The blacks will throw flowers at them.

I don't know why anyone who isn't a rich white male Protestant would vote Republican. For anyone else to do it, it is completely against their own best interest.

Did anyone in the press ask him why he thinks the GOP does not have one black member in Congress?

Is Shrub drinking again?

The Republic Party just got done blowing off a debate at a black college in front of a predominatly black audience.

If the Republic Party ever manages to elect ONE single black person to the Senate it will nearly double the amount of black Americans that they already have in the Senate right now, ZERO.

"NOW WHO IS SMOKING POT IN WASHINGTON DC"

I think the GOP has been smoking a little too much pot in the mens restrooms across America.

Black Voter Caging in 2004 was so blatant and obvious that the GOP would say anything right to squirm up a vote here and there.

SOLDIERS IN IRAQ KNOW THEIR VOTES WERE CAGED AND DID NOT COUNT.

SO JUST because 46 GOP REPUBLICANS voted not to let them come home prior to the 2008 elections, does not mean they are going to jump on their bandwagon to come home.

THIS GOP HAS one thing going for them AND THAT IS JAIL TIME.

IT'S A DAILY OCCURRENCE AND THERE IS NOT THAT MANY LEFT TO COME OUT OF THE CLOSET!

WATCH AND SEE!

How exactly has the Republic Party stood up for the little guys?? Small farmers want the threshhold of Certified Organic to be narrowed so they can sell their healthier, premium products at grocers. Yet time after time this Administration has supported mega farms over small business owners.

If the Republic Party ever manages to elect ONE single black person to the Senate it will nearly double the amount of black Americans that they already have in the Senate right now, ZERO.

Posted by: John E | September 20, 2007 1:11 PM

Genius, 2 X 0 = 0

The man is delusional.

the Republic Party ever manages to elect ONE single black person to the Senate it will nearly double the amount of black Americans that they already have in the Senate right now, ZERO.

Posted by: John E | September 20, 2007 1:11 PM

Genius, 2 X 0 = 0

Posted by: Anonymous | September 20, 2007 1:35 PM

Anti-Obama racist,
Read closer you fool, I said "NEARLY".

Bush: GOP has 'good record to run on' with blacks

That Dubya. What a kidder!

Anonymous,

You're right, but for all the wrong reasons.

I would love for David Nitwitkin to explain how what is taking place in Jena, La. to be Bush's fault. Perhaps Mark Silva can explain for him.

Anyway, the reality is that under Bush black home ownership has set record levels. Bush also has appointed more blacks to high-ranking positions in his administration than any other president. Currently, right now one of heads of the RNC is Michael Steele, a black.
It is a shame that most blacks keep walking in line with the Democratic party, which has largely done them no good. The Democratic party basically treats blacks no different than the slave owners did in the 1600s to 1800s.
Folks like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton are charlatans, who are only out for their own interests while not lifting a finger to help their fellow black -- unless somehow it raises their own profile and gets their mug on TV.

Fox Noise Channel (Bill-O) and Rush Windbag talk about their "love" of black people:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_cYismjwQ_g

John D.,

You're a liar. An honest mistake now and again is human.

But time and time again you lie about what other people have said or done.

Nowhere in Nitkin's article did he blame Dubya for anything.

Quit lieing - NOW!

Anyway, the reality is that under Bush black home ownership has set record levels. Bush also has appointed more blacks to high-ranking positions in his administration than any other president. Currently, right now one of heads of the RNC is Michael Steele, a black.
It is a shame that most blacks keep walking in line with the Democratic party, which has largely done them no good. The Democratic party basically treats blacks no different than the slave owners did in the 1600s to 1800s.
Folks like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton are charlatans, who are only out for their own interests while not lifting a finger to help their fellow black -- unless somehow it raises their own profile and gets their mug on TV.

Posted by: John D | September 20, 2007 2:21 PM

O.J.,
Really? then why does the Republic Party fail to EVER elect black Americans?

Why are the Rethuglicans still blaming the Katrina aftermath on the black people of New Orleans?

Why did the Rethuglicans just blow off a debate in front of a predominatly black audience?

Get on you're knee's and start praying Lil Johnny D. because the GOP is going to be collapsing on it's on stupidity come 2008.

Anonymous,

You're right, but for all the wrong reasons.

Posted by: Doug Zook | September 20, 2007 2:00 PM

Doug,

You have not have not discerned my reasons... not by a long shot.

I was simply pointing out the low mental level of that blogger... which was hardly necessary, I admit. His stupidity is self evident.

As to that big fat matzoball-of-zero... African American Republican presence in the Senate... it's one of the failings of the Republican party.

On the other hand, how many Black Democratic Senators are there? It's less than a crowd. That's the nature of the Senate and electoral demographics. The ethnic make up of each party in the House is more telling.

In any case, many Blacks are tired of being taken for granted by the Democratic party. At some point down the road (after the current bad will subsides) the Republicans should be able to siphon off this support.

Anyway, the reality is that under Bush black home ownership has set record levels.
Posted by: John D | September 20, 2007 2:21 PM

John D (or should it be Lying John Dumb Dumb, as you would turn it? Such class!), can you offer compelling proof that specific Bush policies have driven record levels of home ownership? Or maybe its just the results of the last housing boom that started in 90s that impacted home ownership as a whole? To give any President credit for the housing boom is way more than a stretch.

It is true John D. that "black" home ownership has set record levels under Bush. It is also true that all home ownership has set record levels and further, before this cycle is done we will see record levels for defaults and foreclosures which will no doubt include homes owned by african-americans. It is a sad commentary when notable black participation in the republican party can be summarized in one or two sentences in a blog response. As far as comparing the current democratic party's treatment of "blacks" today versus the slave owners from 1600 to 1800, I would love to see John D. address that topic in front of the crowd at Morgan State University in Baltimore. I'd even pay to see that. Oh, and by the way, could you define "black"?

Doug Zook

Relax. John D thinks it is his duty to defend Bush, can you imagine how hard that is? He is trying to defend one of the biggest morons ever and said moron keeps saying things so mindblowingly stupid he has to A) Attack the messenger B) Throw up a Strawman and pretend the message is something other than it is C) Create out of nothing a true culprit to shift the blame to D) Make stuff up E) Compare it something completely different that some Democrat did 20 years ago.

John E: Anti-Obama racist,
Read closer you fool, I said "NEARLY".

You are the fool who doesn't know any number times zero will still give you zero

nisleib,

The phrase "you have a point" is no longer part of my vocabulary.

These QWERTY Chairborne Commandos will not be allowed to defame and defile my combat veteran father and nephew who just happen to be Democrats without my going for their metaphorical jugular veins.

Especially not when their heros are a deserter and a deferrer.

These cowards make me want to puke.

If getting votes from African-Americans means standing alongside people like Jesse Jackson who hold rallies to "show support" for young men who have beaten another human (any human being) until he was unconscious, then I say the GOP should want nothing to do with those votes.

Much of the black community is already fed up with self-imposed race-baiter "leaders" like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson. That's why Jesse fears Obama so much. The community won't have a real, national electoral voice so long as people like Jesse speak for them. People who say things like "Obama was acting white" rather than things like "a man should be judged not by the color of his skin, but by the content of his character."

p.s. Why is commenting closed on the original Jena 6 thread?

Ahhh, Doogie, from the very first paragraph in David Nitwitkin's article:

Forget Hurricane Katrina. Forget Jena, Louisiana. Forget that the four top Republican candidates for president are snubbing a debate on minority issues next week at historically black Morgan State University in Baltimore.

Doogie, looks to me like Nitwitkin is blaming Bush and Republicans, at the worst, or implying they don't care about black people at the least.

No lying by me, Doogie. Sorry, if pointing out truths is too much for your liberal brainwashed ears and brain to handle.

IS THIS GUY AN IDIOT OR WHAT?

John E: Anti-Obama racist,
Read closer you fool, I said "NEARLY".

You are the fool who doesn't know any number times zero will still give you zero

Posted by: Richard S | September 20, 2007 3:20 PM

John E is right and that "anonymous" clown is wrong....again
ONE IS NEARLY DOUBLE what the Rethugs would have in Congress if they elected ONE.
"anonymous" guy, stick to the issue in the post story, you moron.

Oh, and another chapter in the attempted education of John E (probably fruitless, but we have to try):

"Really? then why does the Republic Party fail to EVER elect black Americans?"

Black republicans elected to national office:

J.C. Watts, US Representative, Oklahoma.
1994-2003

Gary Franks, US Rep. Connecticut, 1991-1997

Edward William Brooke 1967-1979 US Senator, Massachusetts (first ever in the US Senate post-reconstruction, BEFORE Carol Moseley Braun or Barack Obama!)

I won't go into the post-Civil War ones for reasons of brevity. But I think just these three qualify as "ever."

In the most recent election cycle African-American Republicans such as Michael Steele in Maryland very nearly won many of their races. Steeler ran for the US Senate in Maryland and while he lost, he still got a large portion of the black vote.

Whether you and Jesse Jackson think these men are "acting white" or not, the truth is that this party has embraced them and they embrace its ideals. The GOP should be applauded for not lowering its standards and jumping into bed with self-appointed black leaders like Sharpton and Jackson.

Yes, I think Bush proves (once again) he’s delusional with this argument. However, the writer is just as delusional. I had to re-read this quote to make sure I got it correct:

“Under the direction of former Republican Party chief Ken Mehlman and White House political guru Karl Rove, the party made significant outreach efforts to minority groups during several recent election cycles.”

It’s true that Mehlman spoke about reaching out to African-Americans and even spoke in front of unwelcoming groups of African-Americans. However, he didn’t and wouldn’t speak out when race was in an ad campaign against Harold Ford during his Senate Race.

And Karl Rove? Give me a break. This is the same man widely believed to have orchestrated the smear campaign against McCain prior to the 2000 election to stating McCain has an illegitimate Black child. Yeah, they were going after McCain, but using race as a factor is just as deplorable. (“Not only does he have an illegitimate child, he has an illegitimate BLACK child!”)

The adage is true: actions speak louder than words. Surely the writer of this article should understand this simple rule of life.

John D says -

Doogie, looks to me like Nitwitkin is blaming Bush and Republicans, at the worst, or implying they don't care about black people at the least.

I didn't get the same take on it, sorry.

I don't think Bush and the people running this government care about poor people. I really don't think Bush is racist, I think he is classist. If that is even a word. He was born in Connecticut with a silver spoon in his nose. A privileged child grew into a man (who, interestingly enough, considered himself a youth until age 40) who never had to do anything to succeed. He kept running companies into the ground and getting bailed out by his daddy's rich friends (the Bin Laden family and the house of Saud.) Then he made his fortune on a land deal for a baseball stadium - his job: use his daddy's name recognition and political contacts to eminent domain land from a farmer. Of course the farmer later sued because they ripped him off, but by that time the partnerships setup to do the deal no longer existed and the farmer got squat.

Bush is an idiot who only cares about himself and his rich friends. He doesn't care about poor people, he doesn't care about sick people, he cares about people in his cast and his cast only. For goodness sake he laughed when asked about the retarded woman he was going to execute when governor of Texas.

The man is despicable.

Nieslib, it is not difficult to defend Bush. I will defend proudly. While he has not been perfect nor has his administration been perfect, Bush has been a pretty decent president under very difficult circumstances.
I "attack" the messenger, becuase in fact the reporter is linking Janus, La. to Bush. His opening sentence is very clear in that regard. Fifth graders can read and understand that. Nor am I pretending the message to be anything but what it is, another liberal media attack on Bush. Nor am I shifting any blame. In fact, Bush in many ways has reached out to minorities more than most politicians, on either side of the spectrum. And, you know what else? Bush has brought forth minorities not becsause they are a minority but because they are qualified. He doesn't make a big stink about his administration being the "most diverse" and "reflecting America" like a certain previous president. Bush has appointed blacks, Hispanics, women, Asians, Arabs without ever noting their status.

Black republicans elected to national office:

J.C. Watts, US Representative, Oklahoma.
1994-2003

Gary Franks, US Rep. Connecticut, 1991-1997

Edward William Brooke 1967-1979 US Senator, Massachusetts (first ever in the US Senate post-reconstruction, BEFORE Carol Moseley Braun or Barack Obama!)

I won't go into the post-Civil War ones for reasons of brevity. But I think just these three qualify as "ever."

In the most recent election cycle African-American Republicans such as Michael Steele in Maryland very nearly won many of their races. Steeler ran for the US Senate in Maryland and while he lost, he still got a large portion of the black vote.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 20, 2007 3:58 PM

Leo T/Juanito,
We are talking about TODAY, RIGHT NOW, not in HISTORY, you clown.

You are a legend in your own mind, pal.
Keep it coming, I'm lovin' it.

"We've got a good record to run on," the president said.

"Run on", or run over?

Black republicans elected to national office:

J.C. Watts, US Representative, Oklahoma.
1994-2003

Gary Franks, US Rep. Connecticut, 1991-1997

Edward William Brooke 1967-1979 US Senator, Massachusetts (first ever in the US Senate post-reconstruction, BEFORE Carol Moseley Braun or Barack Obama!)

I won't go into the post-Civil War ones for reasons of brevity. But I think just these three qualify as "ever."

In the most recent election cycle African-American Republicans such as Michael Steele in Maryland very nearly won many of their races. Steeler ran for the US Senate in Maryland and while he lost, he still got a large portion of the black vote.

Whether you and Jesse Jackson think these men are "acting white" or not, the truth is that this party has embraced them and they embrace its ideals. The GOP should be applauded for not lowering its standards and jumping into bed with self-appointed black leaders like Sharpton and Jackson.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 20, 2007 3:58 PM

Thanks for showing us how weak the GOP has been in all of History when it comes to electing black people.

You sir are an idiot.

So, John E. you're saying you didn't understand how to use the word "ever" when you used it in your previous post?

("Really? then why does the Republic Party fail to EVER elect black Americans?" -John E.)

Gosh, do we even have to go into basic word usage now? Geez, these little lessons we have are getting downright remedial.

Kevin, Nislieb, your comments about Bush/Republicans and black voters have a lot more substance. Still, you're discounting the real inroads Mehlman and, yes, Rove have made in getting black republicans to both run for office and getting black voters to vote for them.

Michael Steele got 40% of the black vote in Maryland for US Senate in 2006. That's not winning, but it's certainly progress in the right direction. Rove also endorsed and helped run the campaigns of Steele, Lynn Swann and Ken Blackwell, all black republicans.

Sure, none of them won but having them there in close races would've been unthinkable just eight years ago. Don't get me wrong, a lot more HAS to be done to make the GOP more hospitable to African-Americans and minorities of all stripes but one of those things is certainly not cozying up to Jesse Jackson and his shakedown techniques. That's something the Democrats will NEVER disown, so there's hope for the GOP there, just so long as black voters continue to flee Jesse and Al as they recently have.

Let's also remember that Bush has appointed the largest number of both African-Americans AND minorities to cabinet level positions of any administration, democrat or republican, ever. Not Clinton, not Carter, but George W. Bush. It's this type of representation today that will bear dividends for GOP candidates 10-15 years down the road. A parody ad that was set up as a joke about Harold Ford's attendance of the Playboy party at the Super Bowl won't even register a blip on the radar in the face of such groundbreaking representation.

DNC (the party of Klansman Robert C. Byrd), are you saying those men weren't ever elected? That was John E.'s question, after all. If you want more, though, I've got the facts here for you. The GOP's history with black voters is well established since it's the party that freed them from the national shame that was slavery:

US Senate
Hiram Rhodes Revels
Blanche Kelso Bruce

Congress
John Willis Menard
Jeffrey F. Long
Jospeh H. Rainey
Robert C. DeLarge
Robert B. Elliott
Benjamin S. Turner
Josiah T. Walls
Richard H. Cain
John R. Lynch
James T. Rapier
Alonzo R. Ransier
Jeremiah Haralson
John A. Hyman
Charles E. Nash
Robert Smalls
James E. O'Hara
Henry P. Cheatham
John Mercer Langston
Thomas E. Miller
George W. Murray
George Henry White

You can pooh-pooh this list all you want, but it's history and it's the truth. Although white Republicans like Everett McKinley Dirksen fought vigorously for civil rights while democrats like Strom Thurmond and Robert Byrd filibustered the voting rights act of 1964, the GOP lost much of its black voter base during the era.

Only the corruption and pocket-lining of Sharpton and Jackson has started to break that grip today. But even that alone has to give the GOP hope of drawing votes from minorities sick of the Jackson shakedowns, the failure of education and public assistance program reform and other promises democrats have long failed to deliver on for minorities.

p.s. I define "idiot" as a person who doesn't know his own history. That's you, sir, not me.

Anonymous

Forget about some piddly adds, that is not what the GOP is facing when it comes to minorities. The big problem, when it comes to black people, is the Southern Strategy. They intentionally inflame the racist leanings of republicans in the south. They say they have quit, but I don't believe it.

As far as Hispanics go it is worse now for the GOP than it was before Bush took office. The wall, the anti immigration sentiments and the militia (minutemen?) all reflect badly on the GOP.

Oddly enough, and I hate Bush so this isn't easy to say, this isn't Bush's fault. Bush is not a racist, but the GOP has a plethora of racists in it. Ever since the sixties, when Republicans started targeting southern voters (and thereby one the south) the GOP has had a strong contingent of racists.

Bush isn't racist, the GOP as a whole is.

I've heard the "southern strategy" argument before, Nislieb and I've never been convinced it exists. It might have existed in the '60s but only in districts and states where former democrats like Strom Thurmond and Jesse Helms were in power.

Things are actually better now for the GOP with hispanics. Mel Martinez is chair of the RNC, the first time a hispanic of either party has led a national committee. The fact that senators such as Lindsay Graham pushed for immigration reform (and that Bush endorsed the bill) in the face of stonewalling from democrats will win them some votes in the short term and give the republican leadership a domestic agenda in the next congress. Plus, Florida is now a rock-solid republican state mostly because of the hispanic vote.

The militias are manned by zealots of both the right and left. Nobody's claiming them. Remember that Jesse and Al are big anti-immigration zealots, after all.

You say the GOP has a "plethora" of racists in it but you can't identify a single one. You even say Bush is not one.

I know that Robert C. Byrd has used racist language as recently as 2001 and we don't even have to go into his writings. I know that Strom Thurmond once ran for president as a democrat on a segregationist platform. For all the advances the democrats claim to have made for blacks and other minorities, all the cabinet appointments and african-americans elected to both houses of congress were written into history by Republican appointments and candidates WAY before democrats were even running blacks and other minorities as candidates.

This isn't to say that republicans are perfect or don't have a long way to go to re-earn the trust of the majority of black voters. They do. I'm just offering real evidence of exactly what they've done to empower blacks and other minorities. The democrats, quite plainly, have missed the boat on setting this record of history and republicans will always be able to turn to it.

You can say "republicans intentionally inflame racist leanings" or other unproveable accusations. I don't see it. I don't think it's true. It's not based on anything proven in fact. It's just politics. Democrats have been using those types of baseless accusations against republicans for years. I don't think it will work in the next election, either.

Based on Michael Steele's 40%, the race-baiting attacks against Obama by the like of Jesse Jackson and other recent events, I wouldn't be too surprised, if I were you, if more African-Americans don't follow the lead of their ancestors and decide to ride an elephant in the near future.

DNC (the party of Klansman Robert C. Byrd), are you saying those men weren't ever elected? That was John E.'s question, after all. If you want more, though, I've got the facts here for you. The GOP's history with black voters is well established since it's the party that freed them from the national shame that was slavery:

Posted by: Anonymous | September 20, 2007 5:23 PM

They were called DIXIE-CRATS back then and then they became the Republican Party of the South.

The Republicans have a pathetic record with minortities but if you want to continue making a fool of yourself, please do so, we here in the Swamp are enjoying it.

As I said before, you sir are an idiot.

And now, our intellectualized commander-in-occupation is waxing loony about Hussein. He is quoted thusly -

"Part of the reason why there is not this instant democracy in Iraq is because people are still recovering from Saddam Hussein’s brutal rule. I thought an interesting comment was made when somebody said to me, I heard somebody say, where’s Mandela? Well, Mandela is dead, because Saddam Hussein killed all the Mandelas. He was a brutal tyrant that divided people up and split families, and people are recovering from this. So there’s a psychological recovery that is taking place. And it’s hard work for them. And I understand it’s hard work for them. Having said that, I’m not going the give them a pass when it comes to the central government’s reconciliation efforts."

The danger of having “intellectually incurious” people in charge of foreign policy…

Based on Michael Steele's 40%, the race-baiting attacks against Obama by the like of Jesse Jackson and other recent events, I wouldn't be too surprised, if I were you, if more African-Americans don't follow the lead of their ancestors and decide to ride an elephant in the near future.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 20, 2007 5:53 PM

"Anonymous",
You are an embarrassment to all Americans,
I dare you to get in front of an audience of black and hispanic people and give them your little spiel about how great the Republican Party has been through out history for minorities

1. Conservatism has failed. The overwhelming majority of the American public now sees the Bush administration as a failure. They failed in Iraq, they failed after Hurricane Katrina, they failed on health care, they failed to deliver rising wages, they failed on the deficit, they failed, they failed, they failed. Why? Liberals need to argue that it wasn’t a product of incompetence, it was a failure of conservative governance. As Alan Wolfe put it in a recent Washington Monthly article, “Conservatives cannot govern well for the same reason that vegetarians cannot prepare a world-class boeuf bourguignon: If you believe that what you are called upon to do is wrong, you are not likely to do it very well.”

Conservatives had their chance: a Republican president, a Republican Congress, Republican-appointed courts—in short, the perfect environment for enacting their vision with little to stand in their way—and they failed. Should we be surprised at the level of corruption? Of course not; they don’t think government is there to serve the people, so why shouldn’t they raid it for whatever they can grab?

In short, progressives should start talking about the Bush administration’s failures not as those of a president, but of an ideology.

2. Conservatism is the ideology of the past—a past we don’t want to return to. Democrats need to embrace the culture war, because we’re winning. The story of American history is that of conservative ideas and prejudices falling away as our society grows more progressive and thus more true to our nation’s founding ideals. Conservatives supported slavery, conservatives opposed women’s suffrage, conservatives supported Jim Crow, conservatives opposed the 40-hour work week and the abolishment of child labor, and conservatives supported McCarthyism. In short, all the major advancements of freedom and justice in our history were pushed by liberals and opposed by conservatives (Dixie-Crats), no matter the party they inhabited at the time.

Conservatism is Bill Bennett lecturing you about self-denial, then rushing off to feed his slot habit at the casino. It’s James Dobson telling you that children need regular beatings to stay in line. It’s a superannuated nun rapping you on the knuckles so you won’t think about your dirty parts. It’s Jerry Falwell watching “Teletubbies” frame by frame to see if Tinky Winky is trying to turn him gay. Conservatism is everyone you never wanted to grow up to be.

3. Conservatives are cowards, and they hope you are, too. We’re afraid, they shout. We’re so afraid of terrorists, we have to become more like the things we hate. We’re so afraid, we have to let our government sanction torture. We’re so afraid, we have to let the government spy on us. We’re so afraid, we have to give the president dictatorial powers. We’re so afraid, we just want to rush to the arms of politicians who say they’ll protect us.

Progressives need to frame their rejection of the fear campaign as an act of courage: Al-Qaida does not scare us, and we will not dismantle our democratic system because we are afraid. The America we love does not cower in fear, as the conservatives want it to.

~Paul Waldman~

hysterical! this from the texas gov who hung more black folk than any other in history...

repugs are filthy animals...

sure george, black folk vote 90% dem cause their stupid right?!?!?

get a grip! if it wasn't for the african-american vote this country would be full-on fascist by now...

which brings me to buchanon, who 15 years ago was running around making noise about the browning of america and how the repugs will lose their grip on power (legal power that is)...

repulsive as he is, he was right... this is exactly what this republican terrorist plot to destroy the constitution is all about... they have to rig elections and start wars, and suspend habeus corpus, etc...

they had to go for it cause they were running out of time...

republican party 2008 is the party of racism.

stfu about how lincoln was a republican, etc... only a liar or a schmuck would suggest lincoln would be anything other than a democrat today...

so lets talk liberals and conservatives...

take a look at one of those photos of a lynching during jim crow... white boys standing around grinning drinking cans of beer while some poor kid is dying a violent death... look at those faces... if those aren't the daddy's of repuglican boys i don't know what is...

get real!

John E,

Get a grip, son. Not everybody who posts anonymously is your hated enemy, Leo Juanie (whoever that is). There are at least 2 seperate anonymous's in this thread. That's obvious.

And guess what: nobody is fooled when you post under several names but keep the same tone and style and fractured synatx. And it's pretty creepy.

One more thing: 2x0=0. !,000,000X0=0. Really.

PBA, you are wasting your time arguing w/Anon. The man is an idiot.

You missed the thread where he argued that dog fighting ala Michael Vick is an exclusively inner city 'black thing'. It was after that thread I quit wasting my time dealing with a bigot posing as a reasonable man.

I must have hit a nerve to get Paul Waldman all worked up like that.

Anyway, I'm not going to address all the assumptions you've made (or your name-calling) that aren't supported by any hard and fast facts. Without anything to back them up, they're just that, assumptions.

Some history for you, though. The first politician to identify himself as a progressive was Republican Teddy Roosevelt. Yes, he left the party, but he came back to it later in life. Republicans have always been the progressives proposing ideas such as the EPA, child labor laws, labor reform and the ability to form a union, trust busting, taking us off the gold standard, and the Voting Rights Act of 1964 (with a huge assist from Mr. Kennedy). The other side pretends they invented things such as environmentalism, conservation, and labor regulation, but the reality is far from it. Sorry if that offends you.

There were no such labels as "conservatives and liberals" during the 1860s. Put simply, republicans (and Lincoln/unionist democrats) opposed slavery. Southern democrats supported it and opposed the union. You can call them "dixiecrats" or whatever other label you want. The distinction is purely cosmetic. These were people running for office for the Democratic National Committee and trying to win democrat delegates to become president. What you call them makes no difference whatsoever.

Anyway, I certainly encourage you and George Clooney to continue taking credit for things that had nothing to do with democrats.

"All the major advancements of freedom and justice in our history were pushed by liberals and opposed by conservatives."

Please. If that were true there wouldn't be two Republicans (the rail splitter and the trust buster) on Mount Rushmore and democrats wouldn't be left trying to shoehorn Thomas Jefferson (a man who believed in a strict interpretation of the constitution) into a modern party he would've never been a part of.

If you ever go to Berlin, make sure you thank a conservative for telling Gorbachev to "tear down this wall."

Trickled On - Love your math skills!!!

"We are in this cycle where Republicans don't talk to minority groups,"

Newt Gingrich - 9/18/2007

Most importantly, President Bush has been good for all of America - good economy, keeping us safe from terrorist attacks,...

wiener,

You know that I said that dog fighting is connected to hip-hop culture; and that it is niether exclusively Black, nor inner city.

You, on the other hand said that all Republicans are in favor of dogfighting. So who's the idiot here? It's all in the archive shall we look up the thread and embarrass you some more?

Wiener, it says alot about you and your "ideas" when you have to fabricate lies to try to defend yourself.

Weinerdog, that was a different anonymous. Many people choose to post as "anonymous" rather than post under a childish name such as "weinerdog43." I disagree with that anonymous about Michael Vick, too. Would that you could only dismiss all of us by calling us idiots and bigots, though. Nice try.

Most importantly, President Bush has been good for all of America - good economy, keeping us safe from terrorist attacks,...

Posted by: Terry | September 21, 2007 8:13 AM

An economy bought on borrowed dollars that Terry is too old to worry about paying off... sweet!

And keeping us SAFE from terrorist attacks? I don't remember the World Trade Center being destroyed or the Pentagon taking a direct hit from a terrorist attack before Mr. Bush was President. Mr. Bush WAS President on 9/11/01, or was that Clinton? My memory is failing me.

Saying Mr. Bush kept us safe from terrorist attacks is like saying that a pitcher who comes in with a 4 run lead in the bottom of the 9th and gives up 8 runs did a pretty darn good job because, heck, at least he didn't give up 10!

America has never been attacked like it has on 9/11, and Bush was in charge with a Republican Congress, a Republican mayor and governor in NY, and a GOP Supreme Court. They didn't keep us safe, Terry.

To the other Anonymous:

You're a little bit too much of a party loyalist for my taste, but you bring something to the Swamp that is sorely lacking -- critical thinking and a command of facts.

Welcome and please stick around. And don't don't adopt post name. Remaining anonymous drives the cretins up the wall.

Hello fellow anonymous, it's good to be here and I'm glad to civilly share this space with you. I should've imagined that Mr. Weinerdog made all that stuff about Michael Vick, too. I was giving him a bit too much credit there. Sorry about that.

To the other Anonymous:

You're a little bit too much of a party loyalist for my taste, but you bring something to the Swamp that is sorely lacking -- critical thinking and a command of facts.

Welcome and please stick around. And don't don't adopt post name. Remaining anonymous drives the cretins up the wall.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 21, 2007 11:05 AM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hello fellow anonymous, it's good to be here and I'm glad to civilly share this space with you. I should've imagined that Mr. Weinerdog made all that stuff about Michael Vick, too. I was giving him a bit too much credit there. Sorry about that.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 21, 2007 11:26 AM

It doesn't get more pathetic than this, this racist "anonymous" clown gets his arse handed to him on here and then he devolpes a whole new version of "himself" to pat himself on the back with, what a loser....HAHAHAHAHA!

Actually I have a different IP address then whoever that other anonymous is. You can ask the Swamp if you don't believe me.

And if you're going to call someone else a racist, John E., you really need to look at the three fingers pointing back at you. Aren't you the one who used to call Hispanics "burritos" on another thread?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 21, 2007 2:10 PM

People come on here to debate political positions that they passionately belive in, right or wrong.

You come on here with some narcissist play on how you are smarter than everyone else.

Get lost "anonymous" aka Leo T/Juanito, we don't care how "smart" you think you are.....and quit race baiting people on here, it makes you look foolish.

DV or Unemployed Tony,

The WTC was attacked while President Clinton was in office, although I will not cast blame onto him for that. The only difference between the 1993 attack and the 2001 attack was the degree of success that the terrorists had.

I don't rember any African embassies being bombed, or overseas military bases, or warships being bombed while President Bush has been in office. "My memory is failing me".

Your baseball analogy has just proven you are only qualified to manage the Cubs. That was pathetic aanlaogy. Didn't mom let you play tee-ball?

A more appropriate analogy would be that President Bush came into the game against the other team with the bases loaded, nobody out, and had to face the teams 3-4-5 hitters. In other words, he had to clean up the mess of his predecessor.

For the record Tony (DV), on 9-11-01, the Senate was in democratic hands because Senator Jeffords had gone to the dark side back in May.

I never realized the mayor or governor had the power to keep a town safe from terrorists attacks. What was the Supreme Court supposed to do?

Notice that the terrorist flights that took off that day, 3 of them came from democratic states and democratic cities????

The sheer ignorance of republicans here is amazing.

Of course, blacks supported the GOP in the old days. The most racist folks in this country were southern democrats. Republicans were considered liberal northerners, while the South was solidly conservative democrat.

Then things changed dramatically in the 50s and 60s.
LBJ pushed for civil rights legislation, angering southern conservatives along the way (dems and dixiecrats).
The result? Them racist southerners flocked to the desperate Republican party, which was in disarray after LBJ won the 1964 election in a landslide over the segregationist Republican Barry Goldwater.
Is it a coincidence that Alabama, Mississippi, South Carolina and other conservative states became republican for the first time ever in the 1960s and have remained so?

Rice and Powell were appointed TOKENS to give an image of inclusion (Powell) or because of friendship with the Bush clan (Rice)... At least Colin Powell had the decency to leave that sorry administration early.

The GOP seized to be the party of Lincoln in the 60s and became a Goldwater/Thurmond/ Falwell/Duke/Limbaugh/Reagan/Bush diaspora. Why would blacks associate themselves with these kinds of people?
Do you honestly believe that a man like Rockefeller would still feel at home in the current GOP?