The True Bigots… Democrat Editorialists!
Sunday, February 10, 2008
The True Bigots… Democrat Editorialists
So it has come to this. It is now perfectly fine to consider a person’s race and gender when voting for President of the United States. Starting in pre school we are taught that these things are expressly NOT a valid reason with which to make decisions and judgments about each other, but now I have to explain Mr. Ensley’s article to my little girl after she see’s the “Madame President” photo. (This after explaining the NYT “Betray-Us ad). Did I miss something in Dr. King’s “I Have a Dream” speech?
Apparently so. Forty years and hundreds of billions of dollars in the “War on Poverty” have basically created a permanent second class of American citizen, dependant on and beholden to the mighty Federal Government – stripped of their dignity, sense of individual pride and will to succeed.
Maybe I missed it but some of the most powerful, successful and brilliant people in this country lately are Black Americans like Colin Powell, Condi Rice and Justice Clarence Thomas. (None of which incidentally have EVER been on the covers of JET or EBONY magazines… not once). Naturally any intelligent reader would imagine the question “would Gerald Ensley consider voting for any of the persons mentioned above?” They fit the race/gender bill nicely after all.
Attention Big Lib editorial writers… the Democrat Party in general and Hillary Clinton (and Barrack Obama) in particular represent everything that we fought against during the American Revolution. Think about it: High Taxation, unlimited Government power, collectivism, group rights, to name a few. Now, rather than considering this and other genuine principles of American governance, we set out to nominate and then elect a President based on their RACE, and/or GENDER.
It is truly sad how Black Americans are pandered to and taken for granted by the Democrats. I guess it is okay to consider RACE if the candidate is on the left side of the aisle (and Obama is consistently rated as the most liberal Senator). I would be surprised by the stories of Blacks walking into the election room and being annoyed when handed a DEM ballot when they are a registered REP. While American Blacks should so clearly be voting Republican, they overwhelmingly (92% on average) do not.
Have you seen those little online “Electoral Compasses” where you answer a number of policy based and issue oriented questions, then it matches you with your Presidential Candidate. As simple as this is it absolutely does a better job in matching our vote with our candidate who best represents our views than does RACE and GENDER.
If the object of these “it’s okay to discuss race and gender” columns is to evoke a reaction out of the reader then mission accomplished! I just hope the writers of such columns awaken each morning thanking their lucky stars to have a writing career as it was based (at least on the body of evidence) on something such as RACE or GENDER and certainly not on intelligence, writing skill or insight.
Yours truly,
conservOpunk
Chris Says: April 13th, 2008 at 4:57 pm
Great great rant. Well done conservOpunk, you listen to punk and conservative? Hey we have something in common, there’s not many of us.
Chris Says: April 13th, 2008 at 4:58 pm
Well done, ConservOpunk, good rant. You listen to punk and are conservative. Looks like there aren’t may of us.
The Other Side Says: April 16th, 2008 at 4:59 am
this article is a joke. it sounds more “bitter” than anything. say what you want about why the two leading democratic candidates are the most diverse ever, but don’t trivialize this momentous election. the democratic voters aren’t basing their decision on race or gender. both candidates are strong and represent liberal ideas. they’re not going to wither under the right-wing spin machine like john kerry did in 2004. an opposing candidate like john mccain only makes this next election even easier.
conservOpunk Says: May 9th, 2008 at 1:35 am
The “Republican Talking Points” (or Facts) and the “right wing spin machine” (or talk radio discussing facts) is constantly brought up by Liberals who cannot now and could not ever in the past win an argument of ideas. They are left to denigrate the opponent in such a case as the comment here.
I am flattered that you refer to my essay off the top of my head as an “article.” Thank you sir. – ConservOpunk
tonyoconservopunk.blogspot.com
PS – and I dont just listen to punk, I write punk rock conservative songs. The establishment nowadays is BIG Govt and Liberal Media, so punk is anti that… (:
The Other Side Says: May 9th, 2008 at 11:12 pm
while i may not agree with the substance or tone of the points presented above, there needs to be some level of civility in this debate which is why i called it an article.
both sides lie. both sides have valid and invalid points. the differences lie in the way each side thinks. there was a recent study that showed conservatives are happier than liberals because they can rationalize inequality. while i may see people need help because they are in a precarious position due to their circumstances, conservatives may see a person that needs to work themselves out of trouble. not seeing the other side for why they think the way they do leads to this article.
talk radio and the mainstream media are both flawed in their ways. however, the liberal media is an oxymoron because of the obvious love of john mccain and the harsh treatment of obama and clinton.
CONSERVOPUNK Says: July 1st, 2008 at 5:15 pm
Anyone who claims “liberal media” to be an oxymoron is completely out of touch with reality. please go to my site for countless excessive liberal bias in the mainstream media.
John McCain is not a conservative. Period
My point has always been that people support Obama because he is LIBERAL, not just that he is black. There have been many strong black conservatives who are treated horribly by the media.
conservOpunk
The Other SIde Says: July 2nd, 2008 at 5:26 pm
conservopunk doesn’t really dismiss the fact that the media loves mccain, just that he’s not a conservative. thats odd considering he’s the presumptive nominee for the republican party that holds conservative views.
look at how long the media is spending talking about wes clark’s “contraversial” comment compared to the amout of time spent on charlie black’s. the media keeps saying that mccain is a maverick even though mccain has flip-flopped (the media slammed obama’s campaign financing flop). obama gets far more scrutiny than mccain.
its a cop-out to call mccain a liberal then still denounce the “liberal” media for their coverage of mccain. maybe the media is more liberal because liberal minds tend to be more inclined towards journalism. look at the conservatives on tv. fox news is a joke and scarbarough and lou dobbs both have their truth issues. the conservative pundits basically bloviate and lie (i just watched lars larson get in a tizzy over the movie wall-e).
and maybe people support the liberal candidate because the conservative brand is damaged and unpopular. or maybe because obama inspires people. whatever the case may be, things are lookint good for the democrats.
CSP Says: July 3rd, 2008 at 3:26 pm
Firstly, the news media are subordinated to corporate and conservative interests. It is controlled and funded by the likes of Disney, GE, Time-Warner-AOL, Viacom and Rupert Murdoch who represent elite interests, and who’s propaganda model tries to stipulate a set of institutional variables, reflecting this elite power.
Secondly, the media world now includes talk radio, cable television and traditional news sources (newspapers, news magazines and the old broadcast networks). Two of these three major institutions lean well to the right, and the third is under constant pressure to avoid even a hint of liberalism.
Regards,
Craig
Emory Says: July 3rd, 2008 at 10:17 pm
Disney is conservative? I think not.
Typical White Guy Says: July 6th, 2008 at 1:16 am
Consider that the two (other) black men that I work directly with, in a diverse workplace, are voting for Obama JUST because he is black, is prime example, and this is all over the country. Those guys are conservative thinkers and voted for Bush in previous elections, but this is the mentality. I will not be surprised if the thought police don’t knock down my door for posting this. If Obama gets elected I bet they will, so I’ll ad the word in parenthesis above.
Andy Says: July 6th, 2008 at 2:30 am
CSP,
Rent a brain. Disney, GE, Time-Warner-AOL, Viacon are ALL liberal leaning. Of your dopey list only Fox News is conservative leaning (where Sky in UK is liberal). Again, you’re blind if you think talk radio, cable tv, tv news, newspapers, and magazines are not liberal. Finally, what about the movie industry? They have long been liberal propagandists. Why would anyone discount them from a list of purveyors of media?
Kiwi Says: September 13th, 2008 at 1:37 am
Andy,
With all this liberal ‘propaganda’ (Disney, GE, Time-Warner-AOL, Viacon, Cable TV, talk radio, news, magazines, movie stars, rock stars, the list goes on) don’t you ever wonder if the rest of you just aren’t getting it? Do you ever think “Hey, maybe the power SHOULD go to the people!”
Probably not. But hey, just thought I’d ask.
Tyra Says: September 13th, 2008 at 9:17 pm
Kiwi -
You actually believe that the liberal philosophy is “power should go to the people”? Huh? Actually, it’s “Power should go to the Government”. Before you actually claim to be part of particular party, perhaps you should look into their basic belief system.
Kiwi Says: September 18th, 2008 at 2:12 am
Looking into the facts actually proves that the conservative republicans would rather put the power into the government… it was, after all, a republican that enacted the patriot act. And it is, after all, republicans that favor big businesses and shit all over the little guy. Sounds like more power to the government to me.
Buck Says: September 18th, 2008 at 12:01 pm
Kiwi,
The elitist ruling class is peopled with Republicans and Democrats. The reason I’m a conservative is because conservatives want less government control. Unfortunately that can allow abuses by the wealthy and powerful, but I prefer that to more government control any day of the week.
The Other Side Says: September 18th, 2008 at 7:27 pm
buck, you actually say that you prefer “abuses by the wealthy and powerful” to government intervention? do you also prefer that aig, fannie mae and feddie mac all fail? or do you support the bailouts using taxpayer dollars?
what is so threatening about regulation? trying to police the market isn’t going to strip away our civil liberties. i understand that conservative mantra of “less government” but thats unrealistic. take a look at our current economy and say that less government is beneficial to america/
Kiwi Says: September 20th, 2008 at 2:10 am
I agree with The Other Side. Republicans claim less government, but unfortunately the only people who benefit are the one who are rich and powerful. More government doesn’t mean less rights. Sometimes the government needs to step in to make sure all of it’s citizens are being treated as well as their rich friends.