Racist Democrats Will Elect Next President II
On May 14, 2008, I first addressed the blatant racism of white Democrats (black Democrats appear to be as racist as the whites but they won’t be electing the next President, so they are not discussed here further). I did not go into depth on my thoughts on May 14, so I go just a little further now.
There is no discernable difference in the policy positions of Sen. Hillary Clinton and Sen. Barack Obama. None. I read about 2 hours of newspaper, magazine and on-line political stories a day. With this level of exposure, I cannot describe or explain one policy difference between the two. I think true policy wonks can see some daylight between the two Senators’ nationalized health care programs (Sen. Obama, apparently, enamored with the lines sick people face in his beloved Canada). I’m skeptical that even 1,000 of the 30 million people who voted in Democratic primaries can explain a policy difference between the two. If a supporter of either reads this post and can explain a difference, it would be most welcome.
So, what divided the Democrats? Race. No, ifs, ands or buts about it. White, non-college educated Democrats did not vote for Sen. Clinton because of sexism or a perceived policy position difference.
In the lead up to the general election, the liberal extremists who dominate the media will try to portray the Republicans as the racists but this is will be a massive, despicable lie. The filth will not help the healing process and will only further fan the flames of race relations in this Country.
White, and most Black, Republicans will support Sen. John McCain precisely because of policy differences between Sen. McCain and Sen. Obama.
I’m not going to list all the differences between the two here because it will read like an RNC talking points memo and I don't get my thoughts from the RNC but let me certainly highlight continuing the surge success in Iraq versus not, extending the Bush tax cuts or not, and appointing another Roberts to the United States Supreme Court versus appointing President Bill Clinton or Sen. Hillary Clinton.
White and Black Republicans will vote for Sen. John McCain on policy. Imagine the converse, a Republican disavowing his or her policy beliefs to vote for Sen. Obama because he is black. THAT would be an indication the Republican practices racism and may be a racist.
I’m not going to deny there are racist Republicans. Of course there are. Some will even mask their racism by hiding behind bona fide policy differences to substantiate their support for Sen. McCain. But, these racists will still be voting their policy beliefs.
Many white Democrats will vote for Sen. John McCain because they are racists. These white racist Democrats will subordinate their political beliefs to their racism. These white racist Democrats, in what may be a very close election, will elect the next President.
This post does not tell a happy story. As pleased as I will be that Sen. McCain will be our next President, that racist Democrats will elect him is an ugly and distasteful truth.
On May 14, 2008, I first addressed the blatant racism of white Democrats (black Democrats appear to be as racist as the whites but they won’t be electing the next President, so they are not discussed here further). I did not go into depth on my thoughts on May 14, so I go just a little further now.
There is no discernable difference in the policy positions of Sen. Hillary Clinton and Sen. Barack Obama. None. I read about 2 hours of newspaper, magazine and on-line political stories a day. With this level of exposure, I cannot describe or explain one policy difference between the two. I think true policy wonks can see some daylight between the two Senators’ nationalized health care programs (Sen. Obama, apparently, enamored with the lines sick people face in his beloved Canada). I’m skeptical that even 1,000 of the 30 million people who voted in Democratic primaries can explain a policy difference between the two. If a supporter of either reads this post and can explain a difference, it would be most welcome.
So, what divided the Democrats? Race. No, ifs, ands or buts about it. White, non-college educated Democrats did not vote for Sen. Clinton because of sexism or a perceived policy position difference.
In the lead up to the general election, the liberal extremists who dominate the media will try to portray the Republicans as the racists but this is will be a massive, despicable lie. The filth will not help the healing process and will only further fan the flames of race relations in this Country.
White, and most Black, Republicans will support Sen. John McCain precisely because of policy differences between Sen. McCain and Sen. Obama.
I’m not going to list all the differences between the two here because it will read like an RNC talking points memo and I don't get my thoughts from the RNC but let me certainly highlight continuing the surge success in Iraq versus not, extending the Bush tax cuts or not, and appointing another Roberts to the United States Supreme Court versus appointing President Bill Clinton or Sen. Hillary Clinton.
White and Black Republicans will vote for Sen. John McCain on policy. Imagine the converse, a Republican disavowing his or her policy beliefs to vote for Sen. Obama because he is black. THAT would be an indication the Republican practices racism and may be a racist.
I’m not going to deny there are racist Republicans. Of course there are. Some will even mask their racism by hiding behind bona fide policy differences to substantiate their support for Sen. McCain. But, these racists will still be voting their policy beliefs.
Many white Democrats will vote for Sen. John McCain because they are racists. These white racist Democrats will subordinate their political beliefs to their racism. These white racist Democrats, in what may be a very close election, will elect the next President.
This post does not tell a happy story. As pleased as I will be that Sen. McCain will be our next President, that racist Democrats will elect him is an ugly and distasteful truth.
posted by Zack at 7:21 AM
2 Comments:
I do not understand the Canada reference. Can you explain?
Anonymous,
Prior to the Ohio primary, Senator Obama sent his economic advisor to Canada to let the Canadian government know he did not mean everything he was saying on the campaign trail about killing NAFTA.
In the heat of a primary battle prior to a primary in a state he really needed to win, Sen. Obama thought it was okay to let the government of a country where no citizens will vote for President of the United States in November that his US-targeted campaign rhetoric was only that.
This is an example of extremely stupid decision making and a mystifying affection for Canada.
June 8, 6:49 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home