|
Got Dean?
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Shakka |
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/1203/graham.html
| quote: | Michael Graham
Howard Dean's Southern strategy
http://www.jewishworldreview.com | With Howard Dean, more is inevitably less.
The more he talks, the more time he is given, the less impressive he becomes. In the shorthand of the working political media, he's the "frontrunner," the "man to beat," he's got the "Big Mo."
But it was a little man who walked out on a podium in Columbia, South Carolina last Sunday and stood awkwardly behind Congressman Jesse Jackson, Jr., receiving his endorsement. And after the Chicago congressman's speech got the crowd revved up (he is his father's son), Howard Dean wasted no time in bringing them right back down to Earth.
What Howard Dean wants to say is that he's a mainstream, unifying candidate who can build a national coalition to defeat President Bush in 2004. What comes out of his mouth (slightly paraphrased) is "Bush Sucks!" What Howard Dean's motivated and ever-growing coterie of followers wants to hear is "Bush REALLY Sucks!"
What's a candidate to do?
But Howard Dean is no dummy. He realizes he's going to need to take the edge off to win a general election nest November. He's also aware of the conventional wisdom that southern moderates in early primary states like South Carolina and Virginia don't march to the Bush-bashing drumbeat.
So what does Dean do? He comes to South Carolina — home of those infamous white males with the "Confederate Flag in [their] pick-up truck" — and calls President Bush a racist. And, just to cover his bases, he accuses the entire Republican Party of racism, too.
The Republican Party is "purposely dividing the country over the issues of 'guns, G-d and gays'," Dean said. And President Bush is using "race-loaded" language by bringing up affirmative action.
"It's time we had a new politics in America — a politics that refuses to pander to our lowest prejudices," Dean said.
Now, being accused of pandering by Howard Dean is like having Michael Jackson make a crack about your plastic surgery. Dean's non-stop pander-monium is legend — it's how he got in trouble with the Confederate Flag in the first place. When asked what his favorite song was at the Democratic debate held at historically-black ????, Howard Dean said Jaspora by Wyclef Jean.
Yo, my Vermont homies be rockin' out to Jaspora at all the ski resorts, dawg…
The accusation that President Bush is using racial rhetoric to divide America is laughable on its face. Those of us who dream with Dr. King of a color-blind society wish the president would show some enthusiasm for the fight against race-based government policies. Instead, he smiles patiently while open-minded, tolerant Democrats hurl racial slurs at his minority nominees to the courts.
And what to make of Dean's insistence that the issues of "guns, G-d and gays" are part of a divisive GOP strategy? It's not the Republican Party that keeps bringing up the First and Second Amendments, it's the courts. If the Democrats are having trouble handling the issue of homosexual marriage, they should blame the "conservatives" on the Massachusetts state court who brought it to the fore.
Especially fascinating is the fact that all the "divisive issues" Dean says we shouldn't discuss — gun laws, religious expression and the definition of marriage — are part of the primary duties of government. Unlike the economy and job creation, which are only modestly affected by any government action, deciding the limits of gun ownership or the parameters of state-recognized marriage are the reason we have government in the first place.
Of course, Dean isn't saying people should talk about these things. What's he's saying is that we shouldn't disagree with him about them. In Dean's world, if you don't agree with the liberal orthodoxy on gay adoption or the Pledge of Allegiance, you must remain silent. If you speak out, you're a bigot.
Are Howard Dean's positions on freedom and family so weak that he cannot even discuss them, much less defend them? Is the Democratic Party so out of step with southern voters on cultural issues that they can't even engage in debate? If so, the Democrats have lost the South before they've even begun.
When Al Gore announced his endorsement of Howard Dean this week, pundits suggested the former Vice President could give Dean some mainstream, establishment credibility. That's certainly true. They also predicted that Al Gore could sway southern voters to support this New England liberal's campaign. And among Democratic primary voters, that's likely as well.
But when it comes to Howard Dean doing as well in the South against George W. Bush as Al Gore did in 2000 (0-for-13), the former vice president could have stayed home. Howard Dean seems to have it all under control. |
|
|
|
| imokruok |
Howard Dean will get a core base of Democratic support. The question is whether he can clean up his act enough to capture independent voters. Dean currently has extremely low name recognition outside of the Democrat circles. (Nationwide polls including all adults put his name at less than 15% recognition.)
Once the general election comes along, if the economy is good, and Iraq is no worse than it is today, no Democrat has a chance of breaking into the independent vote. And while the Democrats all spew hate about Bush, Bush has been making inroads into the independent vote. |
|
|
| dj adagnitio |
The problem I have with articles like that, is that they treat the reader as a fool. By writing it in such a clearly biased, and in no way academic way it takes away any legitimacy it might of had as a piece of political commentary.
As far as Dean goes, he seems like he's very close to hacing it in his pocket. With the support of gore he's gained a lot of sway and power. Although there is still a lot of time left until the democractic convention where it will be decided. |
|
|
| occrider |
| I think Dean would get my vote if it was a Dean/Clark ticket. As much as I despise his said economic policies, I half think that he would never implement the majority of such. |
|
|
| MisterOpus1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Shakka
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/1203/graham.html
Michael Graham
Howard Dean's Southern strategy
http://www.jewishworldreview.com | With Howard Dean, more is inevitably less.
The more he talks, the more time he is given, the less impressive he becomes. In the shorthand of the working political media, he's the "frontrunner," the "man to beat," he's got the "Big Mo."
But it was a little man who walked out on a podium in Columbia, South Carolina last Sunday and stood awkwardly behind Congressman Jesse Jackson, Jr., receiving his endorsement. And after the Chicago congressman's speech got the crowd revved up (he is his father's son), Howard Dean wasted no time in bringing them right back down to Earth.
What Howard Dean wants to say is that he's a mainstream, unifying candidate who can build a national coalition to defeat President Bush in 2004. What comes out of his mouth (slightly paraphrased) is "Bush Sucks!" What Howard Dean's motivated and ever-growing coterie of followers wants to hear is "Bush REALLY Sucks!"
What's a candidate to do? |
I'll go with that interesting paraphrase, though it's ever-so slightly spinned (to the point of nausia). My response is, "So what? I agree completely. What should a candidate running against the President say? He agrees with him? He supports him? Dean said it straight, and he has every reason to say he "Sucks!", esp. since approx. 1/2 of the nation feels that way too (if not more).
| quote: | But Howard Dean is no dummy. He realizes he's going to need to take the edge off to win a general election nest November. He's also aware of the conventional wisdom that southern moderates in early primary states like South Carolina and Virginia don't march to the Bush-bashing drumbeat.
So what does Dean do? He comes to South Carolina — home of those infamous white males with the "Confederate Flag in [their] pick-up truck" — and calls President Bush a racist. And, just to cover his bases, he accuses the entire Republican Party of racism, too. |
Nice way to beat that misinterpreted drum.
| quote: | The Republican Party is "purposely dividing the country over the issues of 'guns, G-d and gays'," Dean said. And President Bush is using "race-loaded" language by bringing up affirmative action.
"It's time we had a new politics in America — a politics that refuses to pander to our lowest prejudices," Dean said.
Now, being accused of pandering by Howard Dean is like having Michael Jackson make a crack about your plastic surgery. Dean's non-stop pander-monium is legend — it's how he got in trouble with the Confederate Flag in the first place. When asked what his favorite song was at the Democratic debate held at historically-black ????, Howard Dean said Jaspora by Wyclef Jean.
Yo, my Vermont homies be rockin' out to Jaspora at all the ski resorts, dawg… |
Cute. This guy a well-known columnist?
| quote: | | The accusation that President Bush is using racial rhetoric to divide America is laughable on its face. Those of us who dream with Dr. King of a color-blind society wish the president would show some enthusiasm for the fight against race-based government policies. Instead, he smiles patiently while open-minded, tolerant Democrats hurl racial slurs at his minority nominees to the courts. |
"He smiles patiently?" That's too rich. I'm trying to find these racial slurs he's referring to. I'm so incredibly sick and tired of hearing dittoheads continue this banter on this nomination of minority nominees. The issues the Dem. Senators had with these nomineess had NOTHING to do with their minority - an issue that dittoheads easily ignore. They had controversal pasts and rulings, and that WAS the issue they had with them. Funny how the Dem. Senators seemed to pass 168 out of 172 Bush nominees, and have a much better record of passing nominees than when Clinton was in office, another point dittoheads love to skip right over.
| quote: | | And what to make of Dean's insistence that the issues of "guns, G-d and gays" are part of a divisive GOP strategy? It's not the Republican Party that keeps bringing up the First and Second Amendments, it's the courts. If the Democrats are having trouble handling the issue of homosexual marriage, they should blame the "conservatives" on the Massachusetts state court who brought it to the fore. |
I believe Dean is referring to the outcry from Rebugs and their hinchmen fundies on these rulings. What the hell is he talking about Dems. having trouble with the issue of homosexual marriage?!? All I hear are the conservative fundies yelling bloody murder about it, and that it will lead to polygamy, beastiality (I loved that one, thanks O'Reilly), and God knows what else. You'd think it was the end of moral society by listening to these idiots.
By the way, isin't Dean an advocate on gun rights? I'm afraid this partisan author can't go too far with that one.
Quote from Dean on Fox News Sunday:
"Why can't we talk about jobs, health care and education, which is what we all have in common, instead of allowing the Republicans to consistently divide us by talking about guns, God, gays, abortion and all this controversial social stuff that we're not going to come to an agreement on?"
I agree with him 100% on here. These are wedge issues that the dittoheads and fundies are pounding out, which do nothing but divide everyone further. Furthermore, I personally feel, as Dean does, these should not be the central issues to be debating here.
| quote: | | Especially fascinating is the fact that all the "divisive issues" Dean says we shouldn't discuss — gun laws, religious expression and the definition of marriage — are part of the primary duties of government. Unlike the economy and job creation, which are only modestly affected by any government action, deciding the limits of gun ownership or the parameters of state-recognized marriage are the reason we have government in the first place. |
I would love to hear him qualify this more. I just couldn't wait where it would go. Only "modestly affected by any government action?" Puulease.
| quote: | | Of course, Dean isn't saying people should talk about these things. What's he's saying is that we shouldn't disagree with him about them. In Dean's world, if you don't agree with the liberal orthodoxy on gay adoption or the Pledge of Allegiance, you must remain silent. If you speak out, you're a bigot. |
That's the most interesting spin I've ever heard. Of course, the counterpart states that if you don't support the war, you're aiding the terrorists, and what's worse, you're UNPATRIOTIC! Gawd, I shore dew luv dat Ashcroft guy!
| quote: | Are Howard Dean's positions on freedom and family so weak that he cannot even discuss them, much less defend them? Is the Democratic Party so out of step with southern voters on cultural issues that they can't even engage in debate? If so, the Democrats have lost the South before they've even begun. {/QUOTE]
I think Dean realizes that the South is very difficult to capture, if not impossible. His strategy is to strengthen up his strong support first (unions, northern states, grassroot folks), then go after those swing states next. It's a different strategy, to be sure. It will either propel him or backfire on him. Time will tell. As for being out of step with Southerners, I think he's stretching things just a bit here. Of course, judging from his partisan spin throughout the entire article, that hardly seems outlandish for him now.
[QUOTE]When Al Gore announced his endorsement of Howard Dean this week, pundits suggested the former Vice President could give Dean some mainstream, establishment credibility. That's certainly true. They also predicted that Al Gore could sway southern voters to support this New England liberal's campaign. And among Democratic primary voters, that's likely as well.
But when it comes to Howard Dean doing as well in the South against George W. Bush as Al Gore did in 2000 (0-for-13), the former vice president could have stayed home. Howard Dean seems to have it all under control. |
No doubt, the Rebugs have a dominant presence in the South, as was witnessed by the latest gubernatorial campaigns (save Louisiana). In the 2000 election, Repugs on got some 5% or so of the minority vote. Considering how many minorities now live in the South, who do you think is a little out of touch?
Other than that, what a great piece of literature. |
|
|
| rizen |
| quote: | Originally posted by occrider
I think Dean would get my vote if it was a Dean/Clark ticket. As much as I despise his said economic policies, I half think that he would never implement the majority of such. |
Why Clark? If its just because he is a former General, IIRC Dean has two former Generals in his current staff. |
|
|
| Shakka |
Former general who was fired for character issues...
Not that this is a serious website, but I just ran accross this and thought some of the pictures were funny. I haven't read it yet, so I don't know how serious it is--it may have been sponsored by Kerry for all I know.
http://www.wafflepoweredhoward.com/ |
|
|
| anuneventrade |
Interesting article. Gave me a good laugh. Too biased, however, to sway me.
The writer comments on how one of the tactics is "Bush SUCKS"? This seems like an article made purely to say "Dean SUCKS".
With all these misleading articles, it's no wonder half the nation doesn't know for whom to vote!
When the debates and political campaigns truly begin, all true colours shall be seen. |
|
|
| occrider |
| quote: | Originally posted by rizen
Why Clark? If its just because he is a former General, IIRC Dean has two former Generals in his current staff. |
Because he's an economics professor ;) ... personal bias. |
|
|
| anuneventrade |
An article about the Dean endorsement from CNN
http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS...dean/index.html
| quote: | NEW YORK (CNN) -- Al Gore endorsed Howard Dean's bid for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination on Tuesday, substantially deepening Dean's fast-developing drive for dominance in the nine-candidate field of would-be challengers to President Bush.
"I'm very proud and honored to endorse Howard Dean to be the next president of the United States of America," Gore said.
The announcement in Manhattan's Harlem, coming on the morning of another debate between the "'04 Dems," as they're called, could cement Dean's status as the leading Democratic candidate heading into the kickoff contests now just weeks away in Iowa and New Hampshire.
"We need to remake the Democratic Party, we need to remake America," Gore said.
"This nation cannot afford to have four more years of a Bush-Cheney administration," he said.
Prior to Tuesday's endorsement, a source told CNN that Gore -- the Democratic Party's presidential candidate in 2000 -- thinks a protracted primary campaign would serve only to help President Bush.
"In a field of great candidates, one candidate clearly now stands out and so I'm asking all of you to join in this grassroots movement to elect Howard Dean president of the United States," Gore said.
Dean thanked Gore for his leadership: "We have needed a strong, steady hand in this party and I appreciate Al's willing(ness) to stand up and be one," Dean said.
Gore said part of the reason he chose to endorse Dean was his ability to appeal to the nation's "grassroots" elements, a reference to Dean's success in organizing and raising funds on the Internet and in small voter gatherings.
Gore also praised Dean's opposition to the U.S.-led war in Iraq. The former vice president called the Iraq war a "catastrophic mistake" by the Bush administration, a move that leaves the United States less effective in the nation's battle against terrorism. He said the United States is now in a "quagmire" in Iraq.
"He was the only major candidate who made the correct judgment about the Iraq war," Gore said. "And he had the insight and the courage to say and do the right thing. And that's important because those judgments -- that basic common sense -- is what you want in a president."
"Whether it is inspiring enthusiasm at the grassroots, and promising to remake the Democratic Party as a force for justice and progress and good in America, whether it is a domestic agenda that gets our nation back on track, or whether it is protecting us against terrorists and strengthening our nation in the world, I have come to the conclusion that one candidate clearly now stands out," Gore said.
He added that he and Dean would travel together to Iowa following the announcement. Gore was to give a speech later in the day in Cedar Rapids. The Iowa Caucus is set for January 19.
Dean was expected to travel on to New Hampshire for Tuesday evening's Democratic debate sponsored by ABC News and WMUR-TV. The New Hampshire primary is scheduled for January 27.
The announcement came nearly three years to the date from Gore's concession in the 2000 election, when he won the popular vote but lost the electoral vote.
"When we set this event up," Dean said to loud laughter at the rally's start, "I had absolutely no idea that we were going to have the elected president of the United States here with us today."
Sen. Joe Lieberman, Gore's vice-presidential running mate in 2000 and a current presidential hopeful, said he would continue "to fight for what's right, win this nomination, and defeat George W. Bush next year."
"I have a lot of respect for Al Gore -- that is why I kept my promise not to run if he did," Lieberman said.
"Ultimately, the voters will make the determination and I will continue to make my case about taking our party and nation forward," Lieberman said in a written statement.
A source close to Lieberman said Gore, who was Clinton's vice president, did not call Lieberman to inform him of the decision.
Dean pulling ahead
Howard Dean, in thanking Al Gore for his support: "We have needed a strong, steady hand in this party."
With the Dean campaign gaining momentum, a new CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll shows Dean widening his front-runner status among the eight other Democratic candidates.
The poll showed that 25 percent of registered Democrats surveyed support Dean as their nominee, with retired Gen. Wesley Clark coming in second with 17 percent. (Poll: Dean's New Hampshire lead increases)
In an interview before the news broke on CNN's "Judy Woodruff's Inside Politics," Dean played down his front-runner status.
"The pundits in Washington have been talking about me as the front-runner for a long time," Dean said.
"Well, guess what, the people of Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Arizona and so forth get to decide who the front-runner is. So, it's nice talk, but I'm not buying it."
Caught off-guard
Erik Smith, a campaign press secretary for Rep. Dick Gephardt of Missouri, sounded as if the Gephardt team was caught off-guard by the news, as were Dean's other rivals.
Dean and Gephardt are the top two candidates in Iowa. (Gephardt calls for increased homeland security funding)
"Dick Gephardt fought side-by-side with Al Gore to pass the Clinton economic plan, pass the assault weapons ban and defend against Republican attacks on Medicare and affirmative action. On each of these issues, Howard Dean was on the wrong side," Smith said.
Saying he respected Gore and fought for his campaign four years ago, Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts said, "This election is about the future, not about the past." (Kerry: Bush administration arrogant, reckless)
"This election will be decided by voters, across the country, beginning with voters in Iowa," he said.
Paul Begala, a political adviser to President Clinton and now a host of CNN's "Crossfire," called the endorsement an "enormous boost" that would clearly give Dean momentum going into Iowa and New Hampshire.
"It's very good for him," Begala said. "I wouldn't go so far as to say it locks anything up, though, because people want to make up their own minds."
CNN's John King and Kelly Wallace contributed to this report. |
|
|
|
| DaveSaenz |
| quote: | Originally posted by Shakka
|
Haha wow where do you find these guys?:nervous: :stongue:
This editorial is so full of deception....where to begin...?
| quote: | | this New England liberal's campaign. |
Chris Matthews, a popular and well-respected Republican commentator and host of Harball has called Dean a "conservative." The Republican controlled media will call whoever wins the nomination a "liberal extremist" etc. Based on my own views of the candidates, I would place Kerry, Kucinich, and Sharpton well to the left of Dean.
| quote: | | The accusation that President Bush is using racial rhetoric to divide America is laughable on its face. |
Clearly it would be political suicide for the GOP to openly advance and support an agenda based on discrimination against various minority groups, but behind the scenes, this is very much a part of the GOP's winning strategy (especially in the South).
Have you ever heard of "push polling?" This is a technique used for the "persuasion" of potential voters, built around the guise of conducting an actual poll. In the South (and elsewhere), the Republicans use this technique to play upon racial and other prejudices to their advantage at the polls. In one particularly vile example of this technique, thousands of South Carolinians were phoned by Karl Rove's goon squad in the 2000 South Carolina Republican primary. The main contenders in this race were, of course, Arizona Senator John McCain, and Texas governor George W. Bush. In a sickening reference to John's adopted Bangladeshi daughter, Republican voters were phoned and asked someting to the effect of, "If you knew John McCain fathered an out-of-wedlock black child, would you be more likely to vote for him, or less likely?" "If you knew John McCain was a liar and a cheat, would you be more likely to vote for him, or less likely?" Needless to say, Bush won South Carolina, and later the nomination.
This was a real tragedy for the country and the world imo, because even though I don't always agree with him, McCain is an honest man; a man who has built his career in politics on fighting corporate and other big special interests, and also has done a great deal to help the Native Americans in his state.
In another detestable move by the GOP in 2000, flyers were circulated in predominately black areas of Missouri warning that citizens couldn't vote unless they had paid their rent, parking tickets etc. There were countless other allegations of Black voter intimidation and disenfranchisement in many Southern states (Florida in particular):
| quote: | Published on Tueday, November 14, 2000 by Inter Press Service
Irregularities, Harassment Reported by Blacks in US Voting
NEW YORK - Complaints continue to mount from African- Americans around the country who say they were prevented from voting or that they observed serious irregularities in last week's poll for the nation's highest office.
Among the obstacles reported were registration challenges, intimidation, misleading information, police profiling near predominately Black polling stations and ballot tampering.
''The system is not working for us - again,'' said Florida Congresswoman Carrie Meek, who added in a published report that she personally was aware of hundreds of complaints from black voters.
Reports of alleged voter fraud continue to emerge as well from Florida counties, now in the international limelight, including reports from two African-American weekly papers.
In Fort Myers, Florida, Charles Weaver, publisher of the Community Voice, said: ''In Republican Country, (I) received at least a dozen calls from people with all kinds of apparent 'voting inequities.'''
Visiting one of the polls himself, he said he witnessed ''intimidation, harassment and apparent illegal activity'' at the precinct.
''There were illegal poll watchers, threatening people, telling them, 'I know where you work. You're going to get fired.'''
''One guy who lost his wallet was not allowed to vote because he had no identification - rather than asking him to sign a document stating his identification as (is legally) required,'' Weaver said.
At another African-American weekly, Miami Times, Tonnette Collier, a reporter, said her newspaper got so many calls that she lost count. ''There were a lot of elderly people. They were very upset,'' she said. ''It's so much confusion, it's unbelievable.''
Many callers told of a police check point that was stopping cars on a road that leads to the First Baptist Church of Woodville in Tallahassee, Collier said.
Major Ken Howes of the Tallahassee Highway Patrol confirmed that his department did conduct what he called a ''routine'' check point on Oakridge Road about ''2.1 miles'' from the precinct. He said the check, ''one of 31 that been conducted in the last 30 days in this area,'' had nothing to do with voting or elections, but was to enforce laws pertaining to licenses, insurance and faulty equipment on cars.
Similar troubles were reported by Anita Hodgkiss, senior attorney at The Advancement Project and a former voting rights lawyer with the US Justice Department.
Hodgkiss volunteered to work with other lawyers on a telephone hotline taking calls on direct intimidation or obstruction of potential voters. 'Apparently, police in Newport News, VA were stopping people at checkpoints,'' she says. ''In St. Louis, Missouri, some voters there were turned away for not having their cards, while their White counterparts were allowed to vote.
''We also got a lot of calls from ex-felons who wanted to vote, but couldn't. The good thing is that they were (calling from) states where they could vote. In Florida now, there is a legal challenge pending to the disenfranchisement of ex-offenders.''
A statement released by the human rights group Human Rights Watch noted that Florida, being one of over a dozen states that denies the right to vote to ex-offenders, kept 400,000 (black and white) individuals out of the election booths. One third of African-American men in that state, or 200,000, cannot vote because of a past felony arrest.
Nationally, one in 50 adults, or nearly 4 million US citizens cannot vote because of felony records, and 1.4 million of them have completed their sentences and are not on probation or parole.
In a 1998 report, the human rights group estimated that 30-40 percent of the next generation of African-American men may be disenfranchised because of criminal records.
Meanwhile, the nation's largest black civil rights group, the NAACP (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People), has asked Attorney General Janet Reno to investigate possible violations of constitutional guarantees of the right to vote.
''On the surface, there appears to be a violation of the 15th Amendment, which guarantees minority voters the right to vote for the candidate of their choice,'' said Julian Bond, NAACP chairman, in a published report.
The voter fraud allegations, said NAACP president Kweisi Mfume, ''raise serious questions about the fairness and accuracy of the election ... Our sense is that the level and number of calls we received suggest very serious problems, perhaps even nationwide''. |
These tactics have seemingly proven to be effective (at least in the short run) in terms of Southern wins for the GOP. My hope is that people will learn the truth about how loathsome these tactics are and take a stand, or at the very least, they are able to tell when they are being manipulated.
These are direct quotes from a predominately right-wing gun collectors' auction message board that I sometimes view and post on. Not that I am a gun person, but I truly believe in the value of seeing both sides of an issue:
| quote: | | I'm for bush! As long as hes pro gun, not for fags getting married, and not for abortions, then that makes me positive. |
| quote: | I'm thinking of opening up a Gay Resort for those San Francisco folk out in New Mexico.....let me know whatch y'all think...
Only 199.95 will get a room for the weekend provided with an illegal alien bound and gagged for the gay man's desires. No need to worry about legal implications, all illegals are later beaten and taken back across the border. |
| quote: | | If we lined up all the "wets" in Texas on our northen boarders Oklahoma would have to change the offical language to spanish. |
| quote: | | Iffen you guys would take all the Mexicans who are not legal and line them up on your north border there would be enough body heat to make Texas a tropical climate! |
...:rolleyes:
Let's not forget about Reagan!
After he stated his disdain for the voting rights act of 1965 (that guaranteed people of all races the right to vote) and called it “humiliating to the South,” his views about minority voting became perfectly clear. My father was teaching in an inner-city school at the time when news that Reagan had been shot first broke. The entire class erupted in cheers (even the white students). He was detested among the poor and minority communities.
Personally I don't think most Republicans are racist, and I certainly don't think you are Shakka, but I don't see how anyone can deny that some of the most hate-filled, the lowest of all hummanity find a home at the extremist end of the right. The party leaders recognize this, and capitalize on it! This is wrong, and the party leaders should take a moral stand against this; not encourage it!
The Republican party, my friends, is no longer the party of Lincoln. |
|
|
|
|
