didn't just lurk around here), the other crap is, well, just goofy for someone with your skill set.

Making monkey noises isn't OK -it's racist - see the post that started this thread. That's shocking.

Tired of "labels?" - There's racism in our society. Making monkey noises is racist. Why be tired of calling BS on that sort of crap?

I'm pretty f!#$$ tired that in 2008 folks seem to think it's OK to teach their kids that it's OK to make monkey noises about Senator Obama.

There's plenty of important voices on the right that need to be heard (and listened to) over the next 4 years if Obama is elected and if this nation is going to get back on track.

If the republican party decides to go to war with Obama as they did with the Clintons, there is VERY little prospect for political progress.

75Owl - your history lesson stopped in what, 1968? Little bit of Lee Atwater under the bridge since 1970.

Hopefully in 5 days, no matter what party we're supporting, if Obama is elected we can step back from the passion of the moment and recognize what an enormous moment this is for this particular nation, a nation born with the stain of slavery, the deaths of 700,000 in the civil war, a 100 year struggle for civil rights, the death of MLK, the segregation of many of our great cities.

OptimisticOwl Wrote:I think we saw plenty of racism in the Democratic primaries when the black Democrats would vote over 90% for Obama and the white Democrats would vote over 75% for Hillary. Racism must have played a part in that kind of disparity.

I have yet to see a reasonable explanation of this from an Obama supporter. It looks to me that a mojority of democrats voted their race.

Maybe Bill Clinton knows. I'll ask him next time I see him.

Racism, of varying kinds, is home in both parties, and both will have to keep fighting it. I wonder if there will not be more of a problem in the democratic party in the future.

It appears to me that a sleeping giant has been awakened within the Democratic Party. The black community will, I think, realize that if they hang together they can control the Dems. Maybe this will bring about a black/white schism within the party, in 10 years or so.

Of course, it may not happen. But if white Democrats start to feel like a minority within their own party, it might. And we have seen the racism in this year's primaries - if it comes to the surface, what then? They fought it back down when Bill raised it - but can they control it forever?

I think an Obama election will bring about a lot more change than his supporters expect or want. Not all of it will be good, or wanted, or intended. But it will be change.

Pretty gloomy, OO. I choose to be more optimistic (pun intended), particularly given the unique perspective Obama brings. (It can't but help that Jesse Jackson seems to be grumpily drifting offstage, unused surgical tools in hand.)

I think the softening of racial lines continues, if slowly. Even if things headed the direction you say, I think enough black leaders would realize that a 13 percent block is going to need to maintain or build coalitions to have any say.

OptimisticOwl Wrote:Maybe this will bring about a black/white schism within the party, in 10 years or so.

More likely IMO is a schism in the GOP. They've got the fiscal conservatives, the abortion-prohibition / anti-science crowd, and the corporate subsidizers. I believe the first group is most representative of mainstream America, but the other two have been calling the shots.

I fully expect the Dems to lose the midterms though.

S.A. Owl Wrote:Pretty gloomy, OO. I choose to be more optimistic (pun intended), particularly given the unique perspective Obama brings. (It can't but help that Jesse Jackson seems to be grumpily drifting offstage, unused surgical tools in hand.)

I think the softening of racial lines continues, if slowly. Even if things headed the direction you say, I think enough black leaders would realize that a 13 percent block is going to need to maintain or build coalitions to have any say.

Is that 13% of the electorate or 13% of the Democratic Party? If the latter, you may be right. But if it is 13% of the electorate, then it is a much larger bloc within the party, and it is internal party politics of which I speak. It will have little effect on general elections.

It seemed that a lot of black voters were supporting HRC until it dawned on them that the black candidate could actually succeed. A lot of black voters switched or became active once they began to believe in the possibility. They will never again doubt it, and I think there are a lot of savvy black politicians who will try to take advantage of that awakening. We just went from "it's never happened and probably won't in my lifetime" to "been there, done that, let's do it again". If a black candidate - for any office - has that bloc not only supporting him, but believing, it will be a little harder for the white Democrats to win primaries. I have no idea what percentage of democratic candidates for state and national office is black, but I do have an idea that the percentage will start rising. Maybe that is a good thing. I guess it depends on each person's POV. I don't care - I vote for what is in a person's head, not what lies on the surface.

Maybe it won't happen. Maybe all Democrats are indeed colorblind, and all will vote for the best person without regard to race. If that is so, I still need an explanation of why the Democratic primaries this year broke so neatly along racial lines. What are the odds?

Ideally, all voters are colorblind. We aren't there yet, and I reject JAAO's contention that it is just the Republican party that needs to work on this. Both parties do. All individuals do. In truth, gloomy as it is, I think there is a potential here for a step backward. This is uncharted territory, and emotions can run high, and perceptions can rule.

Gravy Owl Wrote:

OptimisticOwl Wrote:Maybe this will bring about a black/white schism within the party, in 10 years or so.

More likely IMO is a schism in the GOP. They've got the fiscal conservatives, the abortion-prohibition / anti-science crowd, and the corporate subsidizers. I believe the first group is most representative of mainstream America, but the other two have been calling the shots.

I fully expect the Dems to lose the midterms though.

Well, I am in the first group, and sometimes in the third, depending on what you mean by corporate subsidizers. You may be right, though. Both parties are really coalitions of diverse special interests, and the evolution of the distribution of power among those special interests can cause change in the party or defections to new parties. If you look closely, that is what i have been saying about the Democrats, but it is just as true for the Republicans. Maybe in 20 years we will be deciding between the Libertarians and the Socialists.

ausowl Wrote:

WMD Owl Wrote:I see something bad coming on the horizon…

Assuming Obama is elected President, anyone who comes out with strong opinions or opposition to his programs and policies will automatically be labeled a “racist” by Administration supporters.

Regarding your "concern trolling" that folks who don't agree with the Obamanauts will be marginalized as racist, me thinks there's little or no evidence of that in Obama, Biden, or the team surrounding them.

Posting pictures of black crack dealers/felons and saying this is Houston's Obama isn't OK. That's racist - it plays to a racist stereo type. I, and I assume others, won't take you seriously if you go there. Why should they?

Tired of "labels?" - There's racism in our society. Making monkey noises is racist. Why be tired of calling BS on that sort of crap?

I'm pretty f!#$$ tired that in 2008 folks seem to think it's OK to teach their kids that it's OK to make monkey noises about Senator Obama.

There's plenty of important voices on the right that need to be heard (and listened to) over the next 4 years if Obama is elected and if this nation is going to get back on track.

If the republican party decides to go to war with Obama as they did with the Clintons, there is VERY little prospect for political progress.

You asked for an example of a "community organizer"... and I gave you two local examples.

And as for the "war" that will kick off on Wednesday.. you got that right.. and it will make what happened to the Clintons look like a picnic.

Any Congressman that represents anything close to a moderate district will be put on notice by the Republicans that if he supports the legislative insanity of Obama-Pelosi-Reid, he will be out of a job in two years. It will be VERY easy to raise money for Republicans once Obama starts getting his tax hikes on people making $250,000 ooops $200,000 oops $150,000 oops $125,000 per year.

Hopefully, your "Messiah" will be politically crippled by the results of the 2010 elections, just like Clinton was in 1994, and the redistricting by the state legislatures will seal the deal.

If you think the 1994 elections was a sea change, wait until 2010. Because people will be pissed at Obama and will elect Republican candidates that will go to their State Legislatures, get out their pens, and start redistricting. Adios Sheila Jackson Lee, Lloyd Doggett, etc you just got drawn out of a job.