The race card: It’s okay to boo the president, he’s just a n—-r.

(Update: 9/17/09) South Carolina’s Joe Wilson might have been thinking the n-word when he shouted “you lie” in the hallowed hall of the House of Representatives, otherwise known as “The People’s House”. We’ll never know. But as Dana Milbank points out in ( The Washington Post ) he wasn’t the only one to disrespect the president.

There was booing from House Republicans when the president caricatured a conservative argument by saying they would “leave individuals to buy health insurance on their own.” They hissed when he protested their “scare tactics.” They grumbled as they do in Britain’s House of Commons when Obama spoke of the “blizzard of charges and countercharges.”

Obama is said to have instructed his spokespersons never to so much as whisper that racism may drive any of the vehement attacks against him. He knows full well that the best defense racists use against being called out for being what they are is accusing the truth-tellers of “playing the race card”.

During the campaign John McCain accused Obama of playing it. Obama said McCain was trying to make voters scared of him because he doesn’t look like past presidents and has a funny name.

McCain campaign manager Rick Davis said, “Barack Obama has played the race card, and he played it from the bottom of the deck. It’s divisive, negative, shameful and wrong.” ( Reference )

joker_0.jpgIf there are 52 regular cards in the deck of politics and social attitudes the joker of racism trumps all of them. Of course this joker is hardly a jester.

Certainly the Republicans have a political incentive to deny Obama a victory on the health care reform initiative. But I got the queasy feeling that comes when you get a fleeting whiff of something rotting when I watched the speech.

My impression is that there was enough group acceptance in the room so those who were inclined to boo and grumble loudly felt empowered to do so. The mob mentality can be a dangerous and powerful thing. Not to resort to hyperbole, but this is what happened in American mobs when (according to Wikipedia) between 1882 and 1968, at least 4,742 African Americans were lynched.

It’s impossible to discern the motivations of those who broke the tradition of simple respectful silence when a president of the opposition party says something they disagreed with in a joint session address.

I strongly suspect that the loudest protests came from those who can’t stand that there’s an “uppity n—r” in the White House. They will find any excuse to discredit or attack him from a speech to school children to where he was born.

If racism is the joker in the deck, I want that card examined with a microscope. If racism is there I will not hesitate to play it.

Update: 9/13/09

Marueen Dowd is my favorite columnist. I’ve written a few columns that turned out to mirror her opinions, and managed to get them published before she did. Of course, she is a far more accomplished writer than I am. When it comes to writing a snarky column, she is the Queen of Snark.

On Thursday and Sunday when her columns are published in The New York Times, unless there a headline that takes precedence, her’s is the first item I read.

Today she addresses the same topic I wrote about here. She agrees with me, only she says it far better with a better title: Boy, Oh, Boy.

Dowd did some research and discovered that Joe Wilson “belonged to the Sons of Confederate Veterans, led a 2000 campaign to keep the Confederate flag waving above South Carolina’s state Capitol and denounced as a ‘smear’ the true claim of a black woman that she was the daughter of Strom Thurmond.”

At first Dowd said she dismissed the idea that the “shrieking lunacy” of the right wing this summer had much to do with race. She says that the Joe Wilson outburst has changed her mind.

She writes:

But Wilson’s shocking disrespect for the office of the president — no Democrat ever shouted “liar” at W. when he was hawking a fake case for war in Iraq — convinced me: Some people just can’t believe a black man is president and will never accept it.

Welcome to the “playing the race card club” Maureen.

You’ve seen “the joker” for what it is.

Read Boy, Oh, Boy.

Update 9/17/09

Sometimes a writer reminds me how emotions can get in the way of writing clearly and expressing simply what I want to get across.

I think Maureen Dowd was guilty of this too.

Charles Blow finally expresses what I was attempting to say. He does it succinctly in a short New York Times OpEd today “Here we go again” (link).

The bottom line is his bottom line:

“Let’s stop talking about racism as if it’s black or white. There are many shades of gray.”

The New York Times’ other black OpEd columnist, Bob Herbert, also addresses this issue in “The Scourge Persists” (link).

He asks “After all these years of race-baiting and stirring the pot of hatred for political gain, it’s too much to ask the leaders of the Republican Party to step forward and denounce this spreading stain of reprehensible conduct. Republicans are trying to ride that dependable steed of bigotry back to power.”

He adds: “But it’s time for other Americans, of whatever persuasion, to take a stand, to say we’re better than this. They should do it because it’s right. But also because we’ve seen so many times what can happen when this garbage gets out of control.”

—-

Here’s another good article: “There’s no denying Obama’s race plays a role in protests” (link)

Column in Newsweek

10 Responses to "The race card: It’s okay to boo the president, he’s just a n—-r."

  1. Hal Brown  September 14, 2009 at 9:30 am

    Bogo,

    It isn’t that those who criticize Obama, even harshly and rudely, are racists. Being a clinician I suggest substituting the word symptom for sign and consider racism like a disease with many symptoms.

    While we don’t have any given critic of Obama in an examining room, we can look at a constellation of symptoms to make the diagnosis.

    If just lacking impulse control doing something inappropriate proved someone was a racist, then you could say Kanye West was a racist for what he just did at the VMA Awards (link)…. Serena Williams for that matter.

    When trying to understand why Joe Wilson did what he did I put it in the context of what Dowd brought up, i.e. that he “belonged to the Sons of Confederate Veterans, led a 2000 campaign to keep the Confederate flag waving above South Carolina’s state Capitol and denounced as a ‘smear’ the true claim of a black woman that she was the daughter of Strom Thurmond.”

    I don’t know if Wilson is a racist but like Gregory House does with a medical mystery I am considering the outburst as a symptom to put into the context of everything else I’ve learned about him.

  2. bogofree  September 14, 2009 at 10:45 am

    I just think the guy got ticked off and yelled out. No filter. IMO not really a big deal. Occasionally happens in Congress.

  3. ekaton  September 14, 2009 at 11:08 am

    Precisely. Mountains out of mole hills. Besides, was Obama’s speech the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Or were there some flat out lies interspersed? Hey, I’m just asking, because I really don’t know!

    Kent Shaw

  4. gazelle1929  September 14, 2009 at 12:12 pm

    Racism is not what you think; it’s not what you feel. It’s what you do.

    If you tell disparaging jokes about black people when in the company of those who will not be offended (or even in the presence of those who will be offended), you are exhibiting racism. If you teach your children, either overtly or otherwise, that some children are to be demeaned, discredited, or dismissed because of their skin color, you are likewise exhibiting racism. And you are perpetuating racial hatred. One has a right to tell disparaging jokes, but others have a right to confront and shun such a person.

    It’s impossible to know whether Wilson IS a racist unless he comes forward and says so. But it is possible to tell whether he exhibits racism by his words and deeds. In my book he comes pretty darned close. Another problem is that exhibiting racism only encourages others to do likewise, particularly when you are in a position of trust or authority.

    As to the SCV, this from the wiki article theereon:

    “Stephen D. Lee’s 1906 charge to the SCV is widely cited by the organization as one of its organizing principles:

    “‘To you, Sons of Confederate Veterans, we will submit the vindication of the cause for which we fought. To your strength will be given the defense of the Confederate soldier’s good name, the guardianship of his history, the emulation of his virtues, and the perpetuation of those principles he loved. Remember, it is your duty to see that the true history of the South is presented to future generations.’”

    “. . . (T)he vindication of the cause for which (the Confederates) fought . . ..”

    “. . . (T)he perpetuation of those principles (the Confederate veteran) loved . . ..”

    Racist? Draw your own conclusion.

  5. Hal Brown  September 14, 2009 at 1:55 pm

    I didn’t bring this up because I wanted to focus on racism as it regards Barack Obama being our first black president.

    However a comment on one of our local blogs prompted me to bring up prejudice against Hispanics.

    A blogger with whom I’ve had disagreements wrote a short piece which I agree with although I wouldn’t use the same disparaging language he did: Wilson is a complete tool.

    What got to me was this anonymous comment: “I would support a visit for a dogbite or the more likely gunshot wound…”

    Underlying bigotry against our black president could be exacerbated by prejudice against Hispanic illegal immigrants.

    Does anybody want to argue that someone who harbors deep prejudice against one group they resent, fear and/or feel is inferior may have the same prejudices against another similar group?

  6. woody188  September 14, 2009 at 9:33 pm

    You nailed it Kent. The discussion should be on whether the statements made by Obama are lies. Instead the discussion is concerning the background and motivation for the the guy that yelled. That’s classic manipulation via controlling the topic of discussion.

    Said it before that Obama was selected over McCain just for this reason. The NWO was happy with either, but Obama, being partly of color, could stifle any policy debate by simply claiming it was a racist attack. Only they are smarter than that, so they will let their paid corporate media hounds speculate on it and stir the pot instead of the White House bringing it up.

    Seems like someone wants race to be an issue.

  7. woody188  September 14, 2009 at 10:07 pm

    Yes, I maintain prejudice for illegal immigrants, but not because of their race or color of skin. If you can’t come into a country legally it’s doubtful you will start to follow the rules if given a legal status.

    Yes, I also maintain prejudice for felons too, for similar reasons.

    I want to know why “n—-r” is OK to use, since we all know what word is being referred to. It’s the meaning and not the word that is offensive. Why not just use the actual word?

    I realize you are trying to show what might have been going through someone’s mind with your title and it isn’t a reflection of your views.

    It shouldn’t be viewed as offensive in discussion when not applied to a person or group, but here we are, can’t even type the word out because of our stupid taboos. So how could we ever overcome the meaning of the word when we can’t even type it?

    For that matter, why is it OK to refer to whites as “rednecks” and “crackers” which are equally offensive and racist IMHO and I’ve seen both posted on CHB without any reprimand.

    Did Obama and Rahm Emmanuel get together after the speech and complain about that stupid goyim redneck Wilson getting all uppity during the speech?

    We’ll never know, just like we’ll never know what Wilson thought. It’s just a huge waste of time and only works to further divide us so that we may be conquered.

    “This society’s deprivation depends not on our differences but the separation within” FRGT/10, Linkin Park

  8. ekaton  September 15, 2009 at 12:12 am

    “It’s just a huge waste of time and only works to further divide us so that we may be conquered.”

    Right again. The wall to wall coverage of Wilson’s “Liar!” comment is one more diversion to keep us further uninformed about the real issues (not that racism is not a real issue, but the issue here is the relative importance or lack thereof regarding Wilson’s comment).

    Kent Shaw

  9. Hal Brown  September 16, 2009 at 7:30 am

    Joe Wilson’s outburst has provoked considerable debate among the talking heads about racism. President Carter’s remarks have keep the discussion alive.

    I don’t recall Maureen Down writing two columns in a row about the same subject. She did. Her latest isRapping Joes’ knuckles”.

    Many words are being used to separate criticism of Obama’s policies which has nothing to do with bigotry from the vehement criticism which comes from racism.

    No matter how many times someone uses word like some, a few, or a small minority other lambast them for playing the race card. But when, as Dowd points out, what are we do make of it when some people show up at rallies with with a picture of a lion, “The Zoo has an African and the White House has a Lyin’ African;” “Bury Obamacare with Kennedy;” “We came unarmed (this time)” and “ ‘Cap’ Congress and ‘Trade’ Obama back to Kenya!”

    It isn’t so much that these people exist, we all knew that. It’s that these people now feel empowered enough to appear in public in front of camera identifying themselves by their signs.

    There may be less of them now than 10 or 20 years ago, but now the Republican Party seems to be openly embracing them and that can do a lot to encourage them.

  10. bogofree  September 16, 2009 at 5:08 pm

    Would you have the same reaction Hal if it was Joe Wilson (D-SC)? Smehow I think that “D” changes everything.

    So a few nut jobs show up and the reaction is to take the small brush and put it away and get the big brush out and paint an entire political party?

    Want a real public service reagarding racism, Hal. Go after rapper West for dissing that cute little White gal. To me he only did it ’cause she was a White country singer.

  11. sherry  September 16, 2009 at 11:47 pm

    I surmise Hal has no issue with Kanye West.
    It is only those who would dare to criticize the POTUS.
    Wilson was out of line. That does not make him a racist.
    As for Carter, he is old and clearly not firing on all cylinders.
    The sad thing is, we finally elect a semi black man and each and every criticism is “you must be a racist”
    Forget that.
    Not impressed with Obama. Never was. He is an empty suit. Call me a racist if it makes you happy.
    As Rhett would say,
    “Frankly my dear, I dont give a damn.”

  12. Hal Brown  September 17, 2009 at 7:45 am

    I already wrote about both Kanye West and Selena Williams in one of my comments.

    Joe Scarborough said this morning that there are some people who say that anybody who disagrees with Obama is racist.

    I am not one of them. I am saying that I suspect those people who now feel free to express their outrage in uncivil ways like Joe Wilson did may (MAY) have racist feelings.

    I am sure there are far fewer racists than there were 10 years ago, certainly than there were 20 and more years ago. I think that an atmosphere fueled by talk radio and some of the Fox News commentators and the Internet has led to some racists that feeling more empowered to express their feelings openly.

    If you want to see health care reform and other progressive changes this is a bad time to discuss race this because it distracts from a civil debate of Obama’s policies.

    Unfortunately “the race card” I call the joker has played into the hands of those who oppose Obama for purely political reasons.

  13. sherry  September 17, 2009 at 11:22 am

    Hal writes: Unfortunately “the race card” I call the joker has played into the hands of those who oppose Obama for purely political reasons.

    You are so right Hal. The race card is a diversion.
    It makes mne think we will never get anything done, because we have to forever discuss race and how it effects the presidency. It’s insane. You are playing into their hands.

    BTW, Joe did a belly laugh saying to the effect, “you mean the man had a 70% approval rating, and due to healthcare he is dropping, and NOW you say the opposition is racist?”

    People who are racists are not going to change their attitudes regardless of how much print it gets. And for those who are not racists, we are oh so tired of this debate, the name calling and the insinuations.

  14. Hal Brown  September 19, 2009 at 7:01 am

    Sometimes a writer reminds me how emotions can get in the way of writing clearly and expressing simply what I want to get across.

    I think Maureen Dowd was guilty of this too.

    Charles Blow finally expresses what I was attempting to say. He does it succinctly in a short New York Times OpEd today “Here we go again” (link).

    The bottom line is his bottom line:

    “Let’s stop talking about racism as if it’s black or white. There are many shades of gray.”

    The New York Times’ other black OpEd columnist, Bob Herbert, also addresses this issue in “The Scourge Persists” (link).

    He asks “After all these years of race-baiting and stirring the pot of hatred for political gain, it’s too much to ask the leaders of the Republican Party to step forward and denounce this spreading stain of reprehensible conduct. Republicans are trying to ride that dependable steed of bigotry back to power.”

    He adds: “But it’s time for other Americans, of whatever persuasion, to take a stand, to say we’re better than this. They should do it because it’s right. But also because we’ve seen so many times what can happen when this garbage gets out of control.”

  15. Hal Brown  September 19, 2009 at 12:50 pm

    Column in Newsweek “There’s no denying Obama’s race plays a role in protests” (link)

    Quotes:

    “I certainly detect a racial element in some of the hostility directed at President Obama. “I’m certain there are white Americans for whom having a dark-skinned president in the White House is an enormous shock. This is really a complete overturning of what they thought was the natural order of things. The natural way that American society worked. It upsets all their ideas about how American society is structured.” Richard Alba, distinguished professor of sociology at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York.

    “Anyone who’s looked at some of the signs at the various ‘tea parties’ knows perfectly well that race is a significant part of this backlash. I’m not suggesting that every person angry about health care or immigration is a Klansman in disguise, but at the back of this white-hot rage that we’ve been seeing are people who are genuinely furious about the way the country is changing and changing racially.” Mark Potok director of the Intelligence Project of the Southern Poverty Law Center.

  16. Warren  September 20, 2009 at 12:04 am

    Are we not permitted to criticize our elected officials when their skin is a color different from our own; lest we be labeled ‘racist’?

    Where does that leave all of the people of color who criticized G.W. Bush? We ALL criticized G.W. Bush for a variety of good reasons. Does it follow that those of darker skin who criticized him were racist while whites who criticized him were not?

    —W—

  17. almandine  September 10, 2009 at 10:49 am

    Democrats treated Bush 43 the same way, minus the “you lie” comment in a joint session. He was booed too.

    Looks to me like you’re already playing that card.

  18. gazelle1929  September 10, 2009 at 11:00 am

    Show us.

  19. almandine  September 10, 2009 at 12:07 pm

    Yes, child.

    http://mediamatters.org/research/200502040014

  20. gazelle1929  September 10, 2009 at 1:02 pm

    Child? ITWOTLRRTYGA.

  21. almandine  September 10, 2009 at 1:36 pm

    I would have noted your obsequiousness, but looking that up on wiki leads one to “sycophant”, instead, and knowing that wiki is your only external reference source, I didn’t want to confuse.

    Google “bush booed in congress” like anyone else would… and the WWW opens right up. Try it on other things, too. Then you can “show yourself” next time.

    Sheesh.

  22. Hal Brown  September 10, 2009 at 2:05 pm

    Watch the snide ad hominem asides….

  23. almandine  September 10, 2009 at 3:15 pm

    Maybe you should take a foray thru this site and decide which is really the snide one, Hal. I’m wearing kid gloves.

  24. sherry  September 10, 2009 at 12:38 pm

    Don’t know about the rest of you, but I have had just about enough of the race card.
    Note to Hal: I know this will come as a complete shock to you, that there are racists in this country.
    Here’s the second shocker: People criticize the POTUS. All the critics are not racists. I am an equal opportunity offender. I couldn’t stand the last POTUS, and I can’t stand this one because he is so much like the last one, only worse.

  25. ekaton  September 14, 2009 at 10:50 am

    “All the critics are not racists” and “I could care less”. I don’t know which “grammatical” construction annoys me more.

    All the critics are not racists means that NONE of the critics are racist. The correct construction would be “NOT all the critics are racists” — implying that SOME of them may be so. The position of the “not” reverses the meaning and intent — unless of course you really mean that none of the critics are racist.

    However, I could NOT care less about the intent of your sentence. “I could care less” would mean that of course I DO care somewhat. Adding the “not” makes it clear that I do not care very much at all.

    Those two phrases drive me nuts when used incorrectly, AND they allow the issuer of the comment some wiggle room and “plausible deniability” — “I never said I didn’t care”, and “I never said critics are racist”.

    Thank you for letting me vent. Yes, I went off topic. Stuff happens.

    Kent Shaw

  26. bogofree  September 10, 2009 at 1:56 pm

    “I strongly suspect that the loudest protests came from those who can’t stand that there’s an “uppity n—r” in the White House. They will find any excuse to discredit or attack him from a speech to school children to where he was born.”

    I just think your assessment is a way bit farfetched, Hal. Do you also continue down that path that all people who are vehemently against Obama (aka – WOW) are also racists? Even on a few issues? I have protested via postings of my opposition to Obama on many issues. Does that make me a racist? I know staunch conservatives who I have been friends for decades that are totally appalled by Obama. Are they racist? IMHO if this was President Hillary Clinton the reaction would have been the same as the result of this hot button issue. Then they would all be sexist.

  27. ekaton  September 14, 2009 at 10:53 am

    “I have protested via postings of my opposition to Obama on many issues. Does that make me a racist?”

    No. Just don’t criticize Rahm Emmanuel. That would make you an anti-semite.

    Kent Shaw

  28. Hal Brown  September 10, 2009 at 2:27 pm

    Bogofree,

    Racism must be discussed, debated seriously. It should go without saying that I am not an idiot. Of course I know there are many people who can’t stand Obama personally and/or are strongly opposed to his policies who don’t have a racist bone in their bodies.

    I know it is a rhetorical question but you are well aware that I know that racism doesn’t motivate you when you criticize Obama. I don’t go out to lunch with racists.

    I wish it was possible to write a column about racism as it relates to Obama without a few people accusing me of playing the race card.

    How can I make this more clear. Intense racial animus exists against Obama in blatant and hidden forms. If I suggest it underlies some of the blatant displays of anger like what we saw yesterday 1) I don’t know this for a fact, 2) I think it is quite possible, and 3) I think it is worthwhile to think about and discuss.

    Playing the race card generally means using the issue of race to win an advantage. I am not doing this. I am bringing up race to to discuss racism, not to win any kind of advantage by deflecting discussion away from an issue.

    I have little doubt that there were elected members of Congress in that room yesterday who are racists. I suspect some of them were those who booed and hissed the loudest.

    It is difficult to believe that Obama’s health care plans is so repugnant to them that they express their objections in such a rude way.

    If there are ordinary people who are racists why is it farfetched to believe some of them have been elected to Congress?

  29. sherry  September 10, 2009 at 4:54 pm

    Hal, where were you when Bill Clinton tried to reform healthcare?

  30. bogofree  September 10, 2009 at 8:47 pm

    Hal wrote

    “If there are ordinary people who are racists why is it farfetched to believe some of them have been elected to Congress?”

    There is a former “Exalted Cyclops” in the ranks. So you are quite correct on that point.

  31. Hal Brown  September 11, 2009 at 7:26 am

    That of course would be Robert Byrd (D) West Virginia.

    With closet racists it’s not possible to tell their real attitudes until they slip and say something that reveals the lie.

    Probably only Byrd knows how he really feels.

    Despite his explanations ( see review of his book “Robert C. Byrd: Child of the Appalachian Coalfields” ) and his 100% NAACP voting rating I would never rule out that he’s a racist.

    For one thing there are too many contradictions in his story. Consider (from the above book review) this explanation that he joined the Klan “because it offered excitement and because it was strongly opposed to communism.”

    But then consider this:

    Byrd said in the Dec. 11, 1945, letter — which would not become public for 42 more years with the publication of a book on blacks in the military during World War II by author Graham Smith — that he would never fight in the armed forces “with a Negro by my side.” Byrd added that, “Rather I should die a thousand times, and see old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again, than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels.”

    He could be one of those racists who thinks that because he has some black friends and is a political liberal he can’t be a racist.

  32. sherry  September 11, 2009 at 7:42 am

    Bob Byrd is an old man from a different time. He changed with the times. Has an Arab son in law, grandchildren. Nothing in his recent history to indicate he harbors racism. But we can always count on people like you Hal, to forever bring up mistakes from 60 years ago, for which the man has apologized over and over and over again.
    He endorsed Obama in the primaries despite the fact that empty suit didn’t carry a single county in WV.
    Not even the counties near DC.
    WV had a history with the Clintons and BHO didn’t even bother to campaign in WV. Secondly, his Cap & Trade plan would kill the coal industry. WV economy has no use for that guy.
    So Hal, you are now reduced to picking up crap from 60 years ago? Is that the best you can do to prove a point?
    That is scraping the bottom of the barrel.
    I was never a member of any racist organization, and until this past election was never called a racist.
    You can bet I am highly resentful, and pretty angry that any criticism leveled at Obama results in the race card.

  33. Hal Brown  September 14, 2009 at 7:02 am

    Marueen Dowd is my favorite columnist. I’ve written a few columns that turned out to mirror her opinions, and managed to get them published before she did. Of course, she is a far more accomplished writer than I am. When it comes to writing a snarky column, she is the Queen of Snark.

    On Thursday and Sunday when her columns are published in The New York Times, unless there a headline that takes precedence, her’s is the first item I read.

    Today she addresses the same topic I wrote about here. She agrees with me, only she says it far better with a better title: Boy, Oh, Boy.

    Dowd did some research and discovered that Joe Wilson “belonged to the Sons of Confederate Veterans, led a 2000 campaign to keep the Confederate flag waving above South Carolina’s state Capitol and denounced as a ‘smear’ the true claim of a black woman that she was the daughter of Strom Thurmond.”

    At first Dowd said she dismissed the idea that the “shrieking lunacy” of the right wing this summer had much to do with race. She says that the Joe Wilson outburst has changed her mind.

    She writes:

    But Wilson’s shocking disrespect for the office of the president — no Democrat ever shouted “liar” at W. when he was hawking a fake case for war in Iraq — convinced me: Some people just can’t believe a black man is president and will never accept it.

    Welcome to the “playing the race card club” Maureen.

    You’ve seen “the joker” for what it is.

    Read Boy, Oh, Boy.

    Her column is being discussed, and criticized on “Morning Joe” this morning. Peggy Noonan thought she was way off base, implying there’s no racism whatsoever in any, or nearly any, of the protests against Obama’s policies.

    To me that’s as implausible as saying racism underlies all of the protests.

    Joe Scarborough and Pat Buchanan talked about people playing the race card as if bringing up racism means it isn’t there, or adding it to the conversation is always meant to be a distraction.

    Wake up! While racists are a dying breed, they are still out there and they are becoming more involved in national politics now that we have a black president.

    In a very close presidential election with Obama running in 2012 they will vote as a block, and they could make the difference between winning and losing. I think that’s why the Republicans know they need them as a reliable part of their base.

    Notice: The spam filter wouldn’t allow posting for a couple of days. We apologize for this. You now are able to comment.

  34. bogofree  September 14, 2009 at 8:47 am

    Sherry

    Of note it was me that brought up the situation with Byrd and Hal just expanded upon it.

    I do agree that some choose to make a critique of Obama (AKA- WOW) a sign of being a racist. I also think that position represents a small segment and I pay little attention to it. IMO the racism argument goes both ways.

  35. ekaton  September 14, 2009 at 11:04 am

    “Secondly, his Cap & Trade plan would kill the coal industry.”

    Seems like a fair trade since the coal industry has been killing people with mercury and other heavy metal emissions, soot and C02 poisoning of the atmosphere. The coal mminers could be put to work in factories producing clean energy systems. Damn, off topic again. I’ll try to do better. And yes, I do understand why WV would be against Obama, temporarily, until he can come up with some kind of viable jobs and energy programs.

    Kent Shaw

Comments are closed.