It is amazing that people still believe that the Democratic party is concerned with diversity and freedom.
The phrase "calling a spade a spade" was originally one from ancient Greece that meant to speak "plainly and bluntly; to speak without euphemisms". In modern times there is a racial component to it as the word spade has been used to denote black people. The reason for this particular title is to push a double entendre as it relates to a former staffer of Ben Cardin. Cardin is running for the open Senate seat in Maryland and his opponent is Michael Steele, a black man who has committed the crime of being conservative.…
Article comments
26 - pleasexcusetheinterruption12
I mean for christ's sake, the author of the article demeans blacks worse than Hillary Clinton or this random volunteer ever did. The whole concept implies blacks are an unintelligent voting block who arn't sophisticated enough to know which party to vote for. Look at the book that is selected for the article. The book cover depicts what in this case is a black man saying "I forgot honey why are we democrats?" Depicting the entire black populace as too stupid to know what's good for them doesnt really score any points either.
27 - Big Dog
Burns probably keeps his sheets where Robert Byrd does. Racism should not be tolerated in any party and yet people keep reelecting Burns. Cardin acted like he did not know anything several days after the story broke. He could have done himself better by saying that he had been made aware of everything and that he would personally apologize, he did none of this.
As for the book. I see two animals that look like donkeys, the Democrat's symbol. Where you get a black man out of it is beyond me. Read what the book is about and then tell me how it is a racist book.
As for blacks being too stupid, I never made such an assertion. The item I pose is, why do blacks and Jews keep overwhelmingly voting for Democrats? Intelligence is not an issue here and for anyone to imply anything not implicitly stated in the article is reckless, wrong, and meant to detract from the argumement. Straw man comes to mind...
28 - Big Dog
BTW, the author of the book is a Democrat:
Kenneth R Libbey
29 - pleasexcusetheinterruption12
I didn't say the book was rascist "and for anyone to imply anything not implicitly stated in my statement is reckless, wrong, and meant to detract from the argumement. Straw man comes to mind..." It's your use of the book that is so repulsive. The people around the table are supposed to be black americans who don't know why they are democrats. Or put more simply, black americans are uninformed unintelligent voters who vote democrat for no good reason because they dont know what's good for them.
30 - pleasexcusetheinterruption12
Obviously I'm not going to get you to apologize for the rascist undertones in your own article, which considering the subject matter of the article, I find highly ironic.
31 - Big Dog
So the book has two donkeys on the cover that you say represent black people and I am the racist?
I will not apologize because I made no racist remarks nor were there racist undertones. They are the facts about Cardin and his staffer. You can continue to attack me with this straw man argument but it will not work.
Perhaps you should contact Gruber and give her your wrath instead.
32 - Maurice
When confronted by racism I always respond the way James Blake did when Leyton Hewitt made some rude comments. James showed some real class.
As a black/hillbilly/conservative/atheiest I almost always end up voting for the conservative candidate because of the very reasons Dave listed in #3.
33 - Nancy
PETI, I enlarged that cover pretty large, and I see nothing that indicates the two donkeys in question are supposed to represent blacks. Where did you get that from?
34 - Clavos
Ditto.
PETI???
35 - Maurice
Yeah. Those donkeys look nothing like me.
Or Thomas Sowell or Oscar Peterson or Walter Williams or ....
36 - Clavos
Hey, Maurice, aren't you the guy who's supposed to be me? Or is it I'm supposed to be you?
Anyway, nice to meet you!!
Clavos
37 - MCH
Re #25;
Wow, I had almost forgotten about all those ignorant remarks by Conrad Burns from the past. Lately he's been on the hot seat here for changing his vote after taking a $50,000 donation from Jack Abramhoff, and then verbally assaulting and cursing some firefighters in the Billings airport, telling one guy, "You didn't do a Goddamned thing!"
Hopefully he'll finally lose an election. My only consolation as a fifth generation Montanan is the fact that Burns actually transplanted here from Missouri...
38 - pleasexcusetheinterruption12
Ummm do you all really think that the boook was chosen randomly for an article about why the democrats are the real rascists? Even if the two donkeys arent black, the book was chosen for an article about blacks, and it wasnt by coincidence. Perhaps this bigoted Big Dog quote will make it more clear, "For the life of me, I cannot figure out why blacks and Jews continue to vote for Democrats in such overwhelmingly high numbers." Obviously, Big Dog is arguing that blacks should be voting for the GOP b/c dems are rascist, and that blacks are too stupid to figure this out without a white guy like Big Dog pointing it out to them.
39 - pleasexcusetheinterruption12
As I pointed out in #25 I think blacks know exactly what they're doing when they decide to vote against bigots like mr. burns.
40 - Nancy
You didn't answer the question: what features of that cover indicate to you that those donkeys represent blacks? Besides your imagination, of course.
41 - Clavos
Obviously, Big Dog is arguing that blacks should be voting for the GOP b/c dems are rascist, and that blacks are too stupid to figure this out without a white guy like Big Dog pointing it out to them.
Nice framing job, PETI.
It's OK to say that Republicans/conservatives (even the black ones) are deluded for the way they vote, but if someone dares to say African-Americans who vote democrat are, you raise the old strawman spectre of racism.
And actually, BD backs his assertion up with quotes from prominent dems.
Here's a non-racist way of putting the same thing: "For the life of me, I cannot figure out why (anyone) continue(s) to vote for Democrats in such overwhelmingly high numbers."
Same valid point; no racism. Feel better now?
42 - Maurice
Nice to meet you Clavos. I've read your posts in the past and believe we do have similarities. My oldest son is handicapped and on SS. I can't remember the problems your wife has but I know they were pretty serious.
43 - Clavos
Maurice,
Yes, she's a paraplegic.
BTW, Re your #35: I have to confess I had to Google Walter Williams, but as a Conservative and jazz enthusiast, I very much know the other two.
Unfortunately for me, the Miami Herald dropped Thomas Sowell some time ago, but I catch him online on Real Clear Politics these days.
Oscar Peterson...aahhh, sublime!
44 - Dave Nalle
Perhaps this bigoted Big Dog quote will make it more clear, "For the life of me, I cannot figure out why blacks and Jews continue to vote for Democrats in such overwhelmingly high numbers." Obviously, Big Dog is arguing that blacks should be voting for the GOP b/c dems are rascist, and that blacks are too stupid to figure this out without a white guy like Big Dog pointing it out to them.
PETI, every person who makes a mistake is not stupid. They just may never have been given a decent explanation of what they are doing wrong, or have been doing it so long - for generations - that they don't think about the complexities of the issue.
Big Dog's statement isn't racist. The racist part is the interpretation you tack onto the end of it. He didn't actually say that stupidity was the reason minorities and the poor remain under Democrat subjugation.
I'll say something you'll probably find even more racist. It's a slave mentality. They've been conditioned to rely on and be loyal to their Democrat party masters and breaking that conditioning and thinking for themselves is scary.
Dave
45 - Maurice
The slave mentality is everywhere. I have a buddy that is a member of IBEW. We were discussing unions. I told him I thought he would be better off if he quit the union. He laughed and then asked a very telling question.
"Where would my jobs come from, the government?"
I was amazed that he thought he had to rely on any entity to supply him with work. He is a highly skilled electrician. He doesn't have to be a slave to anyone.
Clavos - Florida huh. I'm in Boise Idaho. What benefits are you able to get for your wife? My son lives in a group home and is very well taken care off.
46 - Clavos
Maurice,
My wife had a very good job before she got sick.
When she first became disabled she was on private LTD provided by her employer. The LTD carrier employed a company which represented her for purposes of obtaining SSDI, which has much stricter criteria than private LTD. It actually took some time (over two years), but finally she was approved. Then after two years on SSDI (some of the time was considered retroactively), she was approved for Medicare. Medicare pretty much covers most of her medical needs, which are considerable; she's currently in the hospital for the third time in as many months and has spent eight of the last eleven months in the hospital. What's not covered by Medicare is picked up by our private insurance.
I'm her primary caregiver, but Medicare provides home nursing 3x a week when she's home, a home health aide also 3x/week, her wheelchair, braces for her legs, etc., etc. They also pay for therapy on an outpatient basis. As long as it's provided in a hospital, it's unlimited.
Her root problem is a spinal cord injury caused by radiation treatment for a cancer sarcoma she had seven years ago; she's been paralyzed and has no feeling from the waist down for a little more than a year. On the bright side, the cancer has not come back.
Our biggest expense is the private insurance premium ($710.00 a month), which also is through her employer, because I'm self-employed, but her monthly medical bills are way more than that, so it's worth it.
Tell me about your son.
47 - pleasexcusetheinterruption12
You didn't answer the question: what features of that cover indicate to you that those donkeys represent blacks? Besides your imagination, of course.
I never said features of that cover indicate that those donkeys represent blacks. I said features of the article indicate to me that Big Dog wants those donkeys to represent blacks. It's an article about black people and rascism remember Nancy?
It's OK to say that Republicans/conservatives (even the black ones) are deluded for the way they vote, but if someone dares to say African-Americans who vote democrat are, you raise the old strawman spectre of racism.
Exactly. You know why? Because if I call conservatives deluded i am attacking an ideology...if I call blacks deluded, I am attacking a specific group of people who hold nothing in common accept skin color. Pretty damn shallow and rascist.
PETI, every person who makes a mistake is not stupid. They just may never have been given a decent explanation of what they are doing wrong, or have been doing it so long - for generations - that they don't think about the complexities of the issue.
That's the best response of the three, by a long shot. But it leads to a rascist conclusion anyways. "They just may never have been given a decent explanation of what they are doing wrong," seems to imply that blacks need an explanation and "they don't think about the complexities of the issue," seems to imply blacks aren't capable of thinking through complexities.
They've been conditioned to rely on and be loyal to their Democrat party masters and breaking that conditioning and thinking for themselves is scary.
Are you sure you're not the one who's been conditioned to some other master? I mean how can you ever tell who's been conditioned and who's not, b/c if people have been conditioned, how do you know you havent been conditioned too? And if you've been conditioned, everything you say is just a byproduct of that conditioning. Im sure a lot of blacks would say you're the one that has been conditioned, not them.
48 - Clavos
if I call blacks deluded, I am attacking a specific group of people who hold nothing in common accept skin color.
Except that in the original statement they had two things in common: skin color (or race) and voting democratic, in which case you can be saying that the dems are deluding the African-Americans, and therefore any that vote for them are deluded (by the dems).
The American heritage Dictionary at dictionary.com defines delude as:
To deceive the mind or judgment of.
According to this definition, the statement implies that the democratic party is deceptively deluding African-Americans into voting for its candidates, because if it weren't doing so, blacks would not be deluded, and would not vote democratic.
It is a negative comment on the tactics of the dems, not a racist statement.
49 - Dave Nalle
That's the best response of the three, by a long shot. But it leads to a rascist conclusion anyways.
As is so often the case, the racism here appears to be in the mind and eye of the beholder.
"They just may never have been given a decent explanation of what they are doing wrong," seems to imply that blacks need an explanation and "they don't think about the complexities of the issue," seems to imply blacks aren't capable of thinking through complexities.
What leads you to those bizarre conclusions? Everyone needs things explained to them from time to time, and most people live and die by their gut reactions to issues. Nothing in what I said in any way equates race with being ill-informed or complacent. Those same criticism apply to most people with race not being an issue at all.
They've been conditioned to rely on and be loyal to their Democrat party masters and breaking that conditioning and thinking for themselves is scary.
Are you sure you're not the one who's been conditioned to some other master?
Only if that master is the truth.
I mean how can you ever tell who's been conditioned and who's not, b/c if people have been conditioned, how do you know you havent been conditioned too? And if you've been conditioned, everything you say is just a byproduct of that conditioning. Im sure a lot of blacks would say you're the one that has been conditioned, not them.
Perhaps I have been conditioned. I've been conditioned to question everything and form opinions based on observation. But here's the key thing. Whatever conditioning I have doesn't seem to be holding me back or making me depend on the state for things I can do myself.
Dave
50 - Big Dog
I never said features of that cover indicate that those donkeys represent blacks. I said features of the article indicate to me that Big Dog wants those donkeys to represent blacks. It's an article about black people and rascism remember Nancy?
So you can read my mind and tell folks what I want. Let me set it straight so you do not have to read a crystal ball. I picked the book because the title seemed to go with the story. Tell me again why are we Democrats? It had nothing to do with racism or anti Semitism (since I mentioned Jews as well). It had to do with the title and the title only.
I hope that clears it up. Next time ask what I am thinking instead of making unfounded and untrue accusations.
51 - Nancy
At this point, I'm just confused. If you didn't say it, then OK. But I don't make the connection between the donkeys on the book cover necessarily representing blacks just because they were mentioned in the article. Experience will show you eventually that as often as not, the book being touted at the top has only the most tenuous connection with the subject being discussed; the writer frequently picks something that s/he thinks may be appropriate or pertain thereunto, but frequently doesn't. In other words, you made a leap of connection that I strongly suspect wasn't necessarily intended by the writer. Scan thru the various articles in the Frequent Comments & check out the books at the top & see.
52 - pleasexcusetheinterruption12
Whatever conditioning I have doesn't seem to be holding me back or making me depend on the state for things I can do myself.
Yeah, if you count being rich as conditioning.
Except that in the original statement they had two things in common: skin color (or race) and voting democratic, in which case you can be saying that the dems are deluding the African-Americans, and therefore any that vote for them are deluded (by the dems).
The American heritage Dictionary at dictionary.com defines delude as:
To deceive the mind or judgment of.
According to this definition, the statement implies that the democratic party is deceptively deluding African-Americans into voting for its candidates, because if it weren't doing so, blacks would not be deluded, and would not vote democratic.
It is a negative comment on the tactics of the dems, not a racist statement.
Oh I get it, so calling blacks deluded is really a compliment. Gee I can't believe I didnt see that at first. Calling someone deluded is demeaning. To be deluded where others are not means you probably have a less critical, less intelligent or less informed mind.
And then of course you have the assumption that it's only the blacks being deluded. Both you and Big Dog say blacks and/or jews are deluded by the dems. If you were not specifically targetting blacks and jews as being deluded, you would say anyone that voted for the dems is deluded. But you both specifically say it's the blacks and jews who are deluded. If you want to attack political parties, go ahead, but dont attack the particular races that vote for the party.
Of course this is all based on the very delusional sentiment that the politics of the dems dont serve a large majority of society better than other political parties. If the subject matter is which party is less rascist, the obvious choice is the dems. Big Dog's proof that the democratic party is rascist involves 2 mischaracterized statements of Hillary Clinton, whose comments, though distasteful, arent exactly rascist, and on the statements of volunteer (since fired) working for a candidate who wasnt even elected and who made incredibly distasteful comments which are probably not even rascist. As I understand it she complained about how hard it is to fire black employees w/o the race card being played, and then joked about "devouring the competition" who was black, by eating oreos. Very distasteful, but it doesnt attribute any negative qualities to blacks.
And of course, compared with Senator Burns'-R comments, they are incredibly mild. For a refresher on the disgusting rascism of Senator Burns see my post #25. So the premise on which this article tries to establish and which you have all based your comments - that blacks would be better off voting against the dems - is wrong.
53 - pleasexcusetheinterruption12
I dont have to read your mind Big Dog. You wrote an opinion article laying your mind out all in nice "crystal" clear black and white. And, Nancy, I dont need that cover to prove my point. Big Dog outright says it, albeit in a less sarcastic and degrading way than the cover of the book does, "For the life of me, I cannot figure out why blacks and Jews continue to vote for Democrats in such overwhelmingly high numbers." Big Dog seems to think he knows better than blacks and jews themselves who they should be voting for. He seems to think his white ass searching up the distasteful comments of 1 democratic politician and 1 volunteer who has since been fired, is enough to call into question the voting patterns of 10s of millions of blacks. He must be pretty damn arrogant to think his selective reading outweighs the opinions of 10s of millions of people many of whom are no doubt far more intelligent and informed than he is. The implication that he knows how blacks should vote better than blacks do themselves automatically demeans blacks and is at least as rascist as the 3 comments of select individuals he sites.
And of course the whole concept of judging a party by 3 isolated statements of a democratic politician and fired volunteer of a candidate who didnt even get elected, is bull. If we judge entire parties by 1 or 2 individuals in it, then one would have to conclude Republicans were intent on reinstating rascism based on the statements of several individuals, such as Senator Burns (see post #25 for his disgusting rascism).
54 - Clavos
you would say anyone that voted for the dems is deluded.
I thought that was implicit, and I didn't want to belabor the obvious.
55 - Big Dog
Judging a party by 3 incidents? Are you smoking crack? There are hundreds of incidents from people of both parties every year. They are all dispicable and I knew if I waited long enough someone like you would show what is wrong with the whole process.
You excused Hillary's comments as distasteful but not racist and the Oreo photo item as a joke though I doubt you know the whole story (Steel had them thrown at him in a debate). The remark by the liberal Baltimore Sun that said the only thing Steele brought to the ticket was the color of his skin, and on, and on. But you dismiss it as DO ALL DEMOCRATS and those in the black community.
Let a Republican make a remark and every black group in the world is demanding an apology. Jackson, Sharpton, the Congressional Black Caucus and all the others are out in full force talking about the racist Republicans. You dismissed Hillary and the staffer for their unfortunate but not racist remarks and then excoriated me for using a book with donkeys on it and said I was a racist. It could not possibly be a book chosen for its title, no because I am a conservative I had to be the racist.
As I said, I knew if I waited on this debate long enough one of the jackasses would show his ass to the world and you did it. You have completely demonstrated the double standard that exists and you showed that Democrats are blind to their own racism. You were sure quick to point out what you imagined was mine.
I know why blacks vote for the Dems. The Dems promise them everything in the world for their vote. I never said that I knew better than they how they should cast their vote. They can vote however they want. Just tell their so called leaders top stop crying racism because many are not independant enough to make it without hand outs. Call it racist if you want but when people are so dependant on government they can not leave a hurricane then they need to think about where they place their loyalties.
56 - pleasexcusetheinterruption12
So why the fuck did you write an article about 3 incidents if 3 incidents are meaningless in the scheme of things. The difference between the comments in your article and your article itself is that your article implies blacks are stupid. The comments you bring up do not, although Hillary's could conceivably imply Indians work at gas stations. It's not a double standard. There's a big difference between what you and Senator Burns are saying (blacks are stupid) and eating oreos because your opponent is black. Besides..what about the cream filling?
57 - pleasexcusetheinterruption12
"you would say anyone that voted for the dems is deluded."
I thought that was implicit, and I didn't want to belabor the obvious.
Gee I didnt know you were so arrogant Clavos..you really think you're smarter and more informed than the tens of millions who voted Democratic? There are hundreds of good reasons to vote democratic.
1. Bush government is conducting unconstitutional wiretapping.
2. Bush's government is torturing prisoners.
3. " " is making an international mockery of America.
4. " " is violating the Habeas Corpus of U.S. citizens. Habeas Corpus is pretty much the most fundamental right of all citizens.
5. " " lied to get us into Iraq.
6. " " is conducting a war in Iraq which serves no useful purpose.
7. " " has failed at reconstructing Afghanistan.
8. " " has destroyed our former alliances.
9. " " sold nuclear secrets to India for mangoes.
10. " " vetoed stem cell research that will probably one day save the lives of millions.
11. " " has given incredibly unproportional tax cuts to the rich.
Given the atrocities of the GOP whitehouse, I think to say voting democratic is at least a viable option and certainly not delusional.
58 - Clavos
Uh, PETI,
Oreos are the metaphor (for African-Americans, primarily) of blacks who are "Black on the outside, but white on the inside."
59 - Clavos
PETI:
Yeah, but what did he do wrong that you dislike him so??
60 - Nancy
PETI, you forgot:
* Ignored warnings of impending Al Quaeda attacks as late as August 2001; went on vacation instead.
* Ignored warnings of hurricane disaster in New Orleans for almost a week AFTER it hit & left tens of thousands homeless, hundreds dead; went on vacation instead, then sent Mumsy to express Bush Family condolences: "well, they were all underprivileged anyway so this [being homeless refugees in the SuperDome] is working out really well for them...."
* Has consistently & from the inception appointed or awarded crucial government posts or contracts for New Orleans & Iraq/Afghanistan to cronies, big-$ donors, or those who voted for him, not to those qualified (Michael Chertoff, "Brownie", etc. etc.)
* Has worst record for cronyism & awarding of unsupervised, unaudited, unbid contracts since the Grant administration & Tammany Hall. Ongoing GAO audits of Halliburton defense contracts indicate that (thus far: not the end of the tunnel) Halliburton has claimed over $85 MILLION in false or padded invoices. N.B. Both the Bush & Cheney families hold considerable stock in Halliburton which they have NOT divested, altho it is in [barely] legal escrows.
* Have openly invited & allowed big oil corporations to write WH energy policies in secret in violation of Sunshine Laws, & still refuses to release information details in accordance with FOI Act, in defiance of court orders.
* Have refused to testify under oath before the 9/11 Committee; refused to testify without both Bush & Cheney being present and all questions submitted & vetted beforehand - the hallmark of men with something to hide & a need to co-ordinate stories.
* Authorized the FBI to allow the binLaden family to leave the US immediately following 9/11 without requiring or allowing interviews with any of the members.
* Has innumerable times used taxpayer funded travel expenses to pursue private fundraising activities in blatant violation of elections laws, an abuse that is still ongoing.
* Condoned and may have collaborated in fixing & otherwise derailing 2000 Florida & 2004 Ohio elections, among others.
* Suborned the USSC into overriding the popular ballots of the general electorate by issuing judgement in his favor in 2000 elections, which they had no business to get involved in.
* Has instigated the FBI & IRS to start nusience investigations against churches or individuals critical of BushCo, in direct violation of Federal law.
* Employed smears, libels, outright lies & dirty tricks aginst competing candidates on a scale unprecedented since the Nixon administration.
* Swore in public that WH staffers who lied or obstructed investigations would be summarily fired - then denied saying so, and refused to fire staff implicated in obstruction & investigations, including Cheney.
* Shamelessly uses 9/11 and any other tragedy involving others for personal & political aggrandizement; promises assistance - and then never follows through &/or denies promises ever made.
* Pretends to military service, donning uniforms he isn't entitled to, posing with veterans & current service members, lied about his own service record including disertion of post, etc.
Junior Bush is generally an all-round scumbag, who surrounds himself with yes-men and other, even worse scumbags. There's plenty to hate & despise him for. I could go on, but I have other stuff to do.
61 - Big Dog
Here is some more for you to enjoy.
Republican Party Has Been Good To Blacks