The Politics Thread

[alphanguy74]

They can reccommend people wear repellants at all times, hell, LISTERINE works. Going under the assumption that it isn't going to be harmful... yeah.. I bet they said that to the guys in Vietnam right before they sprayed the agent orange. There are also other ways to reduce the populations, like making sure all stagnant water is dried out or made to where the mosquitos will suffocate, all that takes if a few drops of mineral oil.

Edited August 17, 2012 by alphanguy74

[marceline]

Wet conditions? I thought most of the country was suffering varying degrees of drought especially in the center of the U.S.

I'm willing to bet that if someone digs a little deeper they will find that the contract for the aerial spraying has been given to someone who donated to the mayor's campaign.

[quartermainefan]

Long ago I remember someone like David Gergen saying on TV that politics was show business for ugly people. I really thought that was a great way of summing it up.

This was 6 years ago before he even got serious about working out. I would say Paul Ryan went into the wrong arm of show business.

[Max]

I know that every single Democrat laughed it off, but Obama should heed the advice of Senator McCain and drop Biden from his ticket (for his extraordinarily racially-charged remarks) and replace him with Secretary Clinton. Just because McCain is a hypocrite (since he fu-cked up royally with his own VP pick), does not mean he is wrong.

VP Foot-in-Mouth is a total fraud. While many know that he plagiarized a speech of the leader of the British Labour Party, there are several other examples of egregious conduct on his part:

*He also plagiarized when he was in law school.

*He lied and said that he held three undergraduate degrees. (He only has one.)

*He claimed he graduated in the top half of his law school class. (He ranked #76 out of 85.)

*He falsely stated that he went to law school on an academic, merit-based scholarship, when--in reality--it was a scholarship that was based on economic status.

All of what I just stated can be found in the following New York Times article:

http://www.nytimes.c...ed=print&src=pm

God help us all if this reckless egomaniac were to become president.

Edited August 18, 2012 by Max

[marceline]

No he shouldn't. The only people upset by Biden are the people on the right who are trying to gin up some fake moral outrage. What the right considers to be Biden's "gaffes" is just Biden keeping it real. He's actually quite the asset to Obama because he says what needs to be said while Obama tries to placate. Having Republicans tell black people that they "should" be offended doesn't pass the smell test. Especially when backed up by Biden's life long history as someone who fights for minorities and women.

Edited August 18, 2012 by marceline

[Wales2004]

I disagree with you regarding the double standard. Joe Biden ran in the primaries and it was no secret that he voted in favor of the war so there was nothing for Barack Obama to hide nor any need to remind voters of their opposing views. Paul Ryan's budget is a possibility unlike a vote that was already cast.

I don't know if that vote was a big reason why Barack Obama defeated Hilary Clinton. I think the Clinton's arrogance played a major part in their defeat. They didn't take his candidacy seriously and they ended up making some costly mistakes including playing racial politics which backfired on them.

Part of the reason I don't believe race in America is going to progress significantly is because it is financially beneficial to some and politically beneficial to others. Both parites have relied on it for years but the Republicans are the ones who are usually more obvious about it. The Democrats just generally get to fall back on the idea that they will get minorities to vote for them. The Republicans are forced to use a lot more coded phrases because of Barack Obama's racial background. They're not going to come right out and tell the racist xenophobes to whom they want to appeal to vote white so they remind them by referring to Barack Obama as foreign and un-American and they use people like John Sununu who was born in Cuba and is of Palestinian descent to do it which says a lot about how easy that part of their constituency is to manipulate.

IMO, the Republican party has zero credibility in making claims about racially-charged remarks since they engage in it more effectively than the Democrats. This has nothing to do with Republicans trying to tell black people they should be offended. Black people are not a homogenous group of people so not every black person is going to see this the same way and the sooner people get rid of the "black group think" idea, the better because people won't be as easily manipulated due to being easily distracted because getting mad because you think a white man is telling you what to think and feel on top of all the other things of which you think white people are guilty is nothing but a useless distraction and keeps too many people from accomplishing much. Racial politics has very little to do with race and everything to do with emotions that are used to manipulate the ignorant masses, misguided religious zealots, and the idealists into voting a certain way. At the end of the day, a rich Republican is not going to care any more about the poor white citizens he used to get where he was going than he does about the black ones he put down to do it.,

Mitt Romney is just upset that the Democrats are not rolling over for him. The Republicans need to be quiet about running Hilary Clinton as V.P. because they know very well if she ended up on the ticket they will be gleefully slinging mud at her. Joe Biden doesn't come across as cold and calculating so he can cut them up in a delightful non-malicious way.

[Max]

This is impressive spin. But it is not only partisan Republicans who are calling out Biden for his racist comments. So is Doug Wilder, an African American Democrat who was the nation's first black governor since Reconstruction. (Wilder also echoed McCain's comments that Clinton would be a far superior choice for VP than Biden.)

http://www.foxnews.c...-chains-remark/

I will also never understand the "logic" that the GOP's use of "coded" language like "un-American" (which I have heard in reference to a belief that Obama's policies mirror those of Europe, not those of Africa) is race-baiting, whereas Biden's not-so-coded language of putting "y'all back in chains" had zero to do with race. Even if one agrees with the premise of what Biden was trying to say, was there a reason why he had to use the language he did (especially in a town like Danville, VA, which has a very ugly racial past)?

Edited August 18, 2012 by Max

[DRW50]

Doug Wilder has always been bipartisan in his comments - he had to be to win in Virginia.

[marceline]

You can't link to Fox News and expect anyone to take it seriously.

[DRW50]

But how else would we know about lesbian cabals running Washington?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/17/geraldo-rivera-lesbian-cabal_n_1797657.html?utm_hp_ref=media

[Roman]

Mt bad, my bad. That's why i need good folk like yourself to keep me on the straight and narrow.

[Wales2004]

I am not sure why you think I was trying to spin anything because I said that race is politically beneficial to both parties.

Why would I need to spin the facts? The Republican party does have zero credibility and let's not pretend that the couple of exanples I mentioned are all that was ever done. There have been a number of instances where Republicans have depicted Barack Obama as a monkey. If I recall correctly, the reason Michael Steele ended up in that chair position was because Chip Saltzman distributed "Barack the Magic Negro" disc. How many times have Republican candidates stood up and suggested that black people want free stuff (as if only black people want free stuff)? Mitt Romney did that recently. Then there's the constant reference to black people and welfare and implying that only black welfare recipients are undeserving of welfare because they are all lazy people who don't want to work (Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich) and good old Ronald Reagan's welfare queen because only good for nothing black people cheat the welfare system.

How is it that Joe Biden makes the statement yet Mitt Romney turns around and refers to Barack Obama as the one who is angry and full of hate? That characterization is a bit over the top as a response to Joe Biden.

Even if Doug Wilder and every other black American are in agreement, it still doesn't make the Rebublicans any more credible on the subject. Both parties are generally full of it when it comes to their faux outrage but Republicans routinely reference the lazy black welfare recipient in order to make all those honest hard working Americans think that these shiftless individuals are taking their hard earned cash. Even when Newt Gingrich admitted there were more white people on welfare than black people, he didn't ever suggest that any of those white welfare recipients need to work or might be getting money they didn't deserve.

[Max]

The welfare queen that Ronald Reagan referred to did exist, and her name was Linda Taylor. She was a massive fraud, and just because she was black doesn't mean that Reagan was racist:

http://news.google.c...pg=4748,3022544

Santorum was race-baiting when he singled out black people and welfare while campaigning in Iowa. But, I think it is a real stretch to claim it is racist for Republicans to criticize Obama for the fact that the number of people on food stamps has been at an all-time high during his presidency (especially when one considers the fact that many white people are on food stamps as well); rather, Obama should be condemned for this because it shows a major economic failure on his part.

http://www.huffingto..._n_1074344.html

Other folks have linked to left-wing websites, and I don't begrudge them. However, let's go under the assumption that everything in that article was false. Well, that article also contained a video of Doug Wilder in his own words (and I highly doubt that Murdoch was holding a gun to his head). Though Governor Wilder didn't say (in the video) that Clinton would be a better running mate than Biden (it instead was mentioned in the article), he did indeed extensively condemn Biden's remarks while on camera.

Edited August 19, 2012 by Max

[Wales2004]

One of the things that I don't like about either party is the general inability to admit when they do things of which they will readily accuse the other party. I've heard Joe Biden and Harry Reid make racist/racialist or at best questionable statements that have gotten swept under the rug because people who usually make a fuss about things like that gave them a free pass. During the 2008 primaries, some Democrats revealed how backwards they are on the issue of race but I do distinguish between malicious intent and what's politcially beneficial. I believe, for instance, that Hilary Clinton made her statement which implied that only white people worked hard (blue collars) because it was politically beneficial and she didn't anticipate that since she and her husband had such goodwill with their black supporters that it would have caused any type of hysteria at all. But it did. Some people like to pick and choose when to get offended.

What Joe Biden said the other day should not have caused any problems at all unless perhaps he was speaking to an entirely black audience. In fact, if he had said "we" instead of "y'all" there would be no place to go with it. The Republicans have been all over the place using the word "unshackled" and it's not a big deal because apparently they don't have to worry about black people in their venues it seems. But the fact that people associate chains with black people (and I already know about America's slave history) is very telling because it means that this idea of black people and chains is destined to follow black people around in this country forever even if they have no slave ancestry. It also means that black immigrants to this country are going to be bound by something that doesn't even relate to them simply because people want to wear the past. I've seen prisoners in chains and no one can make that connection but they suppose that if there are black people in a room with white people and someone implies chains in a metaphorical sense that it must simply apply to the black people. I have seen the movies with slaves in shackles (otherwise I would not have that image) but I don't relate slaves to chains because I've seen far too many other movies where people where shackled as a form of imprisonment and it had nothing to do with slavery.

I have no idea how black people became associated with monkeys and I don't care to know because it's ridiculous as well as black Americans being specifically assoicated with watermelon. As for fried chicken--it seems to me that the most popular face in this nation associated with it is Col. Sanders and yet it's not just a southern thing. That tells you a lot about how ignorant people are and how willing people are to embrace the ignorance.

Anyway, I may be off base but what you seem to be doing is wanting everyone to acknowledge that Joe Biden was race baiting while only acknowledging that Rick Santorum did it. I pointed out how Newt Gingrich constantly suggests that only black people need to work for welfare. I acknowledge that there are black people who have scammed the welfare system and that there are white people who have done it. Does the fact that Ronald Reagan only chose to point out an instance where someone black did it make him a racist? Maybe not, but does it make it seem more likely that he was using her to win votes from people who don't like black people? Yes. He could have easily told the story of a white woman who defrauded the welfare system or told the story of both, but in this nation all that matters is that someone black did it. There isn't any way around that.

I didn't even mention food stamps because even if some might find it inflammatory, I don't think it's an example of what I've been pointing out. I don't recall anyone making it seem as if only black people get food stamps because I think the point there is to illustrate that he has devastated the whole nation.

Since I'm non-partisan my honest reaction at this point to Joe Biden is so what??? It's not as if the Republicans haven't made it their mission to make sure that they presented road blocks for President Obama from day one. It isn't as if they've all treated him with respect ("you lie" during a state of the union address and Jan Brewer wagging her finger at him on the tarmac). And you missed the whole Mitt Romney reference to him as being full of anger and hate. The Republicans fight dirty. So what if the Democrats decided to get down in the mud with them.

It's like the Republicans came to the party with a bucket of mud and the Democrats snatched it from them and said let me show you how it's done and the Republicans are running around all outraged now because the bully stole their mud from them. Well they shouldn't have brought mud in the first place. Now they're all stuck on how "divisive" the Democrats are when they spent so much time trying to paint everyone who doesn't share their views as "un-American" as if that isn't divisive.

[Wales2004]

I want to add this regarding race and politics:

I believe it has less to do with a candidate's position on race and more to do with the types of voters they are trying to attract. What kind of voter would you be trying to attract by "accusing" (as if there is something terribly wrong with this) John McCain of having a black baby?

Basically candidates stand up and pander to voters that they think might be afraid of family members being deported, voters who they think are racist and don't want to see "minorities" prosper, voters who love unions, voters who hate unions, etc. Does it necessarily mean that the candidate believes in all these things? No. It's just a question of how far they will go and what they will say to get elected.