Patterico's Pontifications

3/21/2008

Tom Bethell: We Need a Debate on Race

Filed under: 2008 Election — DRJ @ 7:30 pm



[Guest post by DRJ]

Tom Bethell writing in the American Spectator agrees that America needs a debate about race. Here are some of the points he wants to discuss:

>> McCain would be toast if he had a pastor like Wright but Obama didn’t even have to disassociate himself from Wright.

>> Some liberals agree with Wright’s view of America.

>> There is a double standard among blacks on the subject of race because light-skinned blacks sometimes discriminate against dark-skinned blacks.

>> Anti-white discrimination is as bad as anti-black discrimination, but it has been legal in America since the Bakke decision 30 years ago.

>> Blacks and white liberals are invested in the “current system of affirmative action and racial preferences.”

I think Chief Justice John Roberts was right when he said “The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.” However, Barack Obama, Jeremiah Wright, and their supporters apparently believe that approach is too simplistic.

So be it, but if we’re going to have a debate about race then we need to discuss the issues raised by Tom Bethell as well as those raised by Barack Obama. In other words, this shouldn’t be a debate solely about how blacks feel about race and what Americans can do to make blacks feel included. It should also be about what all Americans can do to include blacks, Hispanics, Asians, native Americans, whites, and everyone.

Some people seem to think Barack Obama has a cure for racial problems, almost as if he is the vaccine that can wipe away the disease of racism. He does not have the cure; No one person does. The cure for racism is within each of us, assisted by a legal system applied equally to all.

– DRJ

308 Responses to “Tom Bethell: We Need a Debate on Race”

  1. DRJ, you put that very well.

    The sad part is that we are so invested in the victicrat/ethnocrat meme that some will call YOU a racist for suggesting that race not be considered in any decisions!

    Oh my aching head.

    Still, you spoke truth to…well, you know the rest.

    Eric Blair (0211e4)

  2. Something worth considering, that I found on Instapundit:

    http://www.law.upenn.edu/blogs/dskeel/archives/2008/03/race_and_crimestuntz.html#

    Eric Blair (0211e4)

  3. Radical black theology and the Oval Office don’t mix. Say no to Obama.

    Vermont Neighbor (a8a46e)

  4. I’m with Ann Coulter. When can we finally stop talking about race? We’ve been talking about race nonstop for decades – at some point we have to face the possibility there’s no common ground here.

    Eric (884ea6)

  5. If Barry doesn’t deal the race card, his game takes a hit. That’s a large portion of his act.

    It’s divisive. A more eloquent version of Jesse Jackson.

    Vermont Neighbor (a8a46e)

  6. DRJ, rational as always.

    Other things we need a debate about: Money. Sex. Cats. 23″ Rims. Dishwashers. Trips to Belize.

    There’s only one group of people qualified to debate race, and that’s scientists. Why? Because until you can actually identify what you’re supposed to be talking about, it’s all moot. According to those dummies, there are more differences genetically between two whites than whites and blacks (Sorry – African-Americans – wait, that’s not a racial description, it’s a Continental/National description – how confusing).

    How could this be? Because genetic variation between separate beings constitutes a much larger difference than hereditary traits like skin color or eye shape. “Race” (hereditary traits) plays almost no part, with the exception of genetic diseases, which are thought to be linked to hereditary survival.

    Want a fun experiment? Arm the Girl Scouts, send them to Sweden, kidnap the entire population, transport that population to Sub-Saharan Africa, and subsequently take the African population to Sweden. Sell all of them cookies under force of arms. Wait for 500,000 years. Presto! The Africans look Swedish and the Swedes look African. Our big “markers” are hereditary, based on adaptation to local surroundings. Those who don’t adapt, die.

    Race is . . . skin color? Okay. What shade? Are there different races depending on shade? How many? If I get a tan, does my race change? Oh. OK. Uh,

    Then it’s eye color, or hair, or . . . or

    Or maybe race isn’t really race at all. Maybe the “question” of race is really the question of politics mixed with cultural groupings. And if history has any relevance in that matter, Politics and socio-economic groups do not exist because of logical foundations. You cannot have a debate about something that is mis-identified.

    Apogee (366e8b)

  7. There are genetical sub-groups of humanity that coorelate to race and physical traits. Some of these sub-groups are more supceptible to certain diseases, some are more risistant to them. The most prominent examples are sickle cell anemia and Tay-Sachs.

    Now, one can debate issues of causation versus coorelation ect as much as one wants, and perhaps skin color is not the most precise way of identifying genetic sub groups, but those sub groups do exist.

    gahrie (56a0a8)

  8. I think it’s exactly as simple as the Chief Justice prescribes. My aspiration is to avoid discriminating — that is, making any distinction whatsoever, for any purpose — on the basis of race. My intention is to treat those who do draw such distinctions in their speech or actions as if they have just done something very rude — akin to farting in public — that I don’t want to even indirectly encourage by overtly recognizing it.

    Enough with the farting, y’all. Last time I’m going to point this out.

    Beldar (433d17)

  9. The justification I hear from blacks for racial preferences goes like this:

    After 300 years of whites going “mine, mine, mine, all mine” it’s a bit naive to think that “OK, now we’ll split evenly” is going to satisfy.

    Problem is, of course, that it gets very hard to tell “good” discrimination from “bad” discrimination, and the people who are being discriminated against are not the people who caused the problem.

    But one should stop and try to see the black side of it — it is not without merit.

    Kevin Murphy (0b2493)

  10. Thanks for the post DRJ. Along similar line from American Thinker:

    http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/03/obamas_anger.html

    Phil and Levi seem to have inordinate difficulty with the concept of colorblindness. Does the concept of admitting there may have been progress for blacks over the past 40 years create an overwhelming fear that the government spigot may be turned off because it is no longer needed, and thus such words are considered the highest forms of heresy among liberals and minorities?

    Just asking.

    daleyrocks (906622)

  11. Many years ago Andy Rooney did his little wrap up of a 60 minutes program.

    He basically summed it up well. at the rate we are going soon we will be a nation of all brown people.

    Now won’t that be nice.

    TC (1cf350)

  12. Go see Avenue Q. There is a great song “everyone’s a little bit racist” you could put in bigoted in there if you want. It’s an anti-pc song which asks the pertinent question “Yah, I’m a little racist, so are you, what’s yer point?”

    In a thread below a whole raft of commenters, many of which have written plenty of completely unsubstantiated, hysterical, insulting, and even hateful commentary about the rather undefined group called “liberals”, completely wetted themselves with self righteous froth about how OFFENDED they were (not sure how many used the exact word offended but still…how PC) that Obama lump them in with “typical white people” like his grandmother who were mildly racist. I suppose blaming “liberals” for all of ones or one’s countrys problems is not “racist” per se, “bigoted” is more apt but the wording and the result is the same, these self righteous commenters just replaced (insert racist epithet) with “liberal” which is a catchall these days for “bad,stupid, lazy, evil, terrorist loving, unpatriotic” what have you (ja ja libs do it too for sure, “conservative” is equally abused).
    Is there a real difference between an ideaological bigot who “hates” the other side and a racially motivated bigot who “hates” another race ?(you could sub in distrusts for hates if hates seems to strong)

    A conversation about race should happen, particularly including one about reverse-racism, but it needs to be honest and maybe broader to include all sorts of bigotry. If people can’t acknowledge their OWN bigotry (if it exists, I have actually met a few people who I never saw or heard be bigots) then they aren’t honestly participating in the conversation.

    That is the great thing about the avenue Q song. It’s asking people to cut each other some slack about mild or unintended racism. Not excuse them, but cut em slack. Sort of like (as Beldar sez above) ignoring farting in the room instead of self righteously demanding that the farter leave, coz unlike ONESELF, the farter is offensive.

    EdWood (572a39)

  13. Gahrie –
    Remember that Sickle Cell originated in Africa/Middle east, and mutated farther in Sub-Saharan Africa. The reason (partially discovered by the research of Linus Pauling) is that it affords protection from Malaria. It is a case of a genetic mutation that is the lesser of two evils. Had Swedes been located in areas of high Malaria presence, then they too would be prone to Sickle Cell.

    So let’s look at sub-groups, shall we? You’re incorrect that the sub-groups correlate to race. “Race” is a term that originated before the complex understanding of our genetic makeup. To correlate outdated markers with their genetic descriptions is a causal fallacy.

    Let me explain it this way. Ferraris are fast. Ferraris are red. This does not mean that all red cars are fast. In fact, what you see when you look at a car is the paint and some body styling. You can compare the paint and body styling as a percentage of the automobile to the engine, interior, electronics and hydraulics. The paint makes up a very small part of the actual car, yet it is what we see. If you overheard a couple of gear-heads talking about cars as “the green one” or “the blue one”, you’d think that they were idiots, and you’d be right. People who understand automobiles speak primarily about the guts of the cars, because that’s the really important part, the part that sets one car apart from another. They may admire the body style and paint, but it really has nothing to do with the function or performance of the vehicle.

    Yet we are all idiots. We think that because we can see different appearances (i.e. paint jobs) on people we can ascertain something about them intrinsically. Yet we cannot. It is a visual and logical lie. Our inner parts are so different from the outsides that you can’t really categorize people visually with any reasonable accuracy.

    How about bone density? That’s a genetic trait. Why not categorize people by bone density in their Phalangies? Or any one of a thousand other genetic categories? Because we can’t see those. The problem with hereditary genetic traits being used as markers is just that – they’re hereditary. Which means that anyone could have them, had they just existed in a certain part of the planet for a certain amount of time. It says nothing about the actual person. It’s all just paint. Today my car is grey. If I take it to the shop, I could have it painted blue. It would still be the same car.

    Beldar – The first rule of fart club is that you don’t talk about fart club.

    Apogee (366e8b)

  14. America must look racism in the face and not blink. This year we have the opportunity to make this election a civil / equal rights victory for all Americans. The Rev Wight issue and Obama’s brilliant speech have started a much-needed national discussion on race relations in this country. With President Obama in the White House we can come together for a common cause and address many of the problems including race relations that currently face this great nation.

    One definition of racism is that it usually denotes race-base violence, prejudice, discrimination, or oppression. Black people are not only victims of injustice in criminal court cases but also victims of an unjust civil court system.

    My life should have been an American success story. I am a 54-year-old divorced black female and the mother of four children. I was born black and poor in rural north Florida to an unwed mother. We were too poor to even have an outhouse – we had to share my grand mother’s out door toilet. As a child I worked in tobacco fields and one year worked as a migrant worker. As a migrant worker I picked peaches, apples, and harvested tomatoes and cabbages.

    “As an underdog born into poverty I managed to achieve my dream of graduating from college and having what should have been a great career with New York State Department of Corrections. My dream and my life were shattered by employment discrimination.” A Case of Racial Discrimination and Retaliation Real or Imagined.”

    Eliot Spitzer is the former governor of New York State. He was forced to resign after he was linked to a high price call girl operation. Eliot Spitzer was the Attorney General of New York State when a member of his staff, Mike Russo, Assistant New York State Attorney General, filed seven perjured declarations in federal court. The perjured declarations were filed to prevent a jury from ruling that the Defendants violated the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as amended. By filing the perjured declarations NYS Attorney General’s Office also victimized me.

    Two of my daughters also experienced painful racism. My girls complained of racial incidents on a regular basis while attending University of Virginia and Penn State University. Both daughters were admitted to their respective universities based on outstanding academic records and great SAT scores.

    My daughter Julieannah attended Penn State on a full academic scholarship. She graduated with Honors in 2002 with a double major and a minor in Spanish. In response to the handling on a hate mail incident(s) she wrote a letter to the college newspaper.

    Julie’s October 18, 2000 letter the Daily Collegian
    Letter to the Editor
    Racism quickly becoming important concern at PSU
    I am deeply concerned about the article that appeared in the Collegian yesterday. The article, regarding the most recent incidence of hate mail, quoted Penn State Police Services supervisor Stewart Neff as saying,” Little things are brought to our attention that perhaps at other times might not have been reported.”

    Mr. Neff, if you did in fact say that statement then pay close attention as I attempt to educate you and the Penn State community. By minimizing a problem that is so prevalent on this campus as well as an issue that is apparent in this nation and globally, you are providing an excuse to further ignore a serious problem. Racial incidents, gay bashing and anti-Semitic deeds happen every day.

    The effects that these hateful actions have on individuals are not negated based on your perception of what constitutes a “big thing.” Either it be a student who was told that she can not enter a party at a fraternity house because no blacks are allowed, or a Latino student who was asked by a professor “Why do you people keep having so many kids?” a hateful and non-tolerant environment affects people’s self-esteem, their ability to focus on their studies and ultimately their safety.

    I am encouraging and challenging every person on this campus to realize that racism is a colossal problem at Penn State, to start with yourself and evaluate how you truthfully perceive “differences”, and to speak out on hate crimes. For all of the people who have experienced racism, you are not alone. Participation in dialogue about racism and continuously reporting incidents will help.
    Julieannah
    Junior-Marketing and International Business

    Vera Richardson is the author of “A Case of Racial Discrimination and Retaliation Real or Imagined.”

    Vera Richardson (be9eca)

  15. Apogee:

    1) My basic point is that there are genetic sub groups of humanity.

    2) Most of these sub groups do share gross physical characteristics….for exactly the same reason they share genetic characteristics, they are distict sub groups of humanity. Most people who suffer from sickle cell anemia are African. Most people who carry Tay Sachs are Ashkenazi.

    3) I agree that gross physical characteristics are the least important feature of humanity. However, they do exist, and they do coorelate to genetic differences.

    4) We must also confront the truth that all people, throughout history, throughout the world, do categorize people by gross physical characteristics, including self-identifying. Take Obama. He is as much White as he is Black, and his upbringing was more White than Black. However most people, and he himself, categorizes Obama as a Black man because of his gross physical characteristics.

    gahrie (56a0a8)

  16. So, if we elect Obama, what does his election signify? Has the Black race finally “arrived” in this country? Surely, having elected a Black for president, we have broken down all barriers to education, opportunity and access to power.
    If we elect a Black president, does that me we, as a society and country, have met our goals of desegregation and can now discard all affirmative action? I mean we haven’t elected a Jew to the presidency yet.
    Will his election mean an end to the racist organizations like the NAACP, Black Caucus, American Negro College Fund, New Black Panthers, the UCC etc?
    Will hate speech prosecutions be brought against any person whose uses the terms “nigger’ or “whitey”?
    If Obama’s election would finally cause the the race issue in this country to die, (which we all know is a crock, the Black hate/anger business is just too lucrative a cottage industry.) I would call for Hillary and McCain to step aside and let Obama run unopposed.
    I really do not think that the Black community realizes what is truly at stake. The rest of the country is not going to see Obama’s election as permission to continue the current wave of Black racism. The opposite will occur unless the black community (and I know that this is not some monolithic, cohesive community) will put away entitlements, excuses and history, and take on the mantle of American Values and make their considerable contribution to the nation.

    paul from fl (47918a)

  17. Vera,
    If we elect Obama, it is not going to stop people from reacting to Affirmative Action, stop people from making stupid comments or make people understand the Black acceptance of the non-traditional family. Most problems we face between race in this country reflects the differences in culture.
    By electing Obama, will the Black community understand that he has a traditional family, is well educated, reaped the rewards of his own work and embrace that culture or will they see his election to endorse single parent households,welfare checks, “Church goin” gangbangers and white hate in Church?

    paul from fl (47918a)

  18. Vera – Sorry about your problems. Sounds like those Dems in NY did you wrong. How, exactly, would electing Obama cure your problems, or the alleged problem as a whole?

    Again, why are those supposed to be “difficult” discussions? How freaking hard is it to treat a person as an individal? How hard is it to be colorblind, or act in a race neutral manner?

    I would add the following points that should be addressed in this “difficult” discussion. Disagreeing with affirmative action is not racist. Wanting to enforce laws against illegal immigration is not racist. Disagreeing with a policy position is not racist. Julian Bond and Rev. Wright most certainly are racist.

    To this point, this “difficult” discussion has not been a discussion, it has been a lecture, conducted solely by the liberals and identity groups to stifle opposition to positions. A two-way discussion would be welcome, but not the least bit difficult.

    Treat others fairly, in a colorblind, race neutral manner, as an individual, rather than a member of an identity greivance group. Quite simple, actually.

    JD (5f0e11)

  19. Its always a redflag when individuals look to someone else to unite and solve the problem of racism. Its akin to looking at the government to solve the problems of poverty, generational welfare, unwanted pregnancy, the breakdown of the familial structure, etc. The problem is rooted in the individual but for vast numbers of people, they have never individually thought through their motives for discriminate behavior and instead glom onto the group think mob mentality. The need for a debate on race is moot at this point. The debate has been had, is still being had and produces nothing more than finger pointing and whether the finger pointing is justified or not, it does nothing to change the behavior of the individual. And it never will, at least not through the government or politician’s involvement.

    While there is some truth to this (the laws are already in place, the need for equal application is essential): “The cure for racism is within each of us, assisted by a legal system applied equally to all”, there is also perhaps the mistaken belief that each person is capable of living color-blind and I don’t think thats necessarily true. There has to be something greater than the historical bitterness passed down from generation to generation that many hold onto that compels them to love their neighbor; there has to be something greater than themselves to rise above one’s own mantle of self-justification. For some its faith in a God that is colorblind and for a great number of people, they quietly live their lives with that respect for all as a given but they are not the newsmakers. And their quiet lives do not indicate that any anger or resentment is buried under the surface ready to bubble over. It just simply is that – they treat their fellow citizens with equality because its the natural outgrowth and evidence of their faith.

    Dana (fba430)

  20. Paul,

    Excellent points.

    Will his election mean an end to the racist organizations like the NAACP, Black Caucus, American Negro College Fund, New Black Panthers, the UCC etc?
    Will hate speech prosecutions be brought against any person whose uses the terms “nigger’ or “whitey”?
    If Obama’s election would finally cause the the race issue in this country to die, (which we all know is a crock, the Black hate/anger business is just too lucrative a cottage industry.) I would call for Hillary and McCain to step aside and let Obama run unopposed.
    I really do not think that the Black community realizes what is truly at stake. The rest of the country is not going to see Obama’s election as permission to continue the current wave of Black racism.

    Vermont Neighbor (a8a46e)

  21. I have to agree with Paul that most all of what Vera has described was inflicted by the very Left that loves to scream “Raaaacist!” at the drop of a hat. The NY machine – Dem, the racist professor comments – Dem (betcha), Penn State (and State College area) as blue as blue can be. I will never be persuaded that electing a leftist of any color will accomplish squat – after all, didn’t the last Black President actually end up doing nothing more than “ride dirty”?
    Vera, say JC Watts was the nominee, would you feel the same way, or would you nod when some ignorant soul cracked wise about the Uncle Tom? Speaking of uncles, I wonder if Uncle Jerry has a clue how powerful Uncle Tom’s Cabin was in fighting racism.

    rhodeymark (923596)

  22. Continued from post number 14
    Thanks JD. Paul from FL – Obama has stated that we have the change from the bottom up and that as a people we “all” have to be accoutable for our actions and decisions.

    Imagine if you lost everything because of racial discrimination and retaliation. By losing everything I mean your job/career, income, health insurance, prescription coverage, friends, family members, physical and mental health, precious years being a functioning mother and most of all hope.

    My discriminatory experience has wounded me deeply. In fact I am still suffering financially, emotionally and physically because of the retaliation that followed the discriminatory behavior. Yet I don’t blame or condemn an entire race of people because of my past experience. I am intelligent enough to realize that as a nation we are better than the actions of a few people.

    My reality is that I was truly victimized not only NYSDOCS, NYS Attorney General’s Office, but also by the United States judiciary system. Defendant’s legal representation: New York State Attorney General’s Office The NYS Attorney General is the chief legal officer in the state of New York. In 1998 the NYS AG office control a staff of approximately 450 lawyers and had an annual budget of approximately 139 million dollars. The Deputy Attorney General heads the Division of State Counsel. The Division of State Counsel includes nearly two thirds of the department’s attorneys in bureaus based in Albany and New York City and in the department’s twelve regional offices.
    Eliot Spitzer, Democrat elected November 1998 and served until 2006. Mr. Spitzer graduated from Princeton University in 1984 and Harvard Law School. He was Editor of Harvard Law Review.

    One of the main facts of my book is that the America judicial system including the United States Supreme Court failed me in this case. A system that has failed and continues to fail many minority citizens.

    I filed four motions asking the 80-year-old Judge assigned to my case to appoint a lawyer to represent me. The main argument for my request for appointment of counsel was that I was on Social Security Disability for clinical work-related depression. The Judge denied all four of my motions. Therefore, I was forced to present my case without an attorney.

    In the book I discuss some of the evidence including direct evidence and legal argument that I presented to the United States District Court Western District of New York, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, and the United States Supreme Court. The evidence proved that seven of the declarations, filed by the New York State Attorney General’s office were false.

    Excerpts from “A Case of Racial Discrimination and Retaliation Real or Imagined.” July 25, 2002
    I filed three appeal motions to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit during the course of my lawsuit. The Appeals Court denied each one of my appeals. Although my pervious appeals were denied I felt confidant that Elfvin’s May 29, 2001, decision would be reversed.

    My confidence stemmed from a decision issued by United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. In Cynthia Richardson v. New York State Department of Corrections, 180 F.3d426 (2nd Cir. 1999, the court ruled: While a jury may find that Richardson has not suffered a materially adverse change in the terms and conditions of her employment, or that the incidents in question were not connected to plaintiff’s litigation, Richardson’s allegations clearly state a prima facie claim of retaliatory harassment – one that DOCS, by its silence, has failed to rebut. Accordingly, DOCS’s motion for summary judgment should not have been granted, and we reverse the district court’s dismissal of this claim.

    My confidence was also based on my belief that all cases appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit were published in the Federal Reporter. I told family and friends that this case had to be reverse and remanded back to the district court because The Second Circuit Court of Appeals couldn’t justify not overturning Elfvin’s clearly erroneous ruling once the case was published in the Federal Reporter.

    United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued its order upholding the decision of United States District Court for the Western District of New York. The Appeal Court agreed with Judge Elfvin order that granted New York State Attorney General Office’s summary judgment motion.

    I felt disappointed as I read the Appeal Courts decision. I was shock, surprised, and disappointed to discover that the Appeals Court had the authority to rule that a summary order would not be published in the Federal Reporter. Link to read the Appeals Court decision: http://vlex.com/vid/18529506

    “DIARY OF MY EMOTIONS DURING APPEAL TO US SUPREME COURT
    June 24, 2002
    I filed a Writ of Certiorari and nine Appendix (exhibits) with the Supreme Court. I was aware of the almost impossibility that my case would be reviewed but I worked countless hours preparing my Writ of Certiorari. Since I didn’t have a personal computer I did most of the work on the Writ at public libraries in the Hampton Road’s area of Virginia. As I typed the 40-paged Writ, I held on to God’s promise that I would be victorious in this matter.

    The nine Supreme Court Justices have wide discretion in deciding what cases to review. The Supreme Court Justices and law clerks of the Court review nearly 9,000 appeals that are filed each year and pick about 80 to decide.
    October 1, 2002
    Today the United States Supreme Court is conferencing my Pro-Se Petition for Writ of Certiorari. A review of my petition will take place and a decision NOT to review my case will be issued by the Court. I am overwhelmed by this finality of the injustice of the entire process.

    My body aches, my left leg is causing me extreme distress. I can barely place any weight on my leg. I am broken in my body as well as my spirit.
    November 4, 2002
    Today The Supreme Court of the United States of America issued an order that upheld the Second Circuit Court of Appeals decision not to reverse the district court summary judgment order. I understood the reality that The Supreme Court of the United States of America reviews less than 100 of the approximately 8,000 cases filed with the Court each year. I didn’t understand the fact that my case wasn’t selected as one of the cases for review.

    God promised me at the beginning of my Pro-Se case that I would be victorious is this matter. I believed God’s promise because with God nothing is impossible. After I received a copy of the “decision” I burst out in loud cries of anguish and disbelief.

    I cried out to God in pain and utter disappointment. How would I live when the very foundation of my faith received a near fatal blow? I lapsed into something deeper than depression. How could I go on with my life after experiencing such an unjust decision? How could I function in a world were lies prevail over the truth? I didn’t know what to think or what to do. I no longer had a job or the hope of being victories in my lawsuit. I felt like a complete failure.”

    During the course of my quest for justice in my discrimination (Title VII) case, I contacted many people and news media outlets. One of the people that I contacted was Senator Hillary Clinton.

    I sent e-mails to Senator Clinton on numerous occasions. I sent the e-mails before and after the unjust dismissal of my Title VII case. Although my concerns and issues all occurred in the State of New York Hillary Clinton did not respond to my pleas for assistance and/or justice.

    It is my belief that Senator Clinton didn’t respond to my e-mails because of her ambition to become President Hillary Clinton. She did not want to upset the “establishment” of New York State that included her ex-super delegate Governor Spitzer.

    Vera Richardson (be9eca)

  23. Come on, Vera. The best way a reasonable person would view your case is that you didn’t like the way your supervisor was doing his job. He didn’t like the way you were doing your job and from all the available evidence he was right. You didn’t want to work, you only wanted to be paid.

    You thought you could win the jackpot with a discrimination suit. You only got a consolation prize: Social Security Disability for clinical work-related depression. The fakiest of all fake disabilities faked by lazy pigs rooting at the public trough. You must have had a very good Social Security lawyer or, more likely, a sympathetic affirmative action hearing officer who’s there for the same reasons you were — getting paid without working.

    In my view, you’re a shiftless con-artist who tried to game the system and only succeeded partially. And now you’re here trying to peddle your “book”.

    nk (34c5da)

  24. “Some liberals agree with Wright’s view of America”

    Been to a lecture on a college campus lately? I’d use the word “most” in this case.

    Mace (a7e648)

  25. The economy is in shambles, the war on terror has devolved into chasing our own tail through Afganistan, Iraq, Packistan and Iran, and the answer to every problem has become “spend more taxpayer money.”

    And Republicans now want this election to be about protecting whites from racist blacks.

    It’ll may very well work, too. After all, this is the country that managed to elect George W. Bush — twice.

    Phil (6d9f2f)

  26. Phil, more nonsense on your part. The Republicans are not campaigning on “protecting whites from racist blacks”. That’s just another snide little attempt by you to call your political opponents racist.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  27. Vera,
    My family tree was ruthlessly truncated 65 years ago by the Nazi’s. You can always get another job. Sorry you didn’t get your way. Hope you can come to deal with the disappointment.
    Phil,
    Republicans are the party that ended slavery (Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclaimation-remember?) and Started the country on the road to desegration (eisenhower, little rock-remember?)
    It’s been the Liberal/ Democrats who have treated minorities as addled children, feeding them and telling them the big bad world owes them a living. Please don’t take us down the path of BDS again. No one has ever fought a war this pervasive, with an enemy so cowardly yet so deadly. But thanks to the historical ineptitude of the Democrats, Republicans and our nation has to foot the bill. Had Clinton used his balls in dealing with the Middle East (Instead of resting them on someones chin) maybe the world would have been a different place.
    And Republicans now want this election to be about protecting whites from racist blacks.
    Once again, wrong. It’s about electing a President who’ll be protecting the blacks from anything they want to be protected from.
    …I agree, my last comment was pretty asinine, as was yours. yeeeeeesh

    paul from fl (47918a)

  28. SPQR, I don’t care about racism, and have no interest in calling anyone racist — as I say repeatedly. Racism is used as a smokescreen a “booga booga” scare tactic, by both sides of the aisle.

    At this particular point in time, the anti-Obama crowd has found the alleged racism of Wright to be an effective scare tactic, to distract from the very rational, carefully considered positions of Obama.

    When I talk about how stupid all of this is, it’s not because I think that Republicans (or Clinton supporters) are a bunch of racists. It’s because I think they are avoiding taking Obama on head-on, because they don’t have a response to him.

    They’ve finally found someone it’s REALLY EASY to argue with — Wright. And so now it’s very important that we talk about Wright this and Wright that, and how Obama must be Wright in a younger body.

    Obama himself is making points that the GOP should have to address. But no, conveniently, we get to forget about Obama himself, and talk about Wright, and Rezco, and various other people who aren’t running for president.

    And somehow, McCain is becoming a popular presidential candidate without having to say a damn thing! He may very well get to step into the oval office and pick up where GWB left off, without ever having to actually answer for all of the crap that’s been done wrong for the past 8 years — all because the nation was fooled into thinking Wright (and not Obama) was running for president.

    Do I want to protect Obama from the racist GOP? Absolutely not. I don’t think Obama’s race itself matters in this election, and I think if Obama had risen up through the GOP he’d be just as electable as he is as a Democrat.

    But by pulling an old charicature like Wright into the picture (or I should say, very short selected quotes of wright compiled by people intent on making him as scary as possible) race HAS been made an issue in this election. In a really stupid, useless way that is irrelivant to what is actually important to the country right now.

    Phil (6d9f2f)

  29. Gahrie – Let’s look at those points

    1- No. Groupings by genetic trait do not exist on their own. They must be chosen. On every single “trait” that you identify as specific to a group, I can find you thousands of examples of that trait possessed by people “outside” that grouping. You choose to discard those examples specifically because they destroy the idea that traits can be assigned to a specific group.

    2- “Most of these sub groups do share gross physical characteristics”
    Ding! Wrong! Here’s that causal fallacy again. As I said, you choose to group people (sloppily – see above) based on physical markers that are the product of environmental factors related to hereditary survival. You then turn around and conflate the importance of said markers to their genetic disposition. Which came first? The Genes or the Race? Genetics proves Race which proves Genetics which proves Race …….. ad infinitum.
    Here’s another example: The Superdome, the Kingdome, and uncle Joe’s rec room. The Superdome and uncle Joe’s rec room both have a paper cup in the corner, the Kingdome does not. Therefore the Superdome is more like uncle Joe’s rec room than the Kingdome, right? Gross physical characteristics are the paper cup of genetics.

    3- OK. So you agree that people are trying to correlate the least important part of humanity, but you then go on to try and legitimize that fact by relating it to genetics. Again, a fallacy. We don’t group soldiers into units based on the length of their shoelaces because it’s irrelevant to the functions of the military structure. Human appearance does not correlate to genetic differences any more than any one of thousands of other genetic traits correlate to describe a single unit. The fallacy is in picking and choosing hereditary markers to try and group people into a so-called “race”, and then ignoring the mountains of contrary evidence that there is really no such grouping.

    4 – What do you say to this? Everybody does it, so it must be okay. Wow. How 11th century. I feel like I’m watching two groups of people argue about whether the Sun revolves around the Earth, or if the Earth and Sun don’t actually revolve at all, just the Earth spins.

    Both groups are wrong. It really is as simple as that. Is it sinking in to anyone here on these threads why there will not be any movement on so-called race relations on this planet? Why no “debate” is possible? Nobody gets this? Wow. Maybe people really like things the way they are, no matter how they protest to the contrary.

    I mean, in order to really do something about the real life problems as described by people like Vera, we have to acknowledge that what we’re dealing with is a socio-political structure that is rooted in an arcane belief that specific groupings of people actually have relevance. They don’t, and when people finally acknowledge that the fact that they like this food, those clothes, or that music is based on cultural, regional and environmental factors and not some mystical “race”, we may have a chance of actually dealing with what seems to our unenlightened selves as intractable.

    Apogee (366e8b)

  30. As a former feminist I would have thought ‘sexism’ would be a much better venue for Vera to use as the means to achieve equality of outcome.

    Vera, I’m a white female, 46 with no children/unmarried whose lower middle-class parents divorced at an early age. As a young woman I was guided and influence by feminist ‘sexism’ philosophy that my gender is a victim of male chauvanist pigs keeping females stuck barefoot in the kitchen cooking slop for the man; I was informed often as a young female that children whould ruin my identity, that dependence on a man would enslave me and that a successful life meant breaking some career’s glass ceiling. I didn’t get that ‘life of a successful woman’ I thought I should have because from the age of 15 to the age of 40 I spent my life blaming the male chauvanist pig as the obstacle in my right to equality of outcome I believed I deserved.

    I never knew the concept of equality of opportunity until after 9/11/2001 change came for me; my first was reading the philosophy of Thomas Sowells who begin my journey (at the time I even sent him an e-mail wishing that he would run for President someday).

    That said; from my perspective the fact that you have four beautiful children is more wealth and success than I will ever experience in my life and no amount of speech codes or affirmative action or Presidential powers will change this.

    syn (1017f1)

  31. “SPQR, I don’t care about racism, and have no interest in calling anyone racist — as I say repeatedly.”

    “Do I want to protect Obama from the racist GOP?”

    There you go again Phil, contradicting yourself within the same comment.

    daleyrocks (906622)

  32. “When I talk about how stupid all of this is, it’s not because I think that Republicans (or Clinton supporters) are a bunch of racists. It’s because I think they are avoiding taking Obama on head-on, because they don’t have a response to him.”

    Heres a response: Obama is nothing more than a socialist wearing a different mask. When you strip away the rhetoric and the posturing, he is still a politician determined to enlighten us with socialistic rule if he has the chance. And that, and no other reason, is why I as a Republican will not and cannot vote for him.

    What you describe as booga-booga tactics, unfortunately are rooted in truth on both sides. However, I don’t see that anyone on this site has used racism in any way, shape, form as the reason why they would not vote for Obama.

    Dana (fba430)

  33. Dana said: Heres a response: Obama is nothing more than a socialist wearing a different mask. When you strip away the rhetoric and the posturing, he is still a politician determined to enlighten us with socialistic rule if he has the chance. And that, and no other reason, is why I as a Republican will not and cannot vote for him.

    See, if that was the conversation being had today, I would be thrilled. Because then the GOP would have to answer for the past 8 years which have been, in essence, the rise of socialism for the military industrial complex, and more recently for the financial industry.

    But noooooo, we have to spend our days arguing about whether Obama is a closet member of the Black Panthers because of the church he goes to. And the election becomes a choice between keeping things the way they are, or having a crazy racist black preacher controling the country.

    Phil (6d9f2f)

  34. Dailycrocks, good to see you, too.

    Phil (6d9f2f)

  35. See, if that was the conversation being had today, I would be thrilled. Because then the GOP would have to answer for the past 8 years which have been, in essence, the rise of socialism for the military industrial complex, and more recently for the financial industry.
    OK, Phil, regardless of the title of this thread (and I may be hijacking here) tell me. How should we have dealt with Terrorism, The Taliban and Al-Qaeda? I mean effectively dealt with it whereas there would no further attacks on American soil?

    paul from fl (47918a)

  36. Apogee – I hate the “two choices” thing, but here you go:

    You can either work to get people to accept difference, or you can pretend it doesn’t exist.

    Since people aren’t abysmally stupid, the second approach will always fail.

    Gahrie is correct that the inherited appearance of a “race” (while the term is loosely defined and oft-abused, it is not meaningless) is among the least important characteristics a human can possess.

    To say that the differences are a result of time and environment is basically stating the obvious to no end – extend that rule and you explain the differences between cows and whales away. Does that make a cow better than a whale? No, but they’re not the same, either.

    There are genetically distinct subgroups of humanity, but drawing those lines is bound to be somewhat arbitrary and essentially meaningless – and almost all genetic variances occur across and between such populations.

    Saying those groups don’t in fact have any difference at all just flies in the face of stubborn facts – like saying it’s impossible to tell the difference between an Inuit and a sub-saharan African by sight.

    Does that appearance define the content of that persons’ character? Of course not. Does it limit their potential as human beings? No. But does it exist? Yes.

    You will never convince those “unenlightened” people to get over their hangups by telling them that differences they see with their own eyes don’t, in fact, exist. They’ll just assume you’re crazy. Because, as I said, they can see the difference.

    What people need is not to be badgered into ignoring the obvious, but to be educated as to the meaning – or meaninglessness – of what they see.

    Merovign (4744a2)

  37. How should we have dealt with Terrorism, The Taliban and Al-Qaeda? I mean effectively dealt with it whereas there would no further attacks on American soil?

    Well, we could have just let a former Halliburton CEO and a former Texas Rangers ballclub owner/manager throw money at the problem for six years. Maybe that’d help?

    Phil (6d9f2f)

  38. Merovign – thanks for agreeing with me.

    Apogee (366e8b)

  39. “Well, we could have just let a former Halliburton CEO and a former Texas Rangers ballclub owner/manager throw money at the problem for six years. Maybe that’d help?”

    Phil, if you want to know why people don’t take you seriously, that comment is a perfect example of why.

    It’s as dishonest a comment as if I said: the Democrats want to put up a former First Lady and former state legislator for the Presidency!

    Patterico (27575f)

  40. “Will his election mean an end to the racist organizations like the NAACP, Black Caucus, American Negro College Fund, New Black Panthers, the UCC etc?
    Will hate speech prosecutions be brought against any person whose uses the terms “nigger’ or “whitey”?”

    How old are you?

    stef (2b5cca)

  41. Humans that refuse to process visual clues will self select out. The acknowledgment that one has visual clues that could sound racist if verbalized incompletely and inarticulately isn’t a sign of latent racism.
    Three young black males in baggy jeans and wife beater undershirts hanging out in front of a liqour store down in Lynwood spread out and approach a Korean female carrying $2000 cash… should she acknowledge all of the visual clues or should she fixate on eliminating the clue of skin color from her immediate experience?
    Of course not.

    In defense of Grandma,typical black people are afraid of a type of young black males. Maybe she didn’t have the experience to figure out nuances of behavior, but that doesn’t make her racist, or even ignorant.

    SteveG (92b666)

  42. Vera, my brother-in-law retired from the Chicago Police Department as a patrolman in spite of his Master’s degree in Public Administration because the Chicago PD determined that only minorities would be promoted sergeant until the number of sergeants who were minorities was large enough to satisfy Jesse Jackson and his allies. I think he should have kept taking the exam to try to shame the CPD into acknowledging that what they were doing was unconstitutional. He didn’t. Was he as affected by racism as you were ? If not (and I assume that would be your response), why not ?

    Mike K (b9ce3e)

  43. Stef,
    Old enough to understand that some people need to have the target idea overstated when advancing an argument.

    and you?

    paul from fl (47918a)

  44. Phil – The Democrats haven’t even selected a nominee yet. They are slugging it out amongst themselves and creating great campaign fodder for the fall. Given that, the Republicans aren’t really doing a heck of a lot right now so I don’t know what you’re so worked up about. Perhaps you should focus on your party and its screw ups first before pointing your fingers elsewhere.

    daleyrocks (906622)

  45. It’s as dishonest a comment as if I said: the Democrats want to put up a former First Lady and former state legislator for the Presidency!

    How is that dishonest at all? In fact, the more direct criticisms of Obama and Clinton are questions as to whether Hillary’s ability to be a contender for president are rooted in her former status as first lady, rather than as a leader herself, and questions as to whether Obama’s youth/lack of experience should be a concern.

    I’ll take those real questions any day over the silly focus on Wright. That story should have lasted 12 hours. The only reason it’s stretched out is because it’s so fun for Obama’s critics to attack Wright (and not even Wright — just select cherrypicked quotes of Wright). So much more satisfying than having any direct debate with Obama himself.

    Phil (6d9f2f)

  46. Steve G – Regarding visual clues – I never advocated the abandonment of visual processing. If indeed this is pointed at me, I suggest you re-read what I wrote. Merovign misstated what I said, and then proceeded to knock down that straw man. His post comes full circle from attempting to refute what I say by mis-characterizing it to actually agreeing with my main point.

    None of my posts even suggested that, regarding hereditary markers, we “pretend it doesn’t exist.” I did not make that stupid argument. What I did say was that hereditary markers are a minute part of the human genetic makeup, and as such prove impossible to use in grouping people according to “arbitrary and essentially meaningless” classifications. Disagree? OK, then, please name the races. All of them.

    Steve G – as for your hypothetical – lets look a little closer at that. Any human 3 on 1 situation, compounded by a gender and age difference, would give any woman pause, regardless if her nationality is Korean or not. Obviously, “spreading out around” the woman is an aggressive act. Then you add in “baggy jeans and wife beater t shirts” (not business attire). Pal, all I have to say to you is, at this point, worrying about race is taking up too much of your thought processes. If this were me, I’d start steeling myself to either hand over that money or kill some people, no matter what hereditary markings they were displaying.

    I find it interesting that one needs to qualify dress (baggy jeans), location (Lynwood), actions (encirclement), number (3), and economics (200.00 cash) to try and prove a hypothetical about “race”. I couldn’t have proven my point better myself. Thank you.

    Apogee (366e8b)

  47. “How is that dishonest at all?”

    Well, gee, Phil. somewhere I got the impression each of these people had other more recent and significant jobs than the ones mentioned.

    Thanks for playing dumb and making me explain that. It’s not annoying at all!

    Patterico (632a15)

  48. Is the white student who has a A+ GPA in highschool and who is in the top 10% of his class and wants to go to med school discriminated against when a C+ plus student is given that slot due to affirmative action policies in universities?

    Is the white qualified job applicant discriminated against when a black applicant, with no experience given the job because of the color of his skin and the company has a quota to fill?

    Is the black person who calls a white person a “cracker” or a “honkey” racist? Is the person who wears a t-shirt to work that says “Black And Proud” a racist when he knows that a white employee could not wear a t-shirt that says “White And Proud” without being reprimanded and sent home?

    Does the white the child born into poverty in the coal mine area of West Virginia have any greater chance of increasing his lot in life than the child born in poverty in the Chicago south side?

    But poor Vera, in her myopic view of poverty and disadvantage in this country, can only see her own pain but not the pain of others. Perhaps she would be well advised to read Clarence Thomas’s book.

    I wonder, does Vera ever think of the Irish coal miners who worked deep in the earth only to learn that their wages did not cover the rent on mine owned housing and the few groceries bought at the mine store? Did she ever give thought to the fact that the Irish were hired because they were considered expendable and were cheaper than slaves? Or the Chinese who worked the railroads? How about the American Indians? Wonder if Vera ever gives a thought to how the Buffalo Soldier, her people, were the most feared because they rode into villages killing men, women and children for no other reason than they were Indians?

    My guess is Vera only thinks that her own heritage has the exclusive rights to the history of suffering. A subscriber of selective history to continue the cycle of victimhood. Vera has learned well at the Jesse Jackson/Al Sharpton School of Victimhood. Congratulations, Vera, go to the head of the class.

    I would suggest that Vera talk to Vietnamese-Americans who fled their homeland after the fall of Saigon. They came in boats, not designed for the open seas, and begged to be given a chance to survive, knowing not word of English. And survive they did. In two generations, they have built businesses, bought homes in middle/upper middle class homes and their children are some of the highest grade earners in our schools. As a matter of fact, the Vietnamese did so well, the federal government has decided that they are not eligible for affirmative action policies. When Katrina hit, many of the Louisiana and Texas shimp boats are owned by the Vietnamese. See any of them on TV crying about how the federal government failed them? They, like many in New Orleans lost everything. Any TV interviews about them? Yet still, 143 years after the end of the civil war, Vera complains that black America cannot acheive what the Vietnamese acheived in less than forty.

    Obama is right. There news to be renewed dialog about the black community. But it needs to start with the black community to decide how to take themselves back to the values that their ancestors possessed from the Emancipation Proclaimation to the marches of Dr. King. Strong values that included a strong family, two parent households, an education above everything, faith in a God that is color blind. It is the community itself, not society, that has destroyed the dream Martin Luther King, Jr. It is not racial, Vera, it is cultural.

    retire05 (9c1baa)

  49. To Mike K at comment 42 – This is the necessary conversation that Obama’s speech encouraged between all Americans. We have all suffered in some form or another from our past history. By all I mean the descendants of slaves and the slave owners. I am sorry that your brother was one of those people.

    To NK – comment 23 – You are either clueless or one of those people who will ignore the truth regardless of the facts. Buy a copy of my book or download it for $10. If you still think that I a shiftless con artist I will refund your money.

    Excerpts from “A Case of Racial Discrimination and Retaliation Real or Imagined.”
    http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?r=1&EAN=9780615177014
    http://www.lulu.com/content/1362173

    “In January 1989, I requested Leave of Absent Without pay to return to college to complete my degree. My request for leave without pay was denied by NYSDOCS. In January 1989 changed shifts and work the 11:00 pm to 7:00 am shift at Albion Correctional Facility. I worked full time and attended college full time during the day at State University New York at Brockport.

    Though God show grace and mercy I completed the eighteen (18) semester hours that I needed to earn my Bachelor of Science degree. I made the Dean’s list with a 3.5 grade point average and graduated May 1989 with a major in Political Science and a minor in Criminal Justice.

    Due to financial issues caused by my pending divorce I resigned from the position of Supervisor of Inmate Grievance in June 1992. At the time of my resignation, my salary as Supervisor of Inmate Grievance was approximately $31,000. After I resigned I was reinstated to a correctional officer position at Bedford Hills CF. My salary, as an officer was $31,408. Due to a shortage of correctional officers New York State Department of Corrections offered unlimited overtime for security personnel at Bedford Hills. I made $57,415.69 from June 10, 1992, to May 26, 1993 at Bedford. In June 1993 I returned home to my children and to Albion CF.” (I will take work and my health over $15,000 a year any day).

    Secondly, I didn’t have an attorney for my SS Disability. I filed my application with supporting documentation and the application was approved. I didn’t have to appeal my case. My case was approved based in part on the following:

    “On September 16, 1996, approximately two weeks after my examination by the state consultant Dr. U. Raghavan, a state hired psychiatrist – Dr. Klein, examined me. After my examination, Dr. Klein also addressed his written report to Dr. Ciulla. The report listed the Employee Health Service as the referring agency. Dr. Klein’s report stated in part: At your request I met with Vera Richardson on September 16, 1996, for the purpose of providing you with an opinion regarding her ability to return to work.

    Ms. Richardson is a 42 year old, divorced, and mother of four children who have worked for 10 years for NYSDOCS. She reports no particular difficulty on her job until her current sergeant, Sgt. Reed, came on board in 1993. According to her he was in charge of assignments and did not go by seniority. She gave multiple examples of difficulties. For instance, if I understand her presentation about this correctly, she was entitled to an assignment at Strong Memorial Hospital when there were inmates hospitalized at that facility. Instead the assignment was given to others and she had to drive to the Albion facility. Apparently some officers had to drive from Buffalo to Strong for the assignment. She was also given an assignment in an undesirable cellblock. She complained to Sgt. Reed’s supervisor to no avail.

    On August 26, 1995, she became overwhelmed by the harassment she was feeling. She began crying and vomiting and developed an elevated temperature. She saw the nurse and psychiatric treatment was suggested. When she began treatment she was placed out of work and eventually returned, deciding not to let Sgt. Reed “dictate my life.” However, she reports, “He and his buddies made my life a living hell.” On one occasion she reports that five officers were involved in stealing her badge and she has still not recovered this. For the first time in ten years she received an evaluation saying that she needed improvement in a number of areas. She became increasing depressed and reports she was unable to file a complaint with Human Resources until July 1996.

    With Prozac now at 20 mg, day and weekly psychotherapy she was determined to be ready for return to work on August 6, 1996. She reports that she went to work, but it was then required that she have an examination first. She also said that she was escorted out of the Albion Correctional Facility “like a criminal…destroyed everything I had built up.” She also described on one occasion, although the timing of this is not clear to me that Sgt. Red stood on his desk and called her something profane.
    She has had associated symptoms of hyper and hyposomnia, poor concentration, and low energy, in addition to depressed mood. These continue at the present time.

    She will not give me any information about her developmental history, saying, “I don’t want to talk about my family background—it has nothing to do with this.” She noted that before she was hired to her current job she had to take a psychological examination and that she passed it.

    Because of her current financial distress she is receiving support from the Department of Social Services apparently because she is not receiving the disability benefits to which she feels entitled. On examination, she is a neatly, casually dressed woman who appears her stated age and appears depressed. Her speech is emotional. It is generally on normal rate and flow. In the middle of the interview she became increasingly depressed, started sobbing somewhat hysterically and used the bathroom and vomited on the floor. She was feeling anxious and depressed. Her affect is dysphonic. She is heavily focused on multiple examples of injustices on her job. She denied suicidal ideation or attempt. On gross examination cognitive functioning is intact.

    Doctor Klein’s impression/diagnosis states in part: suffers from Major Depression, which has recurred as a result of her attempt to return to work on August 6, 1996. There maybe some character logical issues as well, but I do not have a clear character logical diagnosis at this time. At the present time she is unable to return to work. Whether she might be able to return to a different facility where she was not feeling harassed is another issue. At the present time this is not likely, but once she resolves the current crisis and her mood improves, it may be feasible.
    I affirm, under the penalty of perjury, that the foregoing is a true report of my finding and opinion upon examination of the above-named individual.”
    Signed Dr. Klein

    Vera Richardson (be9eca)

  50. Vera Richardson,

    It sounds like you have had great difficulty in your life. However, most people experience hardship at some point and many have it much worse than you. Have you been able to move forward since then? If not, why do you think you have been unable to move forward while others are able to put hardship behind them?

    DRJ (a431ca)

  51. Apogee:

    You’re failing to see the forest by concentrating on the tree. Yes, it is a scientific fact that race as characterized by gross physical characteristics is meaningless. But that doesn’t matter.

    Take your analogy about red cars. Yes it is true that not all red cars are fast, and painting a car red doesn’t make it fast. But it is also true that people who drive red cars tend to drive faster than people who drive other colored cars, and that police tend to give more speeding tickets to people driving red cars. Why? Perception.

    The color red is perceived as an aggressive color, both by those who choose to buy red cars, and by those who regulate traffic laws. Those who buy red cars self identify, and outsiders identify and judge, behavior based on a scientifically worthless characteristic.

    The same thing occurs with race. People group themselves and others by gross physical characteristics we call race (that coorelate to genetic sub-groups) and behave accordingly.

    So while it may be scientifically true that race has no meaning, socially race is quite important and in many cases determitive.

    Barak Obama has as much White blood as Black blood. He was raised by his White grandparents in a racially diverse environment. He has no genetic, historical or social ties to the plight of the American Black man.

    Yet he self identifies, and most people identify, him as an American Black man.

    Neither he nor his ancestors were ever enslaved or forced to suffer under Jim Crow, yet he chooses to identify with the cult of Black victimology.

    Perception trumps science when it comes to race.

    But most people aren’t scientists. the simple fact is that there are distinct sub groups of humanity that are identified

    Sometimes we have ingrained emotions related to certain colors. Red is an aggressive color in western society. People with red cars tend to drive faster. Police also tend to stop red cars more often, since they drive faster, but also as a response to seeing the color red.

    gahrie (5ae14f)

  52. The last two paragraphs of my 4:41 post should have been deleted.

    [EDIT: I edited with strike-through, Gahrie. There was a gap in your text that makes me believe you did not realize those paragraphs were still there. — DRJ]

    gahrie (5ae14f)

  53. Vera – Do you feel your inability to secure an attorney to handle your appeal, even on a contingency basis, reflects at all on the merits of your case?

    daleyrocks (906622)

  54. Let’s get real. Of our three choices, Barack is the only one that’s going to move America forward on race relations and race issues. Better than the 44th white person in a row, anyways.

    Even symbolically, he’s the product of a union between black and white. And think about it, the premise of Rev. Wright’s entire argument is that the country is run by rich white people. If Obama is elected, that argument is undercut. There’s no more ‘the man,’ there’s no more ‘white government.’ Overnight, an election of Obama will change black’s perception of government, and that’s a good thing.

    He’s also got much more experience than either McCain or Clinton on this specific issue, from all his work in Chicago. What’s more, that speech he just gave, that he wrote, proves he’s got what it takes to lead on this sort of issue. How many Presidential candidates, faced with giving the most important speech of their political lives, eschew all of their speech writers and advisers and write the thing themselves? Nixon was the las to do it, 40 years ago. That takes balls, folks. And if the reaction is any indiciation, he knocked it out of the park. We need more of that.

    Levi (76ef55)

  55. So who are you voting for, Levi?

    DRJ (a431ca)

  56. gahrie – first, thanks for the articulate responses. It’s a pleasure to have someone debate your points civilly.

    I believe that we may be arguing different ideas. Your approach to this is of strict pragmatism, that people’s perceptions of race creates race.

    My point in my posts was to respond to the title of the original DRJ post – “we need a debate on race”. My approach is similarly pragmatic. Since the idea of the existence of “race” is based on shifting perception and not reality, there is no possibility of meaningful debate whatsoever. It’s akin to Plato’s cave allegory. The prisoners can only talk about what they perceive as real, and can never truly understand it.

    In your post you talk of self-identification. That is perhaps the crux of my argument. It is this false perception of “race” that must be changed, if we are to be able to “move beyond it”. The difference between the perception of “race” and the perception of culture and politics is that “race” is a constant. It is fixed because it is inaccurately ascribed to our genetic makeup. Unlike culture or politics, “race” is a safety box that cannot be assailed, and as such a valuable commodity. Those who hide inside its confines can never be asked to change, because changing would imply being ‘more than human’, and against not only society and religion, but science as well. The assumption is that it would be just as easy to become a cow or a whale.

    Culture and politics are not so unassailable, and thus mentioned far less than “race”. So my point about the red cars stands. You are not arguing that the color red actually makes the cars faster, but merely that peoples perceptions affects how they interact with red cars. All behavioral, and all perfectly legitimate. I would ask, however, what would happen if a speeder went to court with the argument “hey, my car’s red, so I can drive as fast as I want”?

    That is precisely what is being argued when people bring up “race” as an explanation for any behavioral situation. They are saying effectively, “I am who I am, and you cannot ask me to change my behavior, because my behavior is indelibly linked to my genetic makeup, and I cannot change that”

    Apogee (366e8b)

  57. Syn and retire05: Thank you for the excellent posts. #30, 48

    Vera: You have a tough work story. But most people have been through the same, if not worse. You enjoy writing, try reading a variety of authors to sort your feelings and anger. From Thoreau to Bukowski, the individual observations might help you focus. Move away from the civil rights angle, even briefly, because it’s keeping you back. You are keeping you back. Suffering and joy are everywhere. . .

    Vermont Neighbor (a8a46e)

  58. Apogee:

    It’s a pleasure to have someone debate your points civilly.

    It is isn’t it? Sadly, it’s also very rare, especially in instances dealing with race.

    It is this false perception of “race” that must be changed, if we are to be able to “move beyond it

    It seems you and I have the same goal in mind, we just differ on the margins. You seem to argue that the way to move ahead is to deny the existence of race. My way is to acknowledge the existence of race, but emphasize how little importance it bears.

    My anger and sorrow about Obama stem from the wasted opportunity. Because of his unique background he had the opportunity to truly transcend race and move the issue forward. I so wanted him to stand up and say: “My father had Black skin, yet I am not a Black man, my mother had White skin, yet I am not a White man. I am an American, and I will allow no one to dictate to me who or what I am based on the color of my skin.” Instead, for political advantage in my opinion, he purposefully and knowingly chose to identify with the culture of victimology and Afrocentrism.

    gahrie (5ae14f)

  59. Levi – “And if the reaction is any indiciation, he knocked it out of the park.”

    People did like the speech itself, but the negatives on Obama increased among blacks, democrats, independents, as well as republicans according to several polls. It doesn’t sound like they are buying his act to the same degree you are Levi. People still have a lot of unanswered questions as has repeatedly been pointed out on these threads. Obama remains a cipher who discloses information only when the media spotlight gets too hot and forces his hand.

    daleyrocks (906622)

  60. Here is the Second Circuit Appelate Decision for Vera, excluding the lead ins:

    UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the decision of said district court be and it hereby is AFFIRMED.

    Plaintiff-Appellant, Vera Richardson (“Richardson”), appeals from the judgment of the United States District Court for the Western District of New York (John T. Elfvin, Judge), entered on May 29, 2001, granting summary judgment in favor of Defendants-Appellees, New York State Department of Correctional Services and N.Y.S. Dept. of Civil Services, and from orders entered October 30, 1997 and April 30, 1998, dismissing claims against these two parties and Defendant-

    Appellee, N.Y. State Office of State Comptroller.

    Richardson, a former employee of the New York State Department of Correctional Services, brought suit against Defendants under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42

    U.S.C. § 2000e, federal civil rights statutes 42 U.S.C. §§

    1981, 1983, and 1985, New York Executive Law § 296, and the New York State Constitution, alleging racial and gender discrimination and harassment, as well as retaliation. In October 1997, the district court dismissed Richardson’s § 1983

    Richardson v. New York Department of Correctional Services Docket No. 01-7722

    claims, holding that the Eleventh Amendment immunized States and their officials from such complaints. In April 1998, the district court dismissed Richardson’s complaint as to the Office of the State Comptroller (identified by the district court as the State’s Department of Audit and Control) for failure to state a claim and dismissed all of Richardson’s other claims on Eleventh Amendment grounds except those under Title VII.

    In May 2001, the district court granted summary judgment to the remaining Defendants on Richardson’s Title VII claims.

    The court held that Richardson’s retaliation claims failed because she did not provide any evidence challenging the Defendants’ legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons for terminating her and for not reinstating her to the position of Supervisor of the Inmate Grievance Program at the Albion Correctional Facility. The court also found that even if Richardson had stated a prima facie case for workplace discrimination, nothing in the record undermined the legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons given by Defendants for each of their actions. In particular, the court noted that while the record showed a “strained relationship” between Richardson and her supervisor, Sergeant William Reed, there Richardson v. New York Department of Correctional Services Docket No. 01-7722

    was no evidence that Reed’s treatment of Richardson resulted from a discriminatory motive. Finally, the court turned to Richardson’s hostile work environment claim and found that the incidents she alleged were insufficiently severe as a matter of law to create a work environment that was abusive or hostile.

    Having reviewed all of Richardson’s contentions on appeal, we find them without merit and affirm the district court’s judgment for substantially the same reasons set forth in its Memoranda and Orders.

    For the reasons set forth above, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

    FOR THE COURT, Roseann B. MacKechnie, Clerk By:

    Lucille Carr, Operations Manager

    daleyrocks (906622)

  61. gahrie – spot on.

    You are correct that Obama had an amazing opportunity to give voice to a position that catered to no single group – and wasted it. I think, however, that had he actually taken that position initially, we would not be discussing his candidacy. His candidacy is not about race, it is about money, power, influence and who gets to control the direction of the money hose. Just like the other candidacies.

    You are also spot on regarding our marginal differences. My point in posting was to challenge people to examine the very idea of race, and where it comes from. I agree that people have different looks (as does every human being), but feel that acknowledging the existence of a “difference” that can be traced to our very genetics (when the importance of this is non-existent) allows all of us to escape the ultimate responsibility for our actions. Obama may self-identify with Afrocentric culture, but that must be his decision and responsibility. As long as there is a possibility that he was merely “drawn” to “his true people”, we will never be able to even start a debate, much less move on from a pre-enlightenment mindset.

    No one has answered my inquiry to list all the races as of yet. If race is real, it should be fairly easy.

    Apogee (366e8b)

  62. I disagree. He’s set fundraising records because people want him to be President so much they’re sending him their money. He’s built a virtually insurmountable lead over an establishment campaign. Literally, people are buying his act.

    Of course his poll numbers are going to go down when conservatives are clogging the airwaves all week wondering whether or not he’d implement some sort of radical, black supremacist agenda on his first day. That’s to expected given the news – or more accurately – opinion cycle. But his speech, and again, I think all of you need to be giving him way more credit for writing it himself, has already received more hits on YouTube than the Wright videos. His speech will probably be more memorable this bullshit controversy that spawned it in a few weeks.

    There’s no unanswered questions. He’s not a cipher. He said he disagrees with Wright’s offending comments. He said that for those 20 years, his black church was like any other black church. The people with unanswered questions are asking stupid fucking questions.

    And trust me, I have no doubt that this could end his chance to win the Presidency, but if it does, it won’t be for his lack of forthrightness. It will be because of good, ol’ fashioned fear and misunderstanding of the black man by stupid fucking white people.

    Or, racism.

    Levi (76ef55)

  63. Levi,

    So anyone that doesn’t vote for Obama is a stupid f*ing white person, a racist, or both?

    DRJ (a431ca)

  64. Levi,

    The people who are really afraid in this election are people like you. You seem so overwhelmed by a need to elect Obama that you become frustrated and agitated when challenged. I think it’s because the Iraq War, the economy, FISA, terrorism, and similar issues have left you feeling out-of-control.

    To counteract that, you crave a simple candidate with a simple message. With Obama, you can push those out-of-control feelings aside and simply Trust Obama. But the fact is sometimes life isn’t easy no matter how much you wish otherwise, and we’re living in one of those times.

    DRJ (a431ca)

  65. #54, Levi,
    if you think that Obama can bring the two social fractions together you are certifiably delusional. Obama has taken a stand, and it ain’t with ALL Americans.

    Let’s take just two items in his speech (as speech, I may add, that was written soley by Obama, yet he had to read it from a teleprompter in front of only those superdelegates who had committed to him already, not in front of ordinary citizens):

    He used the term “original” sin when speaking of slavery in America. Now, original sin is different in that it is passed mother to son, father to daughter, without any action or thought on the part of the person it is passed to. Original sin, according to Christian doctrine, can only be absolved by baptism and the acceptance of Christ as savior. He could have spoke of slavery as a sin of the U.S. but he didn’t.
    He also said that his grandmother “confessed” to having racist views. Now, the term “confessed” is interesting. He could have said she “admitted” to having racist views, but to use the term “confessed” has a connotation of some perceived crime or sin against humanity.

    Senator Obama is not a stupid man. He is highly educated, as an attorney (and yes, attorney’s have to master the art of words to win in court) and has been given a gift of the use of words to their fullest effect. An orator, if you will. So one of two things are going on here. Either Senator Obama does not have the command of words his followers would have us believe and and these were the normal slips you could expect from him when he does not have a speech writer do his work, or…….
    he was fully aware of the words he was using, and as he has said many, many times, words do have meaning.

    Basically his speech was to lay the guilt trip on white America again (following Rev. Wright’s lead) and that by electing him, we shall gain salvation through the baptism of the ballot box.

    Part of America’s sin includes the genocide of Amerindians. He did not mention that, did he? Part of America’s sins is the use of Irish coal miners, considering them expendable. He never mentioned that. Instead, he speaks of the original sin that every “white” American is born with that cannot be removed by any set-aside, affirmative action law or restitution.

    One other little thing: Obama is hailed as a Constitutional scholar. In his opening paragraph, he makes a really serious error about the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. If that is what he taught, no wonder we have college grads that are clueless about the history of our DOI and Constitution.

    retire05 (9c1baa)

  66. Apogee,
    Whose definitions? the Anthropologists’? The Jurists’, The racists’? retire 05 hit the real issue on the head, re-enforcing my basic premise earlier:
    …It is the [black] community itself, not society, that has destroyed the dream [of] Martin Luther King, Jr. It is not racial, Vera, it is cultural.

    A DR. D.R. Johnson of Leeds UK lists the following races:
    Monogloid
    Caucasiod
    Negroid
    Australoid

    So?

    paul from fl (47918a)

  67. Levi – Ron Paul set fundraising records as well based on grass roots appeal. Does that mean you would automatically vote for him and the racists who haunt his campaign?

    daleyrocks (906622)

  68. “And trust me, I have no doubt that this could end his chance to win the Presidency, but if it does, it won’t be for his lack of forthrightness. It will be because of good, ol’ fashioned fear and misunderstanding of the black man by stupid fucking white people.

    Or, racism.”

    Alternatively, a more tolerant view might hild that it was a lack of judgement, experience, and character which might cause him to lose should he secure his party’s nomination, plus those unanswered questions you deny exist.

    daleyrocks (906622)

  69. Oh no! Obama’s unfavorable rating climbed to a record high today of 51% in the Rasmussen survey. That’s approaching Clinton territory of 54%.

    daleyrocks (906622)

  70. Levi – Ron Paul set fundraising records as well based on grass roots appeal. Does that mean you would automatically vote for him and the racists who haunt his campaign?

    Ron Paul was the only real conservative you idiots had to choose from. I don’t think Ron Paul is a racist, and I can’t help it if there are racists out there that support him and actually hold conservative positions, positions like fiscal conservatism and small government, positions the Republican party has abandoned.

    I like Ron Paul, he’s a real conservative. And real conservatives do have some merit to their arguments. I can’t imagine a plausible circumstance where I’d vote for him, but he’d be a better President than anyone else you people have mind.

    Levi (76ef55)

  71. #70 – nothing better than being scolded by a liberal for abandoning conservatism. you should be glad, arent you trying to convert us and bring us over to the good side of the force?

    chas (68d8c2)

  72. Alternatively, a more tolerant view might hild that it was a lack of judgement, experience, and character which might cause him to lose should he secure his party’s nomination, plus those unanswered questions you deny exist.

    That’s what the racists will tell themselves, to be sure. But smart people, people like me, can smell the bullshit. It’s not that hard to realize what’s going on here.

    I know you people don’t like me bringing up ol’ George Bush, but I’m going to anyway. Because everytime one of you Bush voters starts complaining about Obama’s lack of ‘judgement, experience, and character’ because he didn’t stand up in the middle of church and start refuting Wright point-by-point for racist comments that you are only able to assume were being said over the past 20 years, I’m left wondering how Bush’s 20 year run of wreckless alcohol abuse and his propensity for endangering people’s lives for getting fucked up and driving around escaped your deeply inquisitive, seriously scrutinizing eyes.

    Bush’s alcoholism and disregard for the law could have gotten people fucking killed, but hey, he found Jesus, and is redeemed, and none of that stuff says anything about his ‘judgment, experience, or character.’ But it’s unforgivable, absolutely unfor-fucking-givable for Obama to hear somebody say something controversial, which you can’t even really prove, beyond some absurd and reaching extrapolation based on 2 minutes of videotape.

    Yeah, nothing about any of that suggests there’s a massive, racism-based double standard going on here.

    Levi (76ef55)

  73. Ron Paul was the only real conservative you idiots had to choose from.

    You must be talking to the Typical White Man. Do you black it up for people you like?

    Vermont Neighbor (a8a46e)

  74. Levi,

    Given your hysteria, I take it you’ve noticed the recent poll that shows Clinton gaining 10 points on Obama virtually overnight, and that Obama’s negatives are now at 51%.

    DRJ (a431ca)

  75. #70 – nothing better than being scolded by a liberal for abandoning conservatism. you should be glad, arent you trying to convert us and bring us over to the good side of the force?

    Somebody needs to scold you, because you sure are not doing it yourselves. I’m not trying to convert you, I’m of the opinion that you’re too far gone if you haven’t come after watching this Bush train wreck unfold, but we do need some conservative ideas thoughtfully expressed in this country, in terms of fiscal responsibilty keeping the government out of private lives, but Bush has thrown all of that out the window. Look at the bailout of this investment firm, they just gave those people our money for failing on the free market.

    Bush has abandoned conservatism.

    Levi (76ef55)

  76. Bush has abandoned conservatism.

    Agreed.

    Vermont Neighbor (a8a46e)

  77. Levi,

    I agree that Bush has not been a faithful conservative but I don’t agree with your view of the Bear Stearns’ transaction. It was a loan secured by collateral, not a bailout. It’s true the loan could go into default, just as any loan can. It’s also true that the federal government will be responsible if Bear Stearns defaults on the loan. But it’s not a bailout unless and until that happens.

    DRJ (a431ca)

  78. Given your hysteria, I take it you’ve noticed the recent poll that shows Clinton gaining 10 points on Obama virtually overnight, and that Obama’s negatives are now at 51%.

    That’s to be expected when every form of media is obsessing about whether or not you’re a racist. Shows how much influence conservative media outlets have over the supposedly liberally-biased mainstream media you all complain about so god damn much.

    Doesn’t mean shit anyways, Hillary is almost statistically eliminated from this race.

    Levi (76ef55)

  79. We agree again, Levi. The media does have a powerful impact on the way some people think.

    But why do you think the bad polls are the fault of the media? After all, the mainstream media was captivated by Obama’s speech.

    DRJ (a431ca)

  80. Levi –

    How is it that a smart person like yourself doesn’t know about Freddy’s Fashion Mart?

    Adriane (09d132)

  81. Levi – I asked for a link on that Bush alcoholism admission you mentioned. When are you going to produce it, cupcake?

    Which mega influential conservative media sources have got you worried now Levi? Are they the ones that control ABC, CBS and NBC or major metropolitan dailies. Can you be specific or is your dog telling you these things?

    Seriously, Levi, I’m getting worried for you.

    daleyrocks (906622)

  82. That’s the way media works. For a week, if you flipped to any of the news channels any time during the day, they’d be talking about Wright and Obama, and they’d be showing the Wright clips, and they’d scrawl suggestive banners. Regardless of whether or not any of it is true or has any relevant bearing on, well, anything, that kind of repitition is going to have an immediate, measurable effect on polling.

    And yes, most of the mainstream media did like his speech, but the negative stuff always sticks more than the positive. And more people are likely to have seen a 30 second clip versus a 30 minute speech.

    Levi (76ef55)

  83. keeping the government out of private lives

    Stop clutching your pearls right now Levi. That is not Bush in your private life. Can you name more than one person whose private life has been judicially determined to have been illegally tampered with by the Bush administration war on terror if that is what you are talking about? This is pure liberal bed wetting and pillow biting. The politics of fear, catch the fever!

    daleyrocks (906622)

  84. daley,

    Wikipedia

    Levi (76ef55)

  85. Levi #82,

    The “negative stuff” was Wright’s own statements, not media spin. It’s hard to see how that’s an issue of truth or falsity, so I assume your point is that it’s unfair to tar Obama with what Wright said.

    The problem is that it’s Obama’s own fault that happened. All Obama had to do was disavow Wright as well as his statements. He didn’t, so the tar stuck.

    DRJ (a431ca)

  86. I’m talking about issues like abortion and gay marriage more than I am the warrantless wire-tapping, although I do believe that’s a terrible intrusion as well. And of course no one can prove anything, the Bush administration keeps classified all the information about who they’ve spied on. But let’s not start in on yet another topic, we’ve got enough shit going on already.

    Levi (76ef55)

  87. Levi – The link does say what you claimed it said, as I thought.

    ” Although Bush states that he was not an alcoholic, he has acknowledged that he was “drinking too much”,…………..”

    You are lying once more.

    daleyrocks (906622)

  88. Levi – You are full of shit. Gay marriage has benn voted down in every state on which it has been on the ballot. You cannot pin that on Bush. Nothing has changed on abortion except late term abortions.

    Why do you continue to lie?

    daleyrocks (906622)

  89. The “negative stuff” was Wright’s own statements, not media spin. It’s hard to see how that’s an issue of truth or falsity, so I assume your point is that it’s unfair to tar Obama with what Wright said.

    Well, this is a pretty well recognized rule of politics, that negative stuff sticks more than positive stuff… that’s all I meant, I’m not sure what you’re taking issue with.

    The problem is that it’s Obama’s own fault that happened. All Obama had to do was disavow Wright as well as his statements. He didn’t, so the tar stuck.

    He did disavow the statements, but what does disavowing the man mean? He has to say that he hates him, that he’ll never talk to him again? He’s gotta call him a dickhead, or what?

    Levi (76ef55)

  90. Why do you continue to lie?

    Because it’s all he’s got?

    Oh, wait… Was that supposed to be a rhetorical question?

    Scott Jacobs (d3a6ec)

  91. Levi – The link does say what you claimed it said, as I thought.

    ” Although Bush states that he was not an alcoholic, he has acknowledged that he was “drinking too much”,…………..”

    You are lying once more.

    If you read a little bit more, it says that George couldn’t remember a day when he hadn’t had a drink all the way back to high school.

    If you can’t remember a day when you haven’t had a drink for more than 2 decades, you’re an alcoholic, by the textbook definition of the word, whether you admit it to yourself or not.

    Levi – You are full of shit. Gay marriage has benn voted down in every state on which it has been on the ballot. You cannot pin that on Bush. Nothing has changed on abortion except late term abortions.

    Why do you continue to lie?

    But the positions he holds on those issues is intrusive. If he had his way, gay marriage would be banned in the Constitution and abortion would be illegal, and those are unconservative, government-telling-people-what-to-do-and-how-to-live positions.

    I’m not lying, you can’t fucking read.

    Levi (76ef55)

  92. Levi, thanks for reminding us that President Bush had the character to recognize his situation, his problem, his alcoholism, if you want, and face it straight up, going cold turkey to stop drinking.

    As opposed to Obama, who sat in a church where the teachings are racist and bigoted, and only decided there was a problem when it became a problem for his presidential campaign.

    Thanks again…

    reff (59b2ad)

  93. “If you can’t remember a day when you haven’t had a drink for more than 2 decades, you’re an alcoholic, by the textbook definition of the word, whether you admit it to yourself or not.”

    Levi – You said by his own admission, not your definition. Two, you don’t know what you’re talking about.

    Which democrat candidates for president supported gay marriage Levi? Your argument there doesn’t work Mr. Success.

    daleyrocks (906622)

  94. paul – exactly. Whose definitions? Without a genetic excuse for behavior, it becomes what? Cultural, political, etc. It means people are free to adapt and change.

    I disagree with retire05, though, no one culture can explain any individual’s success or failure. That’s up to the individual.

    Apogee (366e8b)

  95. reff,

    Does Obama earn any character points from you for never becoming an alcoholic and habitual drunk driver in the first place? I’m certainly willing to give kudos to anybody that overcomes drug addiction, but I give more for not getting addicted in the first place.

    And again, you don’t know what was said in that church for the past 20 years. You’ve got assumptions based on a total of 2 minutes of sound bites. You really ought to start providing links to video of Wright’s crazed, racist bigotry from 1995 if you’re going to keep claiming that that’s an unassailable fact.

    Levi (76ef55)

  96. But the positions he holds on those issues is intrusive. If he had his way, gay marriage would be banned in the Constitution and abortion would be illegal, and those are unconservative, government-telling-people-what-to-do-and-how-to-live positions.

    I’m not lying, you can’t fucking read.

    Levi you’re really just losing it now. A substantial majority of the country is against gay marriage at least for the time being. Deal with it. A lot of people think Roe v. Wade is bad law and decision should revert to the states. Do you have a problem with that, Levi? Does that scare you? Do you need judges to bypass the will of the people to get your goals as they did in Massachusetts to enable gay marriage? I think the fundamental fact Levi is that you are afraid the ideas you support will not stand up to voter scrutiny.

    It must suck to be you and live a life of lies.

    daleyrocks (906622)

  97. wow, another late nite watching levi get his ass handed to him! 2 nites in a row!

    chas (68d8c2)

  98. “If you can’t remember a day when you haven’t had a drink for more than 2 decades, you’re an alcoholic, by the textbook definition of the word, whether you admit it to yourself or not.”

    Levi – You said by his own admission, not your definition. Two, you don’t know what you’re talking about.

    He admitted to drinking every single day for over 20 years. That’s an admission that you’re an alcoholic, whether or not you embrace the label.

    Not my definition, anyways. You can drink substantially less than a drink a day and be considered an alcoholic. If anything, Bush was an extreme alcoholic.

    Which democrat candidates for president supported gay marriage Levi? Your argument there doesn’t work Mr. Success.

    They don’t, which is too bad. They should. But we’re talking about the unconservativsm of George Bush here, anyways. And supporting a constitutional amendment against gay marriage is about as unconservative as you can get. What Bush calls ‘social conservatism,’ I call theocracy.

    Levi (76ef55)

  99. Levi – You need to put the word “alleged” in front of alcoholic if you use it in connection with Bush. You have no proof. You have some wikipedia entry ginned up bt lefties, you have articles by hereditary liars such as Boehlert. You’ve got speculation. You have no confirmation from Bush. Plus, from the way you talk about addiction, you know nothing about it.

    daleyrocks (906622)

  100. Levi you’re really just losing it now. A substantial majority of the country is against gay marriage at least for the time being. Deal with it. A lot of people think Roe v. Wade is bad law and decision should revert to the states. Do you have a problem with that, Levi? Does that scare you? Do you need judges to bypass the will of the people to get your goals as they did in Massachusetts to enable gay marriage? I think the fundamental fact Levi is that you are afraid the ideas you support will not stand up to voter scrutiny.

    We’re not talking about gay marriage, you fucking dolt. I’m outlining for you all the ways that George Bush has abandoned actual conservatism, and his support of a gay marriage ban is among them. Learn how to follow along in a conversation, jesus fucking christ.

    Levi (76ef55)

  101. Levi, AS an alcoholic (recovering, thank God), I can tell you with absolute certainty…

    You have no fucking clue what the fuck you’re talking about. At all. Period.

    Scott Jacobs (d3a6ec)

  102. We’re not talking about gay marriage, you fucking dolt.

    Really?

    Because 80 minutes before…

    If he had his way, gay marriage would be banned

    Hmmmm…

    If we aren’t talking about Gay Marriage…

    Why the fuck did you bring it up, you thundering moron??

    Scott Jacobs (d3a6ec)

  103. Levi,

    I don’t know if George Bush was an alcoholic but I do remember what the laws were like 30-40 years ago regarding drinking and driving. It wasn’t a per se crime to drink and drive in those days, and it’s only become a crime provided your BAC exceeds certain limits. Bush apparently stopped drinking completely since around the time drinking and driving was criminalized.

    To condemn Bush for drinking and driving years ago, at a time when it wasn’t universally illegal, is as unfair as it would be to condemn Obama for smoking now because 20+ years in the future it may become illegal to smoke.

    DRJ (a431ca)

  104. Levi – You need to put the word “alleged” in front of alcoholic if you use it in connection with Bush. You have no proof. You have some wikipedia entry ginned up bt lefties, you have articles by hereditary liars such as Boehlert. You’ve got speculation. You have no confirmation from Bush. Plus, from the way you talk about addiction, you know nothing about it.

    No confirmation from Bush? He’s talked openly about his drinking, and has willingly revealed the extent to which it affected himself, his family, and his career. He doesn’t want to call himself an alcoholic, that’s fucking fine, that doesn’t change the fact that he was a fucking alcoholic. If people had to admit that they were alcoholics, there wouldn’t be any.

    But to make you happy, I’ll drop ‘alcoholic’ and go with ‘convicted drunk driver’ which is far worse, and immune to your all of your bullshit whining about the left-leaning slant of Wikipedia.

    Levi (76ef55)

  105. If people had to admit that they were alcoholics, there wouldn’t be any.

    Actually, you fucking retard, that’s exactly how it works.

    Get a fucking brain if you want to talk about something I am INTIMATELY familiar with. You do NOT decide if someone else is an alcoholic. You work with them to see if they might realize they are, but just because you call someone one, doesn’t make it so.

    So why don’t you go fuck yourself, asshole.

    Scott Jacobs (d3a6ec)

  106. Hey, let’s go back to talking about something calm … like race.

    DRJ (a431ca)

  107. Levi, AS an alcoholic (recovering, thank God), I can tell you with absolute certainty…

    You have no fucking clue what the fuck you’re talking about. At all. Period.

    How do you know I’m not a current alcoholic? I think that would trump your bullshit status as a recovering alcoholic.

    How fucking relevant is that anyways? George Bush was still an alcoholic.

    Levi (76ef55)

  108. We’re not talking about gay marriage, you fucking dolt.

    Really?

    Because 80 minutes before…

    If he had his way, gay marriage would be banned

    Hmmmm…

    If we aren’t talking about Gay Marriage…

    Why the fuck did you bring it up, you thundering moron??

    We aren’t talking about gay marriage, and I didn’t bring it up as an issue to be discussed.

    I was listing the many ways that George Bush has abandoned conservatism, and I listed gay marriage as one of those things.

    No one has argued that banning gay marriage isn’t an intrusion into gay people’s lives, and that’s all I’m trying to fucking talk about. The unconservatism of opposing gay marriage. I’m not talking about the actual issue of gay marriage and how it gets voted down or whatever, only how Bush’s position on it illustrates, among a number of other things, his total abandonment of conservatism.

    This is quickly going the way of that bracketing bullshit from the other night, do you morons fucking understand yet or do you wanna keep going off on these uninteresting, time-wasting tangents?

    Levi (76ef55)

  109. this is a perfect example of liberals trying to decide what is part of the conservative movement. when did allowing gays to marry become part of the conservative agenda?

    chas (68d8c2)

  110. George Bush was still an alcoholic.

    You have to be trying. There’s no way you can naturally, without effort, be this damned stupid…

    How do you know I’m not a current alcoholic? I think that would trump your bullshit status as a recovering alcoholic.

    Well, considering how utterly and completely fucking wrong you are concerning the topic, I find it rather unlikely your either an alcoholic “out in the world” or one “Within the 4 walls”.

    A friend of Bill’s, you ain’t.

    Bush might have been a heavy drinker. Maybe even a problem drinker. But the only person who can say that Bush the Younger is an Alcoholic is Bush the Younger. Hate to break it to you, what with you thinking you know shit from shine-ola

    Scott Jacobs (d3a6ec)

  111. Levi – You started off the other night saying Bush by his own admission was an alcoholic. I asked for a link. You can’t produce one. Now you claim it’s because you label him as an alcoholic that his is one.

    Again, why do you keep lying. I suggest that once you are caught in one of your lies, you drop it from your repetoire.

    By the way, when did Obama stop using drugs. I’m not clear on that, are you?

    daleyrocks (906622)

  112. Levi are you Phil?

    daleyrocks (906622)

  113. I don’t know if George Bush was an alcoholic but I do remember what the laws were like 30-40 years ago regarding drinking and driving. It wasn’t a per se crime to drink and drive in those days, and it’s only become a crime provided your BAC exceeds certain limits. Bush apparently stopped drinking completely since around the time drinking and driving was criminalized.

    To condemn Bush for drinking and driving years ago, at a time when it wasn’t universally illegal, is as unfair as it would be to condemn Obama for smoking now because 20+ years in the future it may become illegal to smoke.

    Even back then, it was a crime, and yes, George Bush was convicted of it.

    And, I can’t believe I have to explain this to you, but it’s absolutely fair to condemn George Bush, simply because he’s a drunk driver. Being a drunk driver isn’t bad because it means you committed a crime, being a drunk driver is bad because you become a mindless, speeding, 4-ton killing machine. You’re a threat to everyone around you. And even if the laws weren’t as tough back then, everyone still knew that operating machinery under the influence was a pretty stupid fucking thing to do. Well, everyone except for George Bush, apparently. That son of a bitch is lucky he didn’t kill somebody.

    But yeah, youthful transgressions, right?

    Levi (76ef55)

  114. Levi – When did Obama stop using drugs?

    daleyrocks (906622)

  115. Let me rephrase that.

    Levi – When did Obama stop using illegal drugs?

    daleyrocks (906622)

  116. Levi – Do I have to remind to that George Bush is not running for reelection this year? The most stupid president (who had a higher GPA than both Gore and Kerry at Yale) ever already beat the democrats twice, so he’s done. Can you focus on the present and the unanswered questions about Obama and his curious circle of friends and advisers.

    daleyrocks (906622)

  117. Bush might have been a heavy drinker. Maybe even a problem drinker. But the only person who can say that Bush the Younger is an Alcoholic is Bush the Younger. Hate to break it to you, what with you thinking you know shit from shine-ola

    Alcoholism is a clinically diagnosable condition that can and usually needs to be detected by people other than the alcoholic. Part of the problem of addicts is that sometimes people don’t know or don’t want to admit they have a problem, that they’re addicts, or alcoholics. If a ‘heroin user’ doesn’t want to call himself a ‘heroin addict,’ does that mean he’s not addicted to heroin?

    It’s not like it’s some internal relevation you have to have with yourself, it’s a medical problem, that people can diagnose. And Bush’s statements on his drinking, how it affected his family and how frequently he used the stuff, should undoubtedly convince anybody that yes, Bush was an alcoholic.

    But this is some semantics bullshit again and it totally doesn’t fucking matter. You guys just seize on the word ‘alcoholic’ so you don’t have to address my point, that George Bush’s drinking proves he didn’t have the best judgment. For 20 years.

    So can I call him a ‘heavy drinker?’ Is that acceptable to the word police? I think that actually sounds even more sinister than alcoholic.

    Levi (76ef55)

  118. Let me rephrase that.

    Levi – When did Obama stop using illegal drugs?

    In his youth. Like, his real youth. Where you could chalk it up to ‘youthful transgressions’ and it would be accurate. Then he embarked on a career about a million times more accomplished than Bush had at Obama’s age.

    Levi (76ef55)

  119. Levi – You got several alcoholics and/or addicts participating in this thread. Unless you are one yourself or a medical professional, your unbelievable arrogance in attempting to describe the disease, its symptoms and its diagnosis is incredibly offensive, but then again its part and parcel with your behavior on this blog. You have no regard for the opinion of others.

    So when did Obama stop using illegal drugs?

    daleyrocks (906622)

  120. In his youth. Like, his real youth.

    What the fuck does that mean? Do you have a citation?

    Was he still a recreational crack smoker after college? Did he smoke weed after law school?

    Unanswered questions my man.

    daleyrocks (906622)

  121. Levi – Do I have to remind to that George Bush is not running for reelection this year? The most stupid president (who had a higher GPA than both Gore and Kerry at Yale) ever already beat the democrats twice, so he’s done. Can you focus on the present and the unanswered questions about Obama and his curious circle of friends and advisers.

    This is a story about hypocrisy and double standards for me. So no, I don’t want to take part in your rampant speculation and racist panic about who Obama associates with. I’d rather talk about why Bush’s drug abuse and drunk driving wasn’t worth scrutinizing in 2000, when something that Obama heard in church is. I’d rather talk about why all sorts of white pastors with deep, long-standing connections to the G.O.P. and it’s officials can say all kinds of un-American, crazy, bigotted shit and not be condemned as un-American, crazy, bigots, when based on a few seconds of videotape, Reverend Wright can be.

    I want to talk about these hypocrisies, these double standards, that appear to be applied in these cases along racial lines. Because examining the latent racism of one of America’s political factions is infinitely more interesting, and more important, than whatever the fuck happened in a church over the past two decades.

    Levi (76ef55)

  122. Levi – You got several alcoholics and/or addicts participating in this thread. Unless you are one yourself or a medical professional, your unbelievable arrogance in attempting to describe the disease, its symptoms and its diagnosis is incredibly offensive, but then again its part and parcel with your behavior on this blog. You have no regard for the opinion of others.

    I’m not impressed. A bunch of you say you’re alcoholics, big fucking deal. I have no reason to not believe you, but that doesn’t mean I don’t know anything about it. Nothing I’ve said about it has been wrong, it’s not like addiction is some impossible-to-understand, abstract idea like calculus, it’s a fairly simple concept to understand. And you don’t necessarily have to experience something to talk about it.

    I’m now officially refering to him as a ‘convicted drunk driver and alcohol abuser’ now, anyways. Not because I don’t think he wasn’t an alcoholic, but only so you morons won’t have your bullshit little semantic argument to obsess over.

    Levi (76ef55)

  123. Then he embarked on a career about a million times more accomplished than Bush had at Obama’s age.

    whats he done? tell us his legislative accomplishments? what about his accomplishments as a lawyer? did he even practice law? he wasnt a professor he was really sort of a guest lecturer wasnt he?. all obama is is a tanned tony robbins.

    chas (68d8c2)

  124. What the fuck does that mean? Do you have a citation?

    Was he still a recreational crack smoker after college? Did he smoke weed after law school?

    Unanswered questions my man.

    Who gives a fuck? He never let it take a hold of him. Everyone can experiment, people probably should experiment. What is key here is that Obama chose to move past drugs and get on with his life, Bush chose to squander all of his advantages and wallow in irresponsible abuse. For 20 years.

    Levi (76ef55)

  125. whats he done? tell us his legislative accomplishments? what about his accomplishments as a lawyer? did he even practice law? he wasnt a professor he was really sort of a guest lecturer wasnt he?. all obama is is a tanned tony robbins.

    Don’t be lazy and go look at the entry about him on Wikipedia. How fucking hard is that to do? Here’s the fucking link, even. All that shit sounds pretty good to me.

    That ‘he hasn’t done anything’ shit is so fucking tired.

    Levi (76ef55)

  126. not much there, he gives speeches and writes books. yep, tony robbins w/ a tan.

    chas (68d8c2)

  127. Daleyrocks thanks for posting the Court of Appeals’ Decision but the lead in very important to my discussion on racism that includes inequality in the courts. The decision that my cases would not be recorder in the Federal Reporter hid the unjust ruling from ordinary review. The heading: THIS SUMMARY ORDER WILL NOT BE PUBLISHED IN THE FEDERAL REPORTER AND MAY NOT BE CITED AS PRECEDENTIAL AUTHORITY TO THIS OR ANY OTHER COURT, BUT MAY BE CALLED TO THE ATTENTION OF THIS OR ANY OTHER COURT IN A SUBSEQUENT STAGE OF THIS CASE, IN A RELATED CASE, OR IN ANY CASE FOR PURPOSES OF COLLATERAL ESTOPPEL OR RES JUDICATA.

    Yes my case and appeal would have been easier and possibly a financial blessing for me if I had been represented by an attorney. Even without an attorney I should have survived summary judgment as a matter of law. I know that I am not an attorney (this is to stop that argument) but the US Supreme Court in the landmark cases of : Anderson v Libby Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 255 (1986) and Reeves v Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc 530 U.S. 133 (2000)

    Anderson v Libby Lobby, Inc. states “moreover and in an action that turns on the intent of a party – as Title VII actions do – and wherein a plaintiff proceeds without the assistance of counsel, this Court must be especially mindful of its duty to believe all evidence submitted by the nonmovant and to draw “all justifiable inferences in her favor” Anderson, at 255 “Credibility determinations, the weighing of the evidence, and the drawing of legitimate inferences from the facts are jury functions, not those of a judge.” Anderson v Libby Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 255 (1986.

    The United States Supreme Court in Reeves v Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc 530 U.S. 133 (2000) stated: “In appropriate circumstances, the trier of fact can reasonably infer from the falsity of the explanation that the employer is dissembling to cover up a discriminatory purpose. See, e.g., Wright v West, 505 U.S. 277, 296. Moreover, once the employer’s justification has been eliminated, discrimination may well be the most likely alternative explanation, especially since the employer is in the best position to put forth the actual reason for its decision. Cf. Furnco Constr. Corp. v. Waters, 438 U.S. 567. 577.

    Supreme Court Justice Ginsburg in her concurring opinion in Reeves, 530 U.S. 133 (2000) stated “The Court holds that an employment discrimination plaintiff may survive a summary judgment motion as a matter of law by submitting two categories of evidence: first, evidence establishing a “prima facie case” as that term is used in McDonnell Douglas Corp. v Green 411 U.S. 792, 802, (1973); and second, evidence from which a rational fact finder could conclude that the employer’ proffered explanation for its actions was false.”

    Vermont Neighbor – I love politics and I am not bitter. In fact I am living a life of purpose at this time. “I was victorious in this matter because through this trial and test God’s purpose for my life was revealed to me. My memoir/book is the first step in fulfilling my divine purpose. My divine purpose is shed light on employment discrimination in America. I believe that this light will reveal that Congress needs to investigate, address and/or correct the fact that discrimination and retaliation cases are being improperly dismissed by the misuse of summary judgment motions. After investigating this matter Congress should amend the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Amending the Act again would prevent one judge from having the absolute power to grant summary judgment motions that dismiss discrimination and retaliation cases. This action is needed because The New York State Attorney General’s Office attorney’s actions were improper in my case. One can only imagine that other law firms and attorneys are also engaging in questionable methods to deny other victims of discrimination and retaliation their day in court.” “Case of Racial Discrimination and Retaliation Real or Imagine.”

    Racism and/or race relations in America are being used to derail the Presidential candidacy of Senator Obama. I believe that nothing happens in this world by chance. It is a divine moment that Senator Obama is just months away from being a President for all Americans. It is also a divine moment for me because I have written and published a book for just this time in our history. ” Good Morning All!!!

    Vera Richardson (be9eca)

  128. I’d rather talk about why all sorts of white pastors with deep, long-standing connections to the G.O.P. and it’s officials can say all kinds of un-American, crazy, bigotted shit and not be condemned as un-American, crazy, bigots, when based on a few seconds of videotape, Reverend Wright can be.

    Weak, Levi. Really, really weak. And if you can’t understand the difference between any number of preachers and their GOP ties and Obama’s deep, personal, longstanding ties with a racist like Wright, then you’re too stupid to talk to.

    You also seem to have missed the fact that those people you refer to get blasted for saying such things, by people on the right.

    Pablo (99243e)

  129. If he had his way, gay marriage would be banned in the Constitution and abortion would be illegal, and those are unconservative, government-telling-people-what-to-do-and-how-to-live positions.

    So then, by Levi’s view of conservatism, those who support laws against murder are “unconservative” because those laws tell people what to do.

    Brilliant!

    Pablo (99243e)

  130. Vera – You don’t really address my question. If attorneys had seen a glimmer of your case succeeding, they might have been willing to take it on a contingency basis. Apparently they didn’t. Why not?

    The lead in info is not relevant as to why your case was again rejected on summary judgement.

    daleyrocks (906622)

  131. Great Levi, right now we’ve got the illegal drug using Obama who hasn’t even secured his own party’s nomination being compared to a sober outgoing President? Why? Who knows? Liberalism is a mental disease. You keep proving it with each comment.

    daleyrocks (906622)

  132. Levi:

    I was listing the many ways that George Bush has abandoned conservatism, and I listed gay marriage as one of those things.

    Right, ‘cuz we all know all real conservatives all support redefining marriage to include gays, polygamists, or any other voluntary unions of one or more adults, while only knee-jerk liberals want to preserve its traditional definition. That’s why it took a liberal like Clinton would sign something like the Defense of Marriage Act. We all expected that from him, but were shocked, shocked, when President Bush betrayed the Real Conservative (TM) cause by signing … um … nothing?

    I know you people don’t like me bringing up ol’ George Bush, but I’m going to anyway. Because everytime [sic] one of you Bush voters starts complaining about Obama’s lack of ‘judgement [sic], experience, and character’ because he didn’t stand up in the middle of church and start refuting Wright point-by-point for racist comments that you are only able to assume were being said over the past 20 years, I’m left wondering how Bush’s 20 year run of wreckless [sic] alcohol abuse and his propensity for endangering people’s lives for getting fucked up and driving around escaped your deeply inquisitive, seriously scrutinizing eyes.

    Not sure that is more pathetic, Levi, your ideas or your spelling of your ideas. Of all the digs on GWB’s past drinking problem, complaining of the fact that it never resulted in a wreck (the only plausible meaning of “wreckless”) is probably the most bizarre.

    More importantly, when crafting this semi-clever 20-year analogy, did it occur to you to consider which 20 year period we are talking about in relation to each candidate? Bush’s irresponsible period ended in 1986, by his own initiative. If he had run in 1984, then the fact that he was behaving irresponsibly, and had been for the previous ~20 years, would have easily killed his candidacy, as would the fact that he was a neophyte with almost no political experience at the time – two traits that are fatal to any Republican presidential candidate but which appear to be A.O.K. by Democrats, who decided early on in the primary season that it was only a question of which inexperienced junior Senator they would nominate.

    Conversely, suppose that back in his pre-political days, Obama had attended his racist church for 20 years before finally leaving in disgust. Fourteen years later, he finally gets around to running for President. In that case, his past association with a hate church would be a minor footnote, if indeed it was discussed at all. It certainly wouldn’t generate the level of attention that Bush’s past drinking did.

    Even at this late date, I suspect that most people would be satisfied if Obama quit the church now, even though it would be obvious he was doing the right thing only in response to political pressure rather than his own initiative. Imagine how Dubya would have fared if he had gone on drinking right into the 2000 primary, and then reluctantly gave up drinking after McCain had won a few too many primaries, but not before giving a folksy, down home speech about how alcohol can do bad things sometimes, but dammit, he’d sooner disown his grandmother than give up his dear Old Grand Dad.

    Last and least, it’s “anyway,” not “anyways.” Your ideas sound stupid enough when expressed in plain English. No need to stupidify them further by doing to the English language what the CIA did to Abu Zubaydah, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri.

    Xrlq (62cad4)

  133. Levi, #95…

    No, Levi, he doesn’t, because the church he joined has a philosophy, a creed, a mission statement that has been there for much longer than Obama’s attendance….

    So, Obama’s choice, to join a church that believes that the white man is the enemy, that God must be for one race over another, means that Obama walked into that church with eyes wide open…

    I don’t need twenty second links when I have the written statement posted on the church wall….

    I’ve never expected Obama to start an argument in church, or said that he should have counseled the pastor….I don’t necessary want that confrontation…

    He could have simply walked out….and, if he had done that cold turkey about 14 years ago….as someone else said here, it wouldn’t even have registered a blip on the radar….

    He only walked when he learned it would hurt his chances to be President….President Bush walked out of his alcohol abuse voluntarily long before he had any ambitions about being President….

    reff (59b2ad)

  134. Vera, I’m with JD, based on your postings it sounds like the reason you couldn’t get an attorney to take your case on contingency is that you had a crappy case from the start. Strong or even semi-strong cases, with a decent probability of success, can be pretty lucrative due to Section 1983. Perhaps this part of your comment gives away why no lawyer worth his salt would touch your case with a ten-foot pole:

    I filed four motions asking the 80-year-old Judge assigned to my case to appoint a lawyer to represent me. The main argument for my request for appointment of counsel was that I was on Social Security Disability for clinical work-related depression. The Judge denied all four of my motions.

    What the hell other result did you expect? Unless you are on the wrong end of a criminal complaint, there is no right to a taxpayer-funded attorney.

    Therefore, I was forced to present my case without an attorney.

    Or to seek out an attorney on your own like everyone else – if you could find one who thought you had a decent shot at prevailing. Did you?

    My confidence stemmed from a decision issued by United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. In Cynthia Richardson v. New York State Department of Corrections, 180 F.3d426 (2nd Cir. 1999, the court ruled: While a jury may find that Richardson has not suffered a materially adverse change in the terms and conditions of her employment, or that the incidents in question were not connected to plaintiff’s litigation, Richardson’s allegations clearly state a prima facie claim of retaliatory harassment – one that DOCS, by its silence, has failed to rebut. Accordingly, DOCS’s motion for summary judgment should not have been granted, and we reverse the district court’s dismissal of this claim.

    Right, ‘cuz we all know that if someone else once prevailed in an earlier dismissal of a retaliation case, that must mean you are entitled to prevail in yours, as well. Especially if the other plaintiff’s name was also Richardson?

    My confidence was also based on my belief that all cases appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit were published in the Federal Reporter. I told family and friends that this case had to be reverse and remanded back to the district court because The Second Circuit Court of Appeals couldn’t justify not overturning Elfvin’s clearly erroneous ruling once the case was published in the Federal Reporter.

    Right, ‘cuz we all know that whenever decisions are published, they end up favoring the plaintiff.

    Today The Supreme Court of the United States of America issued an order that upheld the Second Circuit Court of Appeals decision not to reverse the district court summary judgment order. I understood the reality that The Supreme Court of the United States of America reviews less than 100 of the approximately 8,000 cases filed with the Court each year. I didn’t understand the fact that my case wasn’t selected as one of the cases for review.

    Right, ‘cuz everything is about meeeeeee. Now on to the one reason no sane lawyer would have considered taking your case:

    God promised me at the beginning of my Pro-Se case that I would be victorious is this matter. I believed God’s promise because with God nothing is impossible.

    If you think God told you anything about the merits of your case, that leaves only two possibilities:

    1. You are right.
    2. You are delusional.

    If #1 were the correct answer, you wouldn’t have needed a lawyer to help you win your case. That leaves #2. What lawyer wants to deal with a client who has a crappy case, but who is personally convinced God will guarantee victory, anyway?

    I no longer had a job or the hope of being victories in my lawsuit. I felt like a complete failure.”

    Yeah, that’s kinda how I felt too last year when I lost my job for reasons infinitely stupider than you losing yours. So I dealt with those feelings by making a federal case out of it getting another job. You should try that, too.

    It is my belief that Senator Clinton didn’t respond to my e-mails because of her ambition to become President Hillary Clinton. She did not want to upset the “establishment” of New York State that included her ex-super delegate Governor Spitzer.

    Wow, that’s amazing. Who knew in 2002 that Spitzer would be elected governor of New York, let alone become the one superdelegate by which Clinton’s narrow nomination would be decided? I sure didn’t know that myself, and I doubt Clinton or Spitzer did, but then again, none of us had your special pipeline to God.

    Xrlq (62cad4)

  135. Then Levi wants to have a discussion on race, and his dream, Obama, has a mentor, a spiritual advisor, a man he goes/went to every time he made an important political decision (Obama’s words, not mine)…

    A pastor of a church whose mission statement (I’m paraphrasing now) includes the ideal that God must be for the Black Man and against the White Man…

    And, of course, after 20 years of supporting that church and that belief system, Obama wants to lead that discussion….that I, meaning me, am a typical white man, one who must be racist in some form….

    Bullshit….

    reff (59b2ad)

  136. Well, Happy Easter everyone!
    I turn my back to hide a few eggs and hit the beach for sunrise service only to find Levi and Vera off on their own self-serving hijacking crusades.
    Lets get back to the issue at hand and let these two pirates be ignored! Yeeeeeesh

    paul from fl (47918a)

  137. Not sure that is more pathetic, Levi, your ideas or your spelling of your ideas. Of all the digs on GWB’s past drinking problem, complaining of the fact that it never resulted in a wreck (the only plausible meaning of “wreckless”) is probably the most bizarre.

    This is a political debate, not a fucking spelling bee. I misspelled some shit and I’ll misspell some more shit. It was fucking two in the morning and I was typing as fast as I could. There weren’t any red squiggly lines, that’s all the proofreading I was doing.

    And honestly, if someone is going to go the lame-ass fucking cop-out route of bitching about someone’s grammar and spelling, you’d think they’d get their posts 100%, absolutely perfect, especially the specific part where they’re doing the actual scolding/insulting. But you didn’t. Read that first sentence of yours and tell me how that makes any sense, I MEAN WHAT ARE YOU A BIG DUMB-DUMB? YOU OBVIOUSLY DIDN’T JUST SLIP UP, THIS IS PROOF-POSITIVE THAT YOU ARE STUPID AND I CAN IGNORE YOU!!!

    I’m gonna come back after skiing today and respond to the rest of your bullshit, which is infinitely more cogent than what the rest of these retards seem capable of, but is still bullshit.

    Levi (76ef55)

  138. Well, so much for Levi being “civil and non-profane”.

    nk (34c5da)

  139. It just took a little while for him to slip into default.

    The thundering moron…

    Scott Jacobs (d3a6ec)

  140. Read that first sentence of yours and tell me how that makes any sense,

    You mean this, right?

    Right, ‘cuz we all know all real conservatives all support redefining marriage to include gays, polygamists, or any other voluntary unions of one or more adults, while only knee-jerk liberals want to preserve its traditional definition.

    Little thing called sarcasm, Levi. I know, it gets lost on the obtuse, which explains you not catching it. At least you have an excuse for not noticing that you were being scornfully paraphrased. It’s not one I’d be proud of, but it is the one you have.

    Pablo (99243e)

  141. The thundering moron…

    Ah ha! ‘TARD OF THUNDER!

    Back on topic, have you seen any of the Trinity Easter sermon? It seem that Wright is just like Christ and analyzing Wright’s speech is just like nailing Jesus to the cross. Except that it’s somehow “lynching”. I hate when metaphors collide.

    Pablo (99243e)

  142. I think the ‘Tard of Thunder (nice moniker to distinguish him from the other Levi, also a liberal but infinitely smarter than this one, and with an age-related excuse to boot) was referring to the first sentence of mine that he/she/it quoted, wherein I inadvertently substituted the word “that” for “which.” Which, of course, is totally indistinguishable from adding an initial w to the word reckless, which he must have done at least twice (and added to his dictionary the last time) if it didn’t turn up a squiggly line. For some odd reason, my dictionary doesn’t render a squiggly line for “anyways,” so perhaps the ‘Tard of Thunder is a bit more influential than I thought.

    Xrlq (62cad4)

  143. “I think Chief Justice John Roberts was right when he said “The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.” However, Barack Obama, Jeremiah Wright, and their supporters apparently believe that approach is too simplistic.”

    Then again, the way to stop war is to stop fighting.

    stef (d10c75)

  144. Correction: the way to stop war is for the aggressor to stop fighting.

    Xrlq (62cad4)

  145. “Correction: the way to stop war is for the aggressor to stop fighting.”

    I think either side stopping will pretty much end it.

    stef (713777)

  146. “Correction: the way to stop war is for the aggressor to stop fighting.”

    works either way.

    stef (8a983a)

  147. No, it doesn’t, unless your definition of “stop war” is “accept that the war won’t stop, end my country’s participation in it.” And as incidents like Pearl Harbor and 9-11 show, even that option doesn’t always work.

    Xrlq (62cad4)

  148. Racist bastards.

    Leviticus – I will never shorten your name to Levi again. Evah.

    JD (5f0e11)

  149. Actually, it can work that way, depending on who you consider the aggressor. If we’re talking about Iraq, we’d stop fighting tomorrow if al Qaeda and the insurgents stopped fighting today. But if we stopped fighting tomorrow, they’d redouble their efforts. Who is the aggressor? Well, that depends on who you ask, I suppose. But there’s an even better way to stop a war: Win it.

    Pablo (99243e)

  150. Xrlq – Though I am in complete agreement, you wer agreeing with daleyrocks.

    Levi – You have managed to make Phil seem reasonable, and stef coherent. Well done.

    JD (5f0e11)

  151. “No, it doesn’t, unless your definition of “stop war” is “accept that the war won’t stop, end my country’s participation in it.” ”

    You’re right. Maybe things aren’t so simple.

    stef (2a5a56)

  152. A lind to instaputz for a discussion on race, stef? Let’s save everyone the effort and pain of clicking on that link. Rethuglikkkans and thecons are teh racists 111!!!!!!eleventy!!!!one

    JD (5f0e11)

  153. Levi:

    Calm down.

    Patterico (4bda0b)

  154. So about an hour ago, I’m putting my groceries in my car at the Jewel parking lot and a typical black person pulls up and parks next to me. In typical black person fashion he smiles at me and says, “Happy Easter”. As a typical white person I tip my hat and “Thank you. And Happy Easter to you.”

    Which reminds me: Happy Easter, all you typical persons!

    nk (34c5da)

  155. nk – Happy Easter to you, you typical whitey. Racist 😉

    JD (5f0e11)

  156. It is amusing to hear Obama’s characterization of “typical white women” as he threw his white grandmother under the bus.

    A white woman alarmed at being followed by a black man in today’s America??? You must be kidding. Nowadays she’d probably turn around and chase lustfully after the hapless black guy! Just look at all the inbred white women fainting, swooning, and having ecstatic orgasms at Obama rallies – just at the flash of his toothy grin, or the sound of his voice!

    It seems that after centuries of clanish inbreeding, sixty years of Civil Rights, Affirmative Action, “political correctness” run amok, societal indoctrination at every level – from schools, to TV programs (nothing but black sit-coms), commercials (with the inevitable black male and white woman), to movies (black Vikings, black Robin Hoods and other historical absurdities), to Rap music and Hip Hop – and, frankly, not color-blindness, but outright favoritism to blacks and their “Hood” subculture, most white American women have not only lost their “racist” inhibitions to interbreed with blacks, but actually have an evolutionary inbred libido (to expand their gene pools I guess) to pant heavily after anything black and run a “Jungle Fever”… like Obama’s mommy did to his “racist” grandmother’s chagrin.

    As a matter of fact, nowadays some white women even boast they will not pair up if not with a black man – as a white girl fellow highschool student told my horrified daughter once: “that she wouldn’t date white boys, only black boys” (of course it was all the fad); or you hear them (as I have at work) whispering to each other “black is the best they’ve had” (apparently they were not getting much at all), to the point you feel you are listening to a Eugene O’Neill play gone wild…of course, it is also convenient to have the supply of drugs at home, and that one’s man is not overly concerned about our slothfulness, or overly jealous about our habitual infidelities.

    On the other hand, it is pitiful to see many young black men paired up with trashy white women, while disdaining much better looking, far worthier, black women, just so they can parade their “White Biaches” as if it was the latest pair of Nikes in vogue.

    At any rate, the left is ecstatic about all this interracial breeding as much as it is about one of the resulting half-breeds of such pairings, Obama, having a shot at the presidency, after all one of their goals, as they have clearly stated, is the “Browning of America” – whether by interracial breeding or bringing them by the millions from south of the border – to swell their “constituencies.” Only way to outbreed white people into extinction.

    After all, God only knows America needs all the resented half-breed, leftist, “Hugo Chávezes” within its borders that it can get! Right?

    Althor (56a0a8)

  157. Althor, however did you manage not to die from sheer imbecility at birth? As for interracial marriages, I’ll go with my mother’s opinion: “They all have the same thing between their legs.”

    nk (34c5da)

  158. Althor…
    You have GOT to be kiddin’ me.
    On Easter no less.
    Chozzer.(Yiddish for Pig)

    paul from fl (47918a)

  159. Yet, “Eppur si muove”, it is so true…

    Althor (56a0a8)

  160. Althor,
    Galileo you ain’t pal….
    yeeesh

    paul from fl (47918a)

  161. Yikes… what a thread.

    My evil alter-ego really puts my occasional F-bombs into perspective.

    Althor… Jeebus. I’m dumbfounded by the stupidity of your post. Give me a while (read: “forever”) to process it before you post again.

    Leviticus (958a9e)

  162. Here’s a video from today’s TUCC Easter sermon.

    Lots of dramatic sighing, and a defense of Wright, although not by name, as the “sacrificial lamb”.

    Bradley J. Fikes (1c6fc4)

  163. Let me guess Althor…. expresso beans, tequila and prozac mixed with a little racist outrage.

    SteveG (f87fc9)

  164. “A lind to instaputz for a discussion on race, stef?”

    its instapunk. Don’t know instaputz.

    stef (8a983a)

  165. My goodness.

    Leviticus, I agree with JD in #149: I will never, ever call you Levi again.

    Paul (b8f307)

  166. Quote: “Let me guess Althor…. expresso beans, tequila and prozac mixed with a little racist outrage.”

    No, actually a cup of Folger’s “Black Silk” coffee (named after Obama), some black rye “Obama Mama” bread, and a shot of “Black Commie” (like Black Russian, but using Southern Comfort in lieu of Vodka in Obama’s honor) mixed with a little “typical whitey”?!?

    By the way, it is not only inbred white women alone who seem to be sexually aroused by Obama’s “blackness.” The liberal media has been so overwhelmingly obsequious in its abject, sniveling, groveling coverage of Obama, that it prompted none other than the “ultra-conservative” (yeah, right) producers and participants of Saturday Night Live to make all the Obama-mania the butt of their jokes for weeks now. On Power Line Forums the Rev. Jim Boswell states, quote: “I begin to wonder if America is worthy of this person of such uniqueness […hmmm], stature […Ahhh], integrity […huh], and amazing magnanimity […yes…yes Obama, yes!].” Seems the good Reverend had an orgasmic experience as he adulated and fawned all over Obama at the end of his sentence. But then, that’s nothing new. The other day on MSNBC’s Hardball with Chris Matthews, in an all out apologia for Obama’s “superb”, “brilliant”, “breathtaking” speech (to quote just some of the superlatives used by those in the media to describe it), none other than noted HBO commie-comic Bill Maher, was so ecstatic about the “sublimity” of the Obama speech, even alluding to it as one of the world’s greatest literary masterpieces (move over Quijote, Obama “El Negro” is here), that he swooned and literally had an Obama orgasm on camera, as he lauded the speech. I wonder if being white – in spite of himself – Maher was not perhaps suffering from the same inbred libido for black males of his white female counterparts…albeit a latent homosexual one. At any rate, just as with Rev. Boswell by the time he finished eulogizing and adulating Obama and his speech Maher was visibly on the thralls of the greatest ecstatic orgasm of his life.

    Pathetic!

    Althor (56a0a8)

  167. “By the way, it is not only inbred white women alone who seem to be sexually aroused by Obama’s “blackness.””

    A fine addition to the debate on race.

    stef (f599f9)

  168. “By the way, it is not only inbred white women alone who seem to be sexually aroused by Obama’s “blackness.””

    A fine addition to the debate on race.

    Just take the blinders off and take a good look at the media, again, when even SNL is compelled to mock all the orgasmic adulation and the groveling of Obama, it should tell you something!

    I can see a Rudy Giuliani, who proved his leadership as Mayor of one of our largest metropolises during the horrors of 9/11; or a John McCain, who though a maverick and a RINO (Republican in name only) did sacrifice himself and served our country during the Vietnam War, and has decades of experience in Washington; or even a Hillary, who having been once already an occupant of the White House and exposed intimately to the ins and outs of the presidency as First Lady can claim by inference to have some experience about it; claim they are the qualified to run this nation. But what qualifies this upstart, Senator Obama to be president? That the media in their mendacity have made him into some kind of demigod black “Messiah” and a “Political Rock Star;” with followers (many of them white women) swooning at the sound of his voice, and fainting at his sight, believing that touching him will cure their illnesses (if not their inbred “Jungle Fever”), who hold candle vigils at his rallies fevereshly chanting his name – Obama (of course, not the unspeakable “Hussein” one), and that believe Obama can actually walk on water (at least ankle deep across the shallow Reflective Pool – appropriately enough – of the Lincoln Monument)? Is it that he’s part black, speaks English properly (and not in “Ebonics” as Sharpton, Jackson, and most of his other fellow black luminaries), and is admittedly a good orator at empty speeches that qualifies this man to be our Commander in Chief during one of the most perilous times in our nation’s history?

    Not only does the real Obama behind all the media hype and adoration seems to be, at least in my view, a racially motivated, and biased, “empty suit,” but what is really scary, as I commented elsewhere, is that the symbiosis between Obama and his wife is similar to that of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, where Obama with his inspiring rhetoric, toothy grin, and “empty suit” is the Dr. Jekyll, to the Mr. Hyde his “Black Nationalist,” activist wife Michelle is, who, on several slips of the tongue during speeches made recently, has let her true feelings about America (and her real agenda if her husband ever comes to power) show. Michelle is truly Obama’s dark (no pun intended) alter ego.

    I feel that the Obama we see, in all his “articulateness,” is but a front, and that the real power behind him is his wife Michelle: A woman who in her attitude, expression, and demeanor, seems to be nothing more than a “resented” negress activist, hell-bent on redress, and restitution – for a slavery of long ago those of her own race ironically still savagely practice to this day in Africa – and with a huge racial “chip” on her shoulders.

    When I hear Michelle Obama speak, with her barely contained resentment and rage at the America that has given her the opportunity of an education and a life many “white” Americans have been denied and will never know, and to her unqualified “empty suit” husband a shot – unbelievably – at the highest Office in the land, I shudder. In her mannerisms, gestures, and in the barely constrained anti-American venom of her rhetoric (any surprise after she and her husband sat listening to Rev. Wright for twenty years?), it is as if instead of her, I was listening to that other resented half-breed, Hugo Chavez, riling at the podium …just as ugly, anti-American, and uncouth… but only wearing a wig!

    But then, it seems inevitable that Obama will win. Even as the media keeps feeding voters the “Obama Kool- Aid” the “Obamaborgs” have begun their inexorable march towards the voting booths with expressionless blank stares in their faces, while repeating to themselves in a monotone robotic voice: “I must vote for Obama, all resistance is futile…”

    And then people wonder and ask themselves how it is possible that someone like Hitler, or Hugo Chávez, can ever get elected!?!? The tragic answer is that we the “lemmings” are voting (not to mention the black squirrels).

    Althor (56a0a8)

  169. haha. giuliani. anyway, thanks for your addition to the debate on race.

    stef (280f03)

  170. It is my belief that my case is a clear example of employment discrimination and the fact that as an American I was denied justice in this case. I would encourage those who have never experienced racism or discrimination to read my book.

    I was not the only victim of discrimination by NYSDOCS and Albion CF. “While I was out of work due to work related depression I was notified that black officers had called the local National Association for the Advancement of Colored People in Orleans County. The president of the local chapter of the NACCP agreed to meet with the officers to discuss discrimination at Albion CF. At the officers request the January 1996, meeting was held secretly at a local church in Orleans County.

    Due to the nature of shift work approximately 20 black officers attended the meeting. We heard story after story of discrimination and disparate treatment of black staff at Albion CF. Officer Debbie Green and I were two of the 20 black officers present. She thanked us for giving her the $1,500 to pay her fine. In an effort to disguise the true nature of our group and because of the fear of retaliation by Albion supervisors we called ourselves “the Focus Group.”

    Comment by Xrlq Vera, I’m with JD, based on your postings it sounds like the reason you couldn’t get an attorney to take your case on contingency is that you had a crappy case from the start. Strong or even semi-strong cases, with a decent probability of success, can be pretty lucrative due to Section 1983. Perhaps this part of your comment gives away why no lawyer worth his salt would touch your case with a ten-foot pole:

    I don’t know anything about you Xulq but I view your interpretation of my comment about super delegate Spitzer as narrow and ridiculous. The point that I was making was that he was a strong member of the Democratic establishment with his own ambition to some day be President.
    ONE OF THE REASON THAT I WASN’T SUCCESSFUL IN MY ATTEMPTS
    TO GET AN ATTORNEY
    “I received the no probable cause ruling of the New York State Division of Human Rights. The Determination and Order After Investigation was dated May 13, 1997. In the determination, Ms. Day’s report stated explanations for the Defendant (NYSDOCS) discriminatory actions that were not offered by defendant’s employees.

    Her findings were that there was no probable cause to the allegations in my complaint. Day made her no probable cause ruling despite the fact that other black female officers made statements to support my allegation of sexual discrimination at Albion.

    The female officers also perceived discrimination against females at Albion. According to Day’s Chronology Events Report she interviewed African American female corrections officers, who worked under the jurisdiction of the person in questions (Reed) and who were available for interviews at the time of her field visit to Albion CF. The two black female correctional officers interviewed privately by Julia Day were Cheryl Johnson and Linda Pace.

    Officer Johnson lived in Albion within minutes of the prison. At the time of J. Day’s interview Johnson had been employed for 13 years at Albion CF and with the State of New York for 18 years. Johnson told the NYSDHR investigator “that female employees, regardless of race and color are treated differently. Johnson said, “That it is a male-oriented job, and men resent that women are even there, and they talk down to women.”

    During her interview with Day, Officer C. Johnson stated “that no one knows what happened to the identification card, but it had to be an officer involved because inmates are not allowed in that area.”

    Officer Johnson also told the NYSDHR investigator that she didn’t really have a problem with Sgt. Reed because she had a lot of seniority and he accommodated her time-off requests whenever he could. During the interview Johnson stated “that when she objected to him saying that all African American female officers were lazy, Reed apologized.”

    J. Day wrote that Linda Pace had been employed by New York Department of Corrections for 10 years and at Albion CF for 3 years. Linda Pace in responded to Day’s inquiry stated: “that the complainant (Richardson) probably was discriminated against.” Officer Pace said, “That the majority of female officers are discriminated against because they are in a job that is considered to be a man’s job.”

    After receiving Day’s Determination I made an appointment with my attorney to inform him of the ruling. My attorney greeted me with the usual pleasantries as he instructed me to have a seat in his office. I handed the ruling to him and nervously sat down. I knew that he would view my case differently after reading the decision. He expressed his disappointment and sorrow with the NYSDHR investigator’s findings. He said “I do not pursue cases that have a no probable cause ruling. I still believe that you have a good case and that you were discriminated against but the policy of my firm is not to represent someone who has received this finding.”

    I understood and accepted his decision. I knew that it would be an uphill battle to overcome the no probable cause decision. I questioned my wisdom in filing the complaint with New York State Division of Human Rights in the first place. I realized now that I filed my formal complaint with a New York State agency against the largest agency in the State of New York because God ordained it. I had to file with NYSDHR in order to achieve my divine purpose. I sought out other attorneys and all of them refused to file a lawsuit on my behalf. I decided that if inmates could successfully file lawsuit then I could file my own lawsuit.

    On October 15, 1997, I filed a Pro-Se employment discrimination and retaliation lawsuit with a jury demand against New York State Department of Corrections and New York State Department of Civil Service.

    I filed four motions seeking appointment of counsel. All of the motions were denied. In addition to filing four motions I also contacted several attorneys and law firms from 1997 to 2000 seeking legal representation. I met Attorney Willie Gary at a church service in Lakeland, Florida where he was the guest speaker. After the church service I talked briefly with Attorney Gary and requested his legal assistance. He was gracious enough to give me his contact information. On November 10, 1997, I wrote a letter to Attorney Willie Gary seeking legal representation.

    Attorney Gary and I talked several times on the phone I appreciated the fact that he and his firm took the time to reviewed my complaint. On December 16, 1997, I received the following letter from Attorney Gary’s law firm declining to represent me. I was disappointed but not discouraged after reading Attorney Gary’s letter. I truly believe that Attorney Gary is a Christian man. God had our paths to cross at church so that I could hear his wonderful testimony for Christ. I pressed on with my case because I believed God’s promise that I would be victorious in this matter.

    I telephoned and met with several other attorneys seeking their help. One of the attorneys that I telephoned seeking legal representation was the late Attorney Johnnie Cochran. I spoke to the Johnnie Cochran on the phone while he was in his New York office. Attorney Cochran informed me that he wasn’t interested in a taking on a Title VII action. He referred to me an attorney in New York City. The New York City attorney refused to take my case primarily because of the no probable cause ruling of the New York Division of Human Rights.” “A Case of Racial Discrimination and Retaliation Real or Imagined.”
    http://www.lulu.com/browse/book_view.php?fCID=1362173
    http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?r=1&EAN=9780615177014

    Mike Russo, NYS Asst. Attorney General also filed a declaration signed by Julia Day, NYS Division of Human Rights Investigator in support of the Defendants’ motion for summary judgment. A question to any attorneys reading this posting, isn’t the investigator’s findings and determination the only thing that is usually filed in Title VII cases?

    Vera Richardson (be9eca)

  171. Vera,

    You left your job and went on welfare. You got a psychologist to give you a mental disability letter and the government accepted it and put you on disability Social Security on your claim that you could never work again. Did you seriously expect the government, after all that, to determine that you were a good and productive worker and that you lost your job due to racial and sexual discrimination?

    BTW: Are you sure that you want that book out there? It kind of destroys your claim that your “clinical depression” prevents you from working. What if it brings you into Social Security’s radar and they decide to review your case? Don’t they already ask you for medical reports regarding your disability from time to time? What do you tell them?

    nk (34c5da)

  172. Levi #124:

    “What is key here is that Obama chose to move past drugs and get on with his life, Bush chose to squander all of his advantages and wallow in irresponsible abuse. For 20 years.”

    Bush wallowed in “irresponsible abuse” for 20 years. That’s quite a claim.

    I assume you are referring to the time period when Bush was approximately 22-42 years old. During that time, he attended and completed Harvard graduate school, ran a business that paid taxes and the salaries of several people, got married, ran for political office, had two children, assisted his father’s political campaigns, and was the managing partner of the Texas Rangers baseball team.

    Until he quit at age 40, Bush was also reputed to be a heavy alcohol drinker, something that was and is legal but I agree it’s not a good idea. He received one DWI while on vacation. You use this fact to bolster your claim that Bush endangered people recklessly for years.

    In comparison, at the same ages, Obama obtained a Harvard graduate degree, did not start or run a business that paid taxes and employed people but worked in a law firm in public interest law, got married, ran for and won a state senate seat, and had two children.

    As you mention, at some point (perhaps even in college and graduate school), Obama admitted to illegal drug use, actions that would have resulted in criminal charges if he had been caught. In addition, Obama has been and is reputed to be a heavy smoker. Like drinking, smoking is legal but reports suggest Obama has unsuccessfully tried to quit in the past because smoking is not a good idea. (However, one writer has credited smoking for Obama’s resonant voice.)

    As a long-time smoker, it’s likely Obama has smoked in the presence of his wife, children, other family members, Senatorial and campaign staffs, and friends. Thus, Obama has recklessly endangered people for years. However, unlike Bush, he continues to do so even though he is well past 40.

    Levi, I don’t think these stories matter much but since you think drinking and driving was relevant in appraising George Bush, I hope you will be open-minded enough to hold Obama to the same standard and condemn him for recklessly endangering people with his smoking.

    DRJ (a431ca)

  173. DRJ – Tilt at any windmills recently?

    JD (6f5e4a)

  174. It’s Easter, JD. I’m in the mood to start fresh.

    DRJ (a431ca)

  175. You are a better person than I.

    I prefer to note that the actions and positions that Phil, Levi, denise, et al. take are consistent with the actions that racists take, judging a group of people based on the actions of a few. Mix in a little holier-than-thou, a good portion of identity politics, and you have a recipe for some pinhead claiming some undeserved moral superiority.

    But, like I said, you are a much bigger and better person than I.

    JD (6f5e4a)

  176. I think the ‘Tard of Thunder (nice moniker to distinguish him from the other Levi, also a liberal but infinitely smarter than this one, and with an age-related excuse to boot) was referring to the first sentence of mine that he/she/it quoted, wherein I inadvertently substituted the word “that” for “which.” Which, of course, is totally indistinguishable from adding an initial w to the word reckless, which he must have done at least twice (and added to his dictionary the last time) if it didn’t turn up a squiggly line. For some odd reason, my dictionary doesn’t render a squiggly line for “anyways,” so perhaps the ‘Tard of Thunder is a bit more influential than I thought.

    Now that it’s established that we’re both capable of fucking up when putting out thousands of words a time, maybe we can agree that calling people out for some dumb shit like grammar and spelling is a waste of time that proves absolutely nothing?

    Levi (76ef55)

  177. This youtube video link shows 9 minutes of one of the sermons that Fox is using in an attempt to disrail Obama.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FqPUXjFYh38

    The title of the youtube video is “Fox Lies The Real Sermon Given by Pastor Wright.” Please view this before blindly accepting 20 seconds of a video to judge Wright or Obama.

    Vera Richardson (be9eca)

  178. Okay, Levi. We will quit pointing out your errors in spelling and grammar. We should really limit our criticisms of you to the brain-pounding bone-jarring stupidity spewed forth from your fingertips.

    JD (6f5e4a)

  179. Vera – Please explain the “context” of God Damn American, or the government made up AIDS to give to black people, or the 9/11 BS spewed from them. Make us understand.

    JD (6f5e4a)

  180. “As a long-time smoker, it’s likely Obama has smoked in the presence of his wife, children, other family members, Senatorial and campaign staffs, and friends. Thus, Obama has recklessly endangered people for years.”

    Secondary smoke is ‘reckless endagerment’? Now that makes all those smoking bans are quite reasonable.

    I think Obama was also a law professor. Besides just being a ‘reckless endagerer.’ Also published books — which pay taxes, I guess — and was a community organizer.

    stef (e870b9)

  181. Levi, I don’t think these stories matter much but since you think drinking and driving was relevant in appraising George Bush,

    The thing is, it has turned out to be extremely relevant in appraising Bush. The immaturity, irresponsibility, and downright stupidity exhibited by Bush when he chose to drive around drunk has manifested itself in his Presidency, as evidenced by his disastrous war, our rapidly collapsing economy, and the general shittiness and ineptitude that permeates every aspect of his administration.

    Bush is a spoiled brat, born with a silver spoon in his mouth. He thinks he’s entitled to all this, he thinks he was entitled to an extended adolescence. The first 20 years of his adulthood were filled with selfishness and poor judgment. None of those are qualities I would want in my commander-in-chief, and oh look what happened, he’s turned out to be basically the shittiest President ever.

    And I know that many of you agree that he’s been a failure. I just want to know where your people were with the magnifying glass and the fine-toothed comb back in 2000 that would have told you what kind of person and leader Bush is and would be, based on things that he actually did.

    Double standard.

    Levi (76ef55)

  182. End stage BDS is so not very pretty.

    JD (6f5e4a)

  183. I prefer to note that the actions and positions that Phil, Levi, denise, et al. take are consistent with the actions that racists take, judging a group of people based on the actions of a few. Mix in a little holier-than-thou, a good portion of identity politics, and you have a recipe for some pinhead claiming some undeserved moral superiority.

    Oh, please. Everyone deserves to feel morally superior to you, the Bush people, allegiant servants to the dumbest man to ever set foot in the White House.

    What’s your excuse? You had the House for 6 years and added the Senate for 4 of the 8 years that Bush has been pinching off this painfully slow turd of a Presidency. What’s more, the Democratic congress, both as the minority and majority, have pathetically acquiesced to Bush virtually every step of the way, and the media, at best, has been subserviant.

    So yeah, you’ve had completely unfettered opportunity to implement whatever fantastic, supply-side, uber-religious, Republican-approved policies you’ve wanted, and here we are, in 2008, and Americans don’t like Republicans, the President, or any of their policies. We’re embroiled in a war that most people don’t support, Al-Qaeda is stronger than it ever has been, gas is climbing towards $4.00 a gallon, and the economy is not in good shape, to put it generously.

    Either one of two things has happened: conservative policies on the economy, foreign policy, and domestic issues have been proven to be ineffective, counter-productive and downright corrosive, or Bush isn’t a real conservative, and he tricked you idiots into voting for him.

    Twice.

    Actually, both of those things are true. So yeah, I’m feeling a little holier-than-thou. Proven conservative failure and a demonstrated tendency to get hoodwinked by an uncharismatic, legendarily stupid dumbshit. How do you expect me to feel?

    Levi (76ef55)

  184. End stage BDS is so not very pretty.

    Ah, BDS. That old Republican catch-all. As if no one has any reason at all to be mad at George Bush.

    Levi (76ef55)

  185. It’s interesting that people believe George Bush could single-handedly ruin the world, but I guess it explains why they also believe someone like Barack Obama could single-handedly save it. It’s a very simplistic view.

    DRJ (a431ca)

  186. Levi, you are aware that Bush isn’t running?

    Paul (b8f307)

  187. Levi – If we accept all of what you said as being true, then it really does not say much for your Dems in Congress who enjoy an approval rating much worse than even President Bush’s.

    Al-Qaeda is stronger than it ever has been

    Proof, or yet another unfounded assertion?

    It really stings that the idiot managed to beat your liberal clowns, twice, doesn’t it?

    So yeah, I’m feeling a little holier-than-thou. Proven conservative failure and a demonstrated tendency to get hoodwinked by an uncharismatic, legendarily stupid dumbshit

    See my question above.

    JD (6f5e4a)

  188. The thing is, it has turned out to be extremely relevant in appraising Bush.

    Well then, you should have no problem sizing up Obama in the same way, right?

    RIGHT?

    Paul (b8f307)

  189. Wrong Paul. Obama is the second coming. His indisccretions give him a moral high ground from which he has learned and can dispense his wisdom from on high. Or some malarkey like that.

    JD (6f5e4a)

  190. and he tricked you idiots into voting for him.

    Levi, ever investigate how Obama got into his first elected position? Or into the Senate?

    Hey, man, better do that before you lecture us on double standards.

    Paul (b8f307)

  191. So yeah, you’ve had completely unfettered opportunity

    And the minority Dems and the MSM were all in complete lockstep on those ideas, right?

    RIGHT?

    Paul (b8f307)

  192. What’s more, the Democratic congress, both as the minority and majority, have pathetically acquiesced to Bush virtually every step of the way, and the media, at best, has been subserviant.

    That’ll be news to Hillary, Nancy Pelosi and the NYT.

    Paul (b8f307)

  193. The MSM is a tool of the Republican party, Paul. Faux News! End of discussion.

    JD (6f5e4a)

  194. None of those are qualities I would want in my commander-in-chief, and oh look what happened, he’s turned out to be basically the shittiest President ever.

    And yet you go to the mat to defend poor judgement in Obama.

    No double standard there.

    Paul (b8f307)

  195. Obama does not have poor judgment. You are just a racist.

    JD (6f5e4a)

  196. Ah, BDS. That old Republican catch-all. As if no one has any reason at all to be mad at George Bush.

    This from a guy that blames Diebold for everything.

    By the way, since you said

    he tricked you idiots into voting for him

    guess it wasn’t Diebold after all, huh?

    Paul (b8f307)

  197. Great JD. You just caled a black man a racist.

    Didn’t you knnow blacks can’t be racist?

    Levi thinks so!

    Paul (b8f307)

  198. I seem to recall that from a past thread, Paul. I was just saving stef/Levi/Phil/etal from having to type it.

    JD (6f5e4a)

  199. Vera,

    That video you linked to only makes Wright look even worse. Watching the video, I learned that terrorism only exists if the U.S. is behind it. Qaddafi is an innocent victim, the Palestinians are innocent victims . . . ad infinitum, ad nauseum. America is always in the wrong. The great majority of Americans are going to find Wright’s views utterly repugnant and wrongheaded. I can’t imagine why you thought making them more known would help.

    Bradley J. Fikes (1c6fc4)

  200. Bradley – Thanks for watching that. I could not bring myself to click on that link. As with all matters political, I think that rather than talk them down, the ideas of Obama’s church and his campaign’s spiritual advisor should be spread far and wide, for all to see.

    JD (6f5e4a)

  201. Levi – If we accept all of what you said as being true, then it really does not say much for your Dems in Congress who enjoy an approval rating much worse than even President Bush’s.

    Hardly ‘my’ Dems. They’re way too fucking naive and gullible to square off against modern day Republicans, who I must admit, are much better at the politics part of government.

    Proof, or yet another unfounded assertion?

    Link

    A Summer 2007 military intelligence report says Al-Qaeda is back to it’s pre 9-11 strength. I say stronger than ever, because a protracted war that leeches our resources, kills our soldiers, over-extends the military, shatters our credibility, and drags our good name through the mud is exactly the kind of hysterical reaction that Osama was hoping to elicit. He’s too weak to ever defeat us, he knows that, so he’s gotten us to do it ourselves. George Bush led us right into a fucking trap.

    It really stings that the idiot managed to beat your liberal clowns, twice, doesn’t it?

    It used to. But I’m content watching you retards destroy the greatest country ever at this point. You definitely don’t deserve it.

    Levi (76ef55)

  202. The sheer unadulterated mendoucheity of your comments is simply breath taking, Levi.

    JD (6f5e4a)

  203. You’re wasting your time, Levi. Even if you were Monica Lewinski, Obama is no Bill Clinton.

    nk (34c5da)

  204. Well then, you should have no problem sizing up Obama in the same way, right?

    RIGHT?

    Yeah, I will size up Obama on the things he’s done, not what you’ve assumed he’s been audience to.

    Levi (76ef55)

  205. Obama was a cocaine sniffer !!!!1 He has poor judgment by Levi’s standards. He put the lives of himself and anyone near him in jeopardy when he so callously disregarded federal laws to indulge his desire to get high. He is not qualified to be President.

    JD (6f5e4a)

  206. And the minority Dems and the MSM were all in complete lockstep on those ideas, right?

    RIGHT?

    For many of them, most notably the Iraq war, by far the most disastrous of Bush’s implemented policies, yes, lockstep.

    So what’s the excuse? Why isn’t Bush enjoying 75% approval ratings? Why isn’t democracy spreading through the Middle East? Why will Bush be leaving the next President a devastated economy? Is conservatism a failure or do all of you just vote for which ever idiot the Republican party trots out in front of you?

    Levi (76ef55)

  207. Goodnight, racists. 😉

    JD (6f5e4a)

  208. I was talking to you, Levi.

    JD (6f5e4a)

  209. Obama was a cocaine sniffer !!!!1 He has poor judgment by Levi’s standards. He put the lives of himself and anyone near him in jeopardy when he so callously disregarded federal laws to indulge his desire to get high. He is not qualified to be President.

    Doing coke a couple of times doesn’t mean you have poor judgment, it means you’re curious.

    Ultimately deciding it’s not for you and not spending the next 20 years of your life abusing it means you have good judgment.

    Levi (76ef55)

  210. I was talking to you, Levi.

    Oooooh, scathing!

    Who am I racist towards exactly?

    Levi (76ef55)

  211. This from a guy that blames Diebold for everything.

    I blame Diebold, and general Republican electioneering and vote suppression tactics, for getting this retard into office.

    Everything else, I blame on Bush. Rightly.

    Levi (76ef55)

  212. Yeah, I will size up Obama on the things he’s done, not what you’ve assumed he’s been audience to.

    How about how he got into office?

    How about that Tony Rezko land deal?

    For many of them, most notably the Iraq war, by far the most disastrous of Bush’s implemented policies, yes, lockstep.

    Then why aren’t you advocating that they (the naive, compliant Dems) be thrown out of office ASAP?

    Paul (b8f307)

  213. I say stronger than ever, because a protracted war that leeches our resources, kills our soldiers, over-extends the military, shatters our credibility, and drags our good name through the mud is exactly the kind of hysterical reaction that Osama was hoping to elicit.

    Maybe you should read a report more current than nine months ago from an unnamed official.

    Like this from General Petraeus.

    Paul (b8f307)

  214. Levi, what kind of judgment/character do you have when you sit in a “church” and listen to someone tell you that your God must be for blacks, and if your God is for whites that he must be killed???

    For 20 years??? While not drinking, or doing drugs, right???

    No excuses….Obama believes in racism, and you want him to be president…and by Obama’s own mouth…words matter….

    Nevermind…your answer will be some defense of character….that Obama was toughening himself up, or something…

    reff (59b2ad)

  215. TTOT:

    Now that it’s established that we’re both capable of fucking up when putting out thousands of words a time, maybe we can agree that calling people out for some dumb shit like grammar and spelling is a waste of time that proves absolutely nothing?

    No, we can’t. The is not that you are capable of screwing up the English language. Screwing up is easy; we’re all capable of that. The difference is that time and time again, you have shown yourself to be incapable of doing anything else. Worse, you don’t even seem to be appropriately embarrassed by it; instead you’re cocky and act as though it’s no big deal. I might could give you a pass on your horrible spelling and grammar if the substance of your comments made it look as though English were the only class you slept through before dropping out, but hello? Your ideas are every bit as stupid, hence my musings over which is more pathetic, your ideas or your spelling thereof (that’s edumacated-speak for “of them”).

    Tell you what. If it makes you feel better, I’ll gladly stipulate that your substantive ideas are infinitely more pathetic than your ongoing struggle with the English language. All I ask in return is that to avoid further confusion with the original Levi(-ticus), you stop posting as “Levi” and start posting as “The ‘Tard of Thunder” instead. Deal?

    Xrlq (62cad4)

  216. How about how he got into office?

    By winning elections? What? Huh?

    How about that Tony Rezko land deal?

    Can you even make an allegation against Obama about the ‘Tony Rezko land deal?’ What’s the crime he’s committed? How did he act improper?

    There’s even less there than Watergate.

    Then why aren’t you advocating that they (the naive, compliant Dems) be thrown out of office ASAP?

    Many of them should be, including Pelosi, Reid, Hoyer, and any one of the idiots that call themselves a ‘Blue Dog.’

    Still, they’re leaps and bounds better than anything the G.O.P. can offer.

    Levi (76ef55)

  217. Maybe you should read a report more current than nine months ago from an unnamed official.

    Like this from General Petraeus.

    Do you know what year it is?

    Levi (76ef55)

  218. Obama believes in racism

    The only evidence you have for this is a few seconds of videotape of somebody other than Obama going on a rant.

    You have nothing to prove it. If you believe Wright was saying this type of stuff in every one of his sermons for the past 20 years, I mean what are you basing that on? Do you have the balls to admit you’re just making a whole bunch of assumptions? Can you prove that Obama heard Wright say “that your God must be for blacks, and if your God is for whites that he must be killed?”

    Come on. Where’s the transcripts from 10, 15, and 20 years ago? Where’s the video? How do you know exactly what’s been going down in that church for the past 20 years?

    Racists aren’t racist because they hear people say racist things and don’t object, they’re racist because they actually so or say racist things themselves.

    Levi (76ef55)

  219. I agree that sitting through 20 years of racist rants without complaining does not make Obama a racist. It does, however, make him an individual with totally shitty judgment. Even if I were to assume your reckless rants about Bush’s judgment were accurate, that would be a lousy reason to vote for Obama. Eight years of poor judgment in the Oval Office (or 16, unless you really think Clinton was better) does not mean we need four more years of someone else’s bad judgment instead. The choices are Obama, Clinton and McCain. Show why Obama’s judgment is better than either of theirs, not better than the guy who isn’t running, anyway.

    Xrlq (62cad4)

  220. Xrlq,

    Who have you been voting for these past few years?

    Levi (76ef55)

  221. Freudian slip, Levi?: “There’s even less there than Watergate.”

    SPQR (26be8b)

  222. I agree that sitting through 20 years of racist rants without complaining

    I’ll ask you the same question I asked the other drone: You got the balls to admit you’re basing that on nothing but a few seconds of videotape? Can you provide transcripts or video of Wright’s sermons 10 and 15 years ago?

    Levi (76ef55)

  223. Can you even make an allegation against Obama about the ‘Tony Rezko land deal?’ What’s the crime he’s committed? How did he act improper?

    If there is nothing wrong with it, why did Baracky admit that it showed poor judgment, your gold standard?

    You have nothing to prove it.

    Bullshit. You just ignore all of the evidence. Go look at his church’s website. They claim to be proponent of Black Liberation Theology. Cone states that Trinity is a shining example of Black Liberation Theology.

    JD (75f5c3)

  224. Freudian slip, Levi?: “There’s even less there than Watergate.”

    So can you make an allegation of Obama’s impropriety with regards to Rezko?

    Levi (76ef55)

  225. Obama said it showed poor judgement. Are you questioning his assessment?

    Let’s refer back to the title – “We Need a Discussion on Race”

    The likes of Levi do not want to have a discussion, because as is, it is a one way lecture, with asshats like him claiming some imagined moral high ground where he gets to preach about how everyone else is a racist, and indulge his BDS fantasies. A discussion would require people like Levi to, in good faith, actually discuss the issues, rather than lecture, and simply make wild assertions. A discussion is the last thing the likes of Levi want.

    JD (75f5c3)

  226. Levi, the Clintonian line, ie., Obama has not been convicted yet, is an amusing one for you to adopt. But it matches your other attempts to shift burdens of proof around.

    Let’s accept your logic, that Rezko is setting up sweetheart real estate deals that put hundreds of thousands of dollars in Obama’s pocket, and arranges for even more money in campaign donations to Obama, for no return in value to Rezko.

    Yep, that makes a lot of sense. What is proven quite clearly is that Obama is just a typical Illinois politician.

    Now with respect to Wright, your line seems to be that we don’t know that Wright has been preaching the exact same version of whackiness and hatred for the full time that Obama has been in attendance. Another Clintonian propaganda line … and just as non-serious.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  227. BTW, Levi, was it a Freudian slip or are you now a closet Nixon fan?

    SPQR (26be8b)

  228. If there is nothing wrong with it, why did Baracky admit that it showed poor judgment, your gold standard?

    You can exhibit poor judgment from time to time, but that doesn’t mean you’ve broken the law or actually done anything wrong. Nobody has perfect judgment.

    Still, you should make an accusation, like he’s laundering money or was cheating on taxes, something, as opposed to just saying ‘TONY REZKO’ like that means absolutely fucking anything.

    Bullshit. You just ignore all of the evidence. Go look at his church’s website. They claim to be proponent of Black Liberation Theology. Cone states that Trinity is a shining example of Black Liberation Theology.

    That’s not evidence that Barack is a racist. How do you know Barack’s ever even been to the website?

    Are you assuming again?

    (you are)

    Levi (76ef55)

  229. SPQR – The irony is astounding.

    JD (75f5c3)

  230. Right, Baracky showed poor judgment and did a good thing? People often go around apologizing for doing the right thing. You are really dense, or have to be incredibly dizzy from spinning like a top for Baracky.

    That’s not evidence that Barack is a racist. How do you know Barack’s ever even been to the website?

    Were you laughing when you typed this? It is the self proclaimed theology of his church, a church that he did great soul searching in selecting, and has attended for over 20 years. Are you seriously claiming that he did not know the theology of his own church?

    JD (75f5c3)

  231. Levi, the Clintonian line, ie., Obama has not been convicted yet

    Convicted? Convicted of what?

    What’s he even been accused of?

    What are you accusing him of?

    your line seems to be that we don’t know that Wright has been preaching the exact same version of whackiness and hatred for the full time that Obama has been in attendance.

    So you’re admitting you don’t know?

    Gosh, that’s quite a reversal, did you check with everyone else before you admitted that? Because everyone else here seems to know, for certain.

    I just think you should have to prove things that you say. How is that propaganda? How is that un-serious?

    Levi (76ef55)

  232. BTW, Levi, was it a Freudian slip or are you now a closet Nixon fan?

    What are you talking about?

    Levi (76ef55)

  233. Right, Baracky showed poor judgment and did a good thing? People often go around apologizing for doing the right thing. You are really dense, or have to be incredibly dizzy from spinning like a top for Baracky.

    So what are all the favors that Rezko got from his bought-off politician?

    Were you laughing when you typed this? It is the self proclaimed theology of his church, a church that he did great soul searching in selecting, and has attended for over 20 years. Are you seriously claiming that he did not know the theology of his own church?

    Black liberation theology isn’t inherently racist. What do you have to prove that? One paragraph written by Cone?

    Levi (76ef55)

  234. How about how he got into office?

    By winning elections? What? Huh?

    I live in Cook County, Illinois, Levi. Obama was the least “blackest” of “black people”, raised in a life of privilege that his targeted constituency, real black Americans, could not even dream of. He needed black American credentials and he latched on to Wright to provide them for him. At the same time, he was kissing Mayor Daley’s ring whose biggest struggle for twenty years has been to keep Chicago’s black people on the Chicago Democratic Machine plantation. And in every election he ran in, he won by disqualifying his opponents. It’s pretty easy to check.

    How about that Tony Rezko land deal?

    Can you even make an allegation against Obama about the ‘Tony Rezko land deal?’ What’s the crime he’s committed? How did he act improper?

    Tony Rezko bought Obama his house and his backyard. See, there was a family who wanted to sell their mansion and rose garden.
    Obama wanted the mansion but he could not afford it. Rezko told the family, “Sell the mansion to Obama at the price he can afford. I will buy your rose garden at a price that makes up the difference.” And that’s exactly what happened. The Rezko told Obama, “My rosegarden is your backyard”. And that’s exactly the situation as of today. The rosegarden is fenced in and the only access to it is from Obama’s house. And this is pretty easy to check.

    But like I said before, stop wasting your time. No matter how much you might want to do to him the same thing Monica Lewinski did to Bill Clinton, Obama is no Bill Clinton and he will never let you.

    nk (34c5da)

  235. Wrong. You do not get to shift the burden of proof. Why would Baracky state that it showed poor judgment on his part? Doesn’t he know better than you?

    Go do some studying, and come back. You ignorance is palpable.

    JD (75f5c3)

  236. He needed black American credentials and he latched on to Wright to provide them for him. .

    Just like John McCain needs evangelical credentials and has latched on to Hagee and Parsley?

    What you’re describing is basic American politics. People running for office try to grab certain constituencies, what’s how politics works.

    Tony Rezko bought Obama his house and his backyard. See, there was a family who wanted to sell their mansion and rose garden.
    Obama wanted the mansion but he could not afford it. Rezko told the family, “Sell the mansion to Obama at the price he can afford. I will buy your rose garden at a price that makes up the difference.” And that’s exactly what happened. The Rezko told Obama, “My rosegarden is your backyard”. And that’s exactly the situation as of today. The rosegarden is fenced in and the only access to it is from Obama’s house. And this is pretty easy to check.

    Is any of that illegal? Improper, certainly. The ‘you scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours’ culture is a problem in American politics, but it’s hardly exclusive to Barack Obama. And it appears that he’s learned from that mistake, since he’s not taken any money from lobbyists for his campaign.

    Levi (76ef55)

  237. Just like John McCain needs evangelical credentials and has latched on to Hagee and Parsley?

    If McCain lived within 1000 miles of Hagee, attended Hagee’s church for 20 years, was married by Hagee, had his children baptized by Hagee, called Hagee his personal spiritual advisor, used Hagee’s words as inspiration, and placed Hagee on an advisory committee for his campaign … then that might be relevant.

    Improper, certainly. Feeling kind of generous today, aren’t you?

    JD (75f5c3)

  238. All right, Levi. Welcome back. Thank you for the non-profane response. Although it’s like thanking you for not stealing my wallet. But stay on this level and I will too.

    Now, on the part of his not taking any lobbyist money for his campaign, there’s that $200.00 limit that need not be reported. And it’s not so hard, over the internet, for a Machine Democrat in Chicago or an international gangster in Syria, to give as much money as he wants to Obama under fake names in $200.00 increments. I wonder what we would see if the FEC would randomly pick a thousand or so $200.00 contributions for audit.

    nk (34c5da)

  239. If McCain lived within 1000 miles of Hagee, attended Hagee’s church for 20 years, was married by Hagee, had his children baptized by Hagee, called Hagee his personal spiritual advisor, used Hagee’s words as inspiration, and placed Hagee on an advisory committee for his campaign … then that might be relevant.

    Well, that wasn’t really the point I was making anyway. But we can talk about it this way if you want.

    McCain actively sought out Hagee’s support, and then had a big huge press conference where he lauded him with praise. Hagee is a genuinely fucking crazy person, whose stated objective is to trigger the apocalypse by getting America to invade Iran. Parsley, the guy that McCain has called his ‘spiritual guide,’ thinks that America’s divine mission is to eradicate Islam.

    That shit is about a thousand times crazier than anything Wright has said, and McCain hasn’t disavowed any of it, as Obama has done with Wright. Now I know you’re going to keep hammering on this 20 years thing, so let’s just say that sure, that does make some kind of difference. Regardless of that, doesn’t the absolute silence about McCain’s association with crazies like Hagee and Parsley illustrate a race-based double standard?

    Levi (76ef55)

  240. Now, on the part of his not taking any lobbyist money for his campaign, there’s that $200.00 limit that need not be reported. And it’s not so hard, over the internet, for a Machine Democrat in Chicago or an international gangster in Syria, to give as much money as he wants to Obama under fake names in $200.00 increments. I wonder what we would see if the FEC would randomly pick a thousand or so $200.00 contributions for audit.

    More assumptions?

    Levi (76ef55)

  241. doesn’t the absolute silence about McCain’s association with crazies like Hagee and Parsley illustrate a race-based double standard?

    No. That your fevered mind makes that jump is more remarkable than the observation you make.

    Baracky endorsed Wright and the Church. He practiced their theology. He gave the church tens of thousands of dollars. Your inability to discern the obvious differences between the 2 scenarios is remarkable.

    JD (75f5c3)

  242. No, Levi, you are completely losing all logic. Hagee is not loonier than Wright and the two situations are not comparable as has been pointed out scores of times.

    Your attempts to defend Obama got really threadbare long ago. Not least because of how often you contradict Obama himself in this.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  243. So, McCain’s association with Hagee and Parsley only becomes meaningful if it lasts for 20 years? It absolutely matters not that he’s pandering to them and holding press conferences with them and lavishing them with praise?

    And please, nothing Wright has ever said comes close to rivaling Hagee’s insanity. The apocalypse is a myth, and he wants to haphazardly and very destructively direct American foreign policy to trigger that myth. What’s Wright got, a bunch of harmless conspiracy theories? Hagee wants to get us all killed. And Hagee’s views are far more reflexive of those held by McCain and the Republican party in general than Wright’s are of Obama’s and his party.

    Levi (76ef55)

  244. Continued misrepresentations and strawmen are not impressive, Levi. McCain’s associations with Hagee are not of the same significance as Obama’s associations with Wright. By Obama’s own words, Wright is a key mentor and advisor. Nothing comparable exists with respect to McCain and Hagee.

    Your hypocrisy got old long ago.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  245. More assumptions?

    Reasonable suspicions. Given his connections. Chicago gangsters and Syrian gangsters. Likely some Saudi money there, too.

    nk (34c5da)

  246. SPQR,

    Yes, the associations are different. But so too, are the demonstrated levels of craziness of these people. McCain called Parsley his ‘spiritual guide.’ (Very similar to a spiritual adviser, wouldn’t you say? Maybe the associations aren’t so different?) Parsley is a snake oil salesman faith-healer that thinks God invented America to destroy Islam. McCain said that he’s ‘proud’ of Hagee’s endorsement. Hagee thinks New Orleans deserved Hurricane Katrina because of the gays, and again, believes everything America does should be geared towards triggering his end of the world fantasies.

    Wright thinks the government invented AIDS. That’s crazy, but also totally fucking harmless. And Obama says he doesn’t agree with it. McCain, presumably, agrees with everything these other two have said, not merely because he’s ‘proud’ of one of them, or refers to the other as his ‘spiritual guide,’ but because he’s never explicitly has said he disagrees with them, like Obama has.

    Levi (76ef55)

  247. Reasonable suspicions. Given his connections. Chicago gangsters and Syrian gangsters. Likely some Saudi money there, too.

    It’s good to be suspicious of government officials and the company they keep and the people they do business with, I agree.

    So if I point out that there are two oil men running the White House, and that the oil industry is as profitable as it ever has been, and that the Iraq war has benefited no one in this country except for these two oil men’s close business partners to the tune of tens of billions of dollars, you’d agree they’re probably a bunch of corrupt assholes that started a war to make their friends money, wouldn’t you?

    I know, I know, I brought up Bush again. But why are we only scrutinizing the black guy, whereas the white guys have given us much more reason to be ‘reasonably suspicious.’

    Levi (76ef55)

  248. McCain, presumably, agrees with everything these other two have said,

    That’s patently false. McCain has said on more than one occasion that he disagrees with Hagee.

    “Well, obviously I repudiate any comments that are anti-Semitic or anti-Catholic, racist, any other,” McCain said. “And I condemn them and I condemn those words that Pastor Hagee apparently — that Pastor Hagee wrote. I will say that he said that his words were taken out of context, he defends his position. I hope that maybe you’d give him a chance to respond.”

    That’s from Talking Points Memo

    Steverino (e00589)

  249. Levi, do you seriously believe that the price of oil has gone up so high because of the Iraq war? You don’t think it has anything to do with increasing demand by heavily populated countries like India and China?

    Steverino (e00589)

  250. That’s patently false. McCain has said on more than one occasion that he disagrees with Hagee.

    “Well, obviously I repudiate any comments that are anti-Semitic or anti-Catholic, racist, any other,” McCain said. “And I condemn them and I condemn those words that Pastor Hagee apparently — that Pastor Hagee wrote. I will say that he said that his words were taken out of context, he defends his position. I hope that maybe you’d give him a chance to respond.”

    That’s from Talking Points Memo

    The crazy part about Hagee isn’t his anti-Catholicism, it’s his frenzied bloodlust for a war with Iran, a frenzied lust that McCain has demonstrated he shares, a number of times.

    Also, when Obama rebuked Wright, he never qualified it with some bullshit about how he’s been taken out of context.

    And regardless, what’s the benign context of calling Catholicism ‘the great whore?’

    Levi (76ef55)

  251. Levi, do you seriously believe that the price of oil has gone up so high because of the Iraq war?

    I never said that, though it certainly hasn’t helped.

    Levi (76ef55)

  252. Levi #247:

    Wright thinks the government invented AIDS. That’s crazy, but also totally f*ing harmless.

    How is it harmless that blacks are taught from the pulpit, and some actually believe, that AIDS is a government plot against blacks instead of a sexually transmitted disease? I think such misinformation imparted by a pastor and respected community leader could affect the believers’ behavior and cause them to be more at risk for infection.

    DRJ (a431ca)

  253. a frenzied lust that McCain has demonstrated he shares, a number of times.

    Proof? This one should be easy to document, unless you are lying.

    He did not qualify it by saying it was taken out of context, he qualified it by not stating what he was disavowing.

    Hagee endorsed McCain. Baracky endorsed Trinity and Wright. If you do not understand the difference, go back to middle school. The only reason Baracky repudiated Wright, which he knew a long time ago he was going to have to do, was because it became a problem in the primaries.

    JD (75f5c3)

  254. The crazy part about Hagee isn’t his anti-Catholicism, it’s his frenzied bloodlust for a war with Iran, a frenzied lust that McCain has demonstrated he shares, a number of times.

    That sound you just heard was the goal posts being moved. I refuted your comment that McCain believes “everything” Hagee says, and you come back with this weak reply.

    I never said that, though it certainly hasn’t helped.

    You said outright that the war has profitted oil companies. Another set of goal posts being moved.

    The war has had no effect on oil prices, Levi. There has been no significant interruption of supply, nor any significant increase of demand because of it. In fact, oil prices dropped for the first 9 months after the Iraq war began.

    Gosh, do you think something else might be driving oil prices?

    Steverino (e00589)

  255. Also, when Obama rebuked Wright, he never qualified it with some bullshit about how he’s been taken out of context.

    Go back and read McCain’s quote, and this time pay closer attention. McCain never said Hagee had been taken out of context. What McCain said was that Hagee said he was taken out of context.

    Now who’s spreading the bullshit????

    Steverino (e00589)

  256. Well, I don’t think he teaches that it isn’t an STD, so I don’t think he’s endangering their lives. Everyone knows it’s an STD, even those that buy into the conspiracy theory that it was invented by the government.

    My point is that it’s a harmless conspiracy theory compared to Hagee’s and Parsley’s shared belief that Islam needs to be eradicated so Jesus will come back and chill with us, or whatever these silly Christians believe.

    Levi (76ef55)

  257. It is beyond belief that anyone could claim that a belief in a government conspiracy to kill blacks with a manufactured AIDS virus is harmless.

    That kind of silly statement shows either an astonishing amount of stupidity or mendacity.

    And I’m not too interested in which it is.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  258. That kind of silly statement shows either an astonishing amount of stupidity or AND mendacity.

    There, fixed that for ya’

    JD (75f5c3)

  259. Proof? This one should be easy to document, unless you are lying.

    Remember McCain’s little Beach Boys ditty about bombing Iran? And just last week he repeated the false assertion that Iran is training Al-Qaeda.

    The neo-con wing of the Republican party is clamoring for more war in the Middle East, specifically with Iran, just like this Hagee asshole and McCain’s new sidekick Joe Lieberman. And McCain is their candidate.

    Hagee endorsed McCain. Baracky endorsed Trinity and Wright. If you do not understand the difference, go back to middle school. The only reason Baracky repudiated Wright, which he knew a long time ago he was going to have to do, was because it became a problem in the primaries.

    McCain actively sought Hagee’s endorsement. It’s not like Hagee just randomly threw in with McCain, McCain was begged him to. Obama might have chosen Wright, but McCain also chose Hagee. Not a bit of fucking difference, as if any of this bullshit matters anyway.

    Levi (76ef55)

  260. It is beyond belief that anyone could claim that a belief in a government conspiracy to kill blacks with a manufactured AIDS virus is harmless.

    That kind of silly statement shows either an astonishing amount of stupidity or mendacity.

    And I’m not too interested in which it is.

    Get what I’m saying through that thick skull of yours; It is harmless compared to openly advocating bringing about the Apocalypse.

    There’s millions of harmless conspiracy theories out there, about who shot JFK and who caused 9-11 and how AIDS came to be. Nobody ever does anything about them, and most are ridiculous at face value. It might be counter-productive, I will grant you that, but holy shit, it’s not anywhere near as crazy as staking out a policy position that kills billions of people and literally destroys the world.

    Levi (76ef55)

  261. Not a bit of fucking difference, as if any of this bullshit matters anyway.

    Nuance just ain’t your thing, huh?

    JD (75f5c3)

  262. God Damn America, land that Levi doesn’t love
    Stand beside her (sexist), and guide her
    Through the night, with a light, from above.

    From the mountains, to the government infecting black people with AIDs.
    To the oceans, full of all of the people the government infected with syphillis at Tuskeegee

    JD (75f5c3)

  263. Levi at #247:

    Wright thinks the government invented AIDS. That’s crazy, but also totally fucking harmless.

    Levi at #261:

    Get what I’m saying through that thick skull of yours; It is harmless compared to openly advocating bringing about the Apocalypse.

    No, Levi, that wasn’t what you were saying. You’ve changed your position again, and now you’re even lying about the things you’ve posted here.

    I’m with SPQR on this: your behavior here is indicative of either tremendous stupidity or bare-faced lying.

    Steverino (e00589)

  264. By the way, anyone who thinks it’s “totally fucking harmless” to make people think the government is actively trying to kill them is either bat-shit insane or a pathological liar.

    Steverino (e00589)

  265. That sound you just heard was the goal posts being moved. I refuted your comment that McCain believes “everything” Hagee says, and you come back with this weak reply.

    I don’t care what Hagee says about Catholics and Jews, and I never brought up those comments. Petty squabbles about which magical sky creature any of these assholes believe in don’t matter to me in the slightest.

    What does matter, again, is that Hagee wants America to be in a perpetual state of war, something which John “100 years in Iraq” McCain has hinted will be the basis of his foreign policy.

    You said outright that the war has profitted oil companies. Another set of goal posts being moved.

    I didn’t say oil companies, I said ‘their friends.’ That means KBR, Halliburton, Blackwater, and the rest of the war profiteers that are getting paid top-dollar (our dollars) with absolutely no accountability or quality assurance that what they’re being paid to do is actually being done, and done well. The invasion of Iraq has opened up the treasury of the government to a select few companies that Bush and Cheney gave all these no-bid contracts to. (By the way, how are no bid-contracts part of the free market spirit?)

    The oil industry is still one of Bush’s closest friends though, and there’s no doubt that he’s helped them, by dragging his feet on energy policy, handing them billions of dollars (our dollars) in unnecessary subsidies, eviscerating environmental regulations, and cutting them tax breaks, all at a time when they’re posting record profits.

    George Bush governs this country for the benefit of his buddies and to the detriment of you, me, and everyone else that isn’t worth at least $100 million dollars.

    The war has had no effect on oil prices, Levi. There has been no significant interruption of supply, nor any significant increase of demand because of it. In fact, oil prices dropped for the first 9 months after the Iraq war began.

    Gosh, do you think something else might be driving oil prices?

    I never made the claim that it did. It might be helping, though I’m no economist. I don’t think destabilizing the region was helpful at all, but that’s not my argument anyways.

    Levi (76ef55)

  266. No, Levi, that wasn’t what you were saying. You’ve changed your position again, and now you’re even lying about the things you’ve posted here.

    I’m with SPQR on this: your behavior here is indicative of either tremendous stupidity or bare-faced lying.

    Okay, I’m gonna walk you through this, nice and simple, as if you were the slowest kid in fifth grade.

    Re-read what I wrote at #247. That point of that first paragraph of mine is to demonstrate the craziness of the Hagee and Parsley positions with regards to Islam and the end-times, positions that would result in the deaths of, well, everybody, a policy position which I think most of us would consider incredibly destructive.

    The purpose of the first sentence of that second paragraph is to contrast Hagee’s and Parsley’s insanity with that of Wright’s AIDS conspiracy theory, which by any metric is not as crazy as calling for the eradication of a major world religion.

    I know what I meant, that post explains it plenty well, you just have no reading comprehension. I mean, the whole point of my bringing up Hagee and Parsley is to demonstrate that Wright isn’t as crazy as the Republican pastors. Do you know how to compare and contrast?

    Levi (76ef55)

  267. I don’t care what Hagee says about Catholics and Jews, and I never brought up those comments. Petty squabbles about which magical sky creature any of these assholes believe in don’t matter to me in the slightest.

    You don’t get away with this, you miserable little cretin. You said,

    McCain, presumably, agrees with everything these other two have said, not merely because he’s ‘proud’ of one of them, or refers to the other as his ’spiritual guide,’ but because he’s never explicitly has said he disagrees with them,

    (emphasis added).

    I proved you wrong: McCain repudiated Hagee’s statements. Now you’re trying to weasel around it.

    You also said,

    So if I point out that there are two oil men running the White House, and that the oil industry is as profitable as it ever has been, and that the Iraq war has benefited no one in this country except for these two oil men’s close business partners to the tune of tens of billions of dollars, you’d agree they’re probably a bunch of corrupt assholes that started a war to make their friends money, wouldn’t you?

    Tell me how you weren’t implying that the war profited oil companies.

    You are a lying, deceitful, dishonest and malicious sack of manure.

    Steverino (e00589)

  268. I know what I meant, that post explains it plenty well, you just have no reading comprehension. I mean, the whole point of my bringing up Hagee and Parsley is to demonstrate that Wright isn’t as crazy as the Republican pastors. Do you know how to compare and contrast?

    More goal post moving. If you really did mean “by comparison”, you would have said “by comparison”. But you didn’t say that. You said Wright’s comment was “totally fucking harmless”.

    Do you know what “totally” means? It means “completely” or “in its entirety”. So, you have said that Wright’s comment was completely and in its entirety harmless. And we both know that it isn’t.

    I have no trouble reading English, little man. You, however, seem to have trouble with the truth.

    Steverino (e00589)

  269. By the way, anyone who thinks it’s “totally fucking harmless” to make people think the government is actively trying to kill them is either bat-shit insane or a pathological liar.

    Conspiracy theories are by definition harmless, usually, and the only thing they ever really hurt are the reputations of those that espouse them. And really Wright’s bullshit about AIDS has almost no measurable traction compared (uh oh, start paying real close attention!) to things like 9-11 being an inside job and the various theories as to how JFK got killed. In that light, it’s hardly even a conspiracy theory. It’s an urban legend.

    Levi (76ef55)

  270. Levi #270:

    And really Wright’s bullshit about AIDS has almost no measurable traction compared (uh oh, start paying real close attention!) to things like 9-11 being an inside job and the various theories as to how JFK got killed.

    And yet, in a 1995 survey of 1,000 black church members, “35 percent believed the AIDS conspiracy theory and another 30 percent would not rule it out.” There’s more in the linked article on why it matters:

    “The study grew out of a work by researchers Sandra Quinn and Stephen Thomas. “In the hands of demagogues, talking about AIDS as a form of genocide polarizes us, separates us, and Dr. Quinn and I both believe places more people at risk,” said Thomas.

    Badili Jones of AID Atlanta suggests that African-Americans take more of a role in their own health care. “People need to be able to trust the people who are providing the health care. People need to take their own health care into their hands, and actually get over the sense of being victimized and have the power to govern their own lives,” he said.”

    It seems like Rev. Wright did his best to make sure his congregants were mired in misinformation and dependent on him.

    DRJ (a431ca)

  271. John “100 years in Iraq” McCain has hinted will be the basis of his foreign policy

    Interesting. Obama’s military advisor, McPeak, said almost the exact same thing.

    The invasion of Iraq has opened up the treasury of the government to a select few companies that Bush and Cheney gave all these no-bid contracts to.

    Please direct us to your outrage when prior Presidents utilized the services of Halliburton and KBR, or in the alternative, demonstrate for us another company that has the capability and expertise to do what they do.

    JD (75f5c3)

  272. First, I shall privately chuckles at “Dr. Quinn”, the medicine woman…

    Second, DRJ< Patterico, someone…

    Can you just ban the new Levi? Leave the old one. At least he’s 50/50 on being rational. This new moron is battin’ a big ol’ goose-egg.

    Scott Jacobs (d3a6ec)

  273. For people like Levi that demand the proper context for the whack job statements of people like Wright, they have no problem ripping McCain’s statements out of their context, and then claiming that he has a bloodlust for a 100 years war in the Middle East.

    JD (75f5c3)

  274. demonstrate for us another company that has the capability and expertise to do what they do.

    To be fair, there is one other (at lest, but I’m pretty sure it’s just one). It’s french. Would you rather we give money to the french, and employ the frogs instead of our guys?

    Scott Jacobs (d3a6ec)

  275. Jesus Christ Steve.

    Please, just recognize that both of us are coming into this conversation with our own sets of assumptions and ideology, and that just given the format of this type of debate, there are going to be things that are misinterpreted, or misread. When I referred to Bush’s friends, for example, I specifically meant those companies that have received huge, no-bid contracts to do shitty work in Iraq, but I can totally see how someone could think I meant oil companies, given the rest of my post.

    What’s needed in these confusions is requests for clarification, not accusations that I’m lying about what I believe in. I don’t care enough about you or this place to try to lie to win some argument that is totally meaningless. Again, I know what I mean, and I know what I believe in. If all you’re gonna do is tell me that I’m lying about those things, why should I bother talking to you at all?

    Levi (76ef55)

  276. received huge, no-bid contracts to do shitty work in Iraq,

    The brave men and women that are doing yeoman’s work in a war zone sure apprecite your fucking support, asshat.

    with our own sets of assumptions and ideology

    It sure helps debate when you assumptions and ideology are based on anything remotely approximating a fact.

    JD (75f5c3)

  277. To be fair, there is one other (at lest, but I’m pretty sure it’s just one). It’s french. Would you rather we give money to the french, and employ the frogs instead of our guys?

    Our guys are ripping us right the fuck off. There is no accountability for anything they do in Iraq, the Bush administration refuses to investigate them, even though there’s plenty of evidence to suggest egregious waste and irresponsibility, and have rewarded every allegation of wrongdoing against them with even more of our tax dollars.

    How much more obvious can the cronyism get? I mean Dick Cheney was Halliburton, and now he’s steering money into their coffers and literally, refusing to give a shit what they do with it, even though this mission in Iraq is supposedly really, really important.

    Levi (76ef55)

  278. What’s needed in these confusions is requests for clarification, not accusations that I’m lying about what I believe in.

    The problem, Levi, is that you behave just like a liar caught in his own words.

    If you had said, “You’re right: I said that badly. I didn’t mean to say that Wright was completely harmless,” maybe I’d have some respect for you. Instead, you dug your heels in and tried to explain how you really said something that you didn’t say at all.

    Again, I know what I mean

    As is evidenced by comments from me, SPQR, JD, and DRJ, nobody else seems to know what you mean. But rather than own up to your own failure to communicate, you blame the readers for not having ESP.

    If all you’re gonna do is tell me that I’m lying about those things, why should I bother talking to you at all?

    If you don’t like being called a liar, then stop lying. Stop weaseling out of things when you’re proven wrong. Stop moving the goal posts and twisting words around.

    And if you’d rather not talk to us than change your asinine behavior, I won’t shed any tears.

    Steverino (e00589)

  279. The brave men and women that are doing yeoman’s work in a war zone sure apprecite your fucking support, asshat.

    A few of those ‘brave men,’ that I remind you, aren’t governed by a UCMJ and are being paid three times as much as the military personnel in Iraq that are, have run around wantonly fragging civilians.

    And if they wanted my support, they wouldn’t do shit work. And I don’t necessarily blame the individuals hired by these war-profiteering companies for the shit work so much as I blame the war-profiteering companies themselves. These companies are wasteful and sometimes counter-productive to our public relations effort with Iraqis, and are actually rewarded for it, with more money and even less accountability.

    Levi (76ef55)

  280. And if you’d rather not talk to us than change your asinine behavior, I won’t shed any tears.

    I’ll talk to the rest of these people, but there’s obviously nothing more I can accomplish with you.

    Good bye forever!

    Levi (76ef55)

  281. Our guys are ripping us right the fuck off.

    LIAR

    And if they wanted my support, they wouldn’t do shit work.

    The tens of thousands of people that are doing this working, really fucking well, give you the middle finger salute.

    What do you think these evil companies are made up of, Levi? They are hard working Americans. The vast majority are blue collar workers, and many are former military. But those rubes are too uncooth for you.

    JD (75f5c3)

  282. Nice attempt to backpedal from denigrating the individuals to denigrating the company. The Left never bleated like this when President Clinton rightfully utilized their services.

    JD (75f5c3)

  283. The tens of thousands of people that are doing this working, really fucking well, give you the middle finger salute.

    What do you think these evil companies are made up of, Levi? They are hard working Americans. The vast majority are blue collar workers, and many are former military. But those rubes are too uncooth for you.

    You’re right, those people aren’t the problem. But there are people in Iraq that are swindling the American taxpayer and undermining the war effort. These companies have overcharged the military for necessary supplies, and they’ve overcharged individual soldiers for necessary services. A substantial portion of the money these companies receive go to extravagant luxuries that are absurd wastes of money in a war effort. They’ve exposed all of these blue-collar, ex-military to incredible danger to try to cut costs and boost profits. Remember those Blackwater workers that got attacked and were dragged through the streets? Some dumbshit pulled the machine gun escorts they were supposed to have had that day to save a buck.

    These are war profiteers. This is what happens when you try to privatize a war and refuse to put in place any sort of system of accountability. Why do you defend them?

    Levi (76ef55)

  284. War profiteers? And in italics no less.

    Sheesh, how juvenile.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  285. Nice attempt to backpedal from denigrating the individuals to denigrating the company. The Left never bleated like this when President Clinton rightfully utilized their services.

    I feel sorry for many of the individual contractors in Iraq, I wouldn’t denigrate them. Lots of them are hired for certain jobs and end up doing other things, things they aren’t experts in, because inefficiency and having to do work over and over and over again means Halliburton and Blackwater get more money. That’s the wisdom of the federal government signing these ridiculous ‘cost-plus’ contracts.

    But there are some, and it’s an extreme minority, I’m aware, that actively undermine the war effort by shooting at civilians and making American soldiers look bad.

    Levi (76ef55)

  286. You won’t denigrate them, you just lie about them and their efforts repeatedly.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  287. War profiteers? And in italics no less.

    Sheesh, how juvenile.

    All the stocks of these companies have gone through the roof in the past 5 years. They’re very provably profiting from this war. I don’t expect them to do all of this and not make a profit, of course, but they’re cutting corners and overcharging and lying and destroying perfectly good equipment, giving the shaft to the government, the taxpayers, the soldiers, and their employees to maximize those profits.

    How is it juvenile to label them war profiteers?

    Levi (76ef55)

  288. This was supposed to be a debt about race. When Levi can’t seem to win one argument he moves on to another.
    I’ll talk to the rest of these people, but there’s obviously nothing more I can accomplish with you.

    Good bye forever!

    And he couldn’t even keep that promise….
    yeeeesh

    Paul from Fl (47918a)

  289. and they’ve overcharged individual soldiers for necessary services

    Proof, please.

    A substantial portion of the money these companies receive go to extravagant luxuries that are absurd wastes of money in a war effort

    Proof, please.

    These are war profiteers.

    Proof, please. Not based on your assumption of what that phrase means, but based on the traditional and correct usage of that phrase.

    I feel sorry for many of the individual contractors in Iraq, I wouldn’t denigrate them.

    Liar. You have blasted them repeatedly on this very thread.

    lying and destroying perfectly good equipment

    Proof, please.

    JD (75f5c3)

  290. I’ve said this a few times, but for myself and for most liberals, this is a story about the double standards, hypocrisy, and blind, unquestioning loyalty of the Republican party, not race. Somebody brought up Obama’s connections to Rezko, as if that’s some big deal that proves his corruption and should automatically disqualify him from being President, so I brought up the fact that the former CEO of Halliburton started a war that’s earned Halliburton billions of dollars, which I think proves your party’s corruption, and should automatically disqualify any of you from being President.

    And I was only saying goodbye to Steve, at least until he learns to read.

    Levi (76ef55)

  291. Your words, Levi. Back them up, with facts.

    JD (75f5c3)

  292. so I brought up the fact that the former CEO of Halliburton started a war

    It is apparent that you do not even have a passing acquaintance with the meaning of the word “fact”

    JD (75f5c3)

  293. JD,

    There’s literally thousands of articles all over the god damn internet that detail everything that I’m alleging against these companies. Just because you’ve shut your eyes and covered your ears and ignored all of these examples of fraud, abuse, and waste so that you can maintain the delusion that we’re on some glorious quest doesn’t mean I’m going to do all the work you should have been doing over the past 5 years, by paying a fucking modicum of attention to what’s really going on over there.

    Levi (76ef55)

  294. Everyone watch their language.

    First and last warning on this thread.

    DRJ (a431ca)

  295. Good bye forever!

    Comment by Levi — 3/24/2008 @ 11:54 am

    But then…

    Comment by Levi — 3/24/2008 @ 12:14 pm
    Comment by Levi — 3/24/2008 @ 12:22 pm
    Comment by Levi — 3/24/2008 @ 12:26 pm
    Comment by Levi — 3/24/2008 @ 12:53 pm
    Comment by Levi — 3/24/2008 @ 1:00 pm

    And he wonders why we call him a liar?

    There’s literally thousands of articles all over the [redacted] internet that detail everything that I’m alleging against these companies

    Then you should no problem linking to even one that isn’t from a leftist blog/website.

    Hell, a well-sourced CNN or AP piece will suffice.

    By well-sourced, I mean one that doesn’t use “un-named source” for everyone.

    YOU made the assertation, so YOU get to provide the proof. It isn’t our job to prove your claims.

    Scott Jacobs (d3a6ec)

  296. Nope, Levi. That is not how it works. Your assertion, your burden of proof.

    You have alleged the following :

    * and they’ve overcharged individual soldiers for necessary services
    * A substantial portion of the money these companies receive go to extravagant luxuries that are absurd wastes of money in a war effort
    * These are war profiteers.
    * lying and destroying perfectly good equipment

    If the proof for these allegations is all over these here innertubes, it should be pretty easy for you to specifically source them. You failure to do so, or insistence that you do not have to, will constitute a tacit agreement that you were lying out your ass.

    We will let your lie about not denigrating the workers of Halliburton and KBR go for the time being, since it was such a whopper that nobody could be expected to take you seriously on that bald faced lie.

    JD (25bb93)

  297. Odd that when “thousands” of articles exist on the internet that say something Levi does not like, he refuses to read them.

    But when caught making more slanderous assertions that are off topic, by god all of a sudden the “thousands” of articles on the internet prove him right … whereever they are.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  298. SPQR – He made some very specific allegations. You would think he would be able to easily source them. Sadly, no.

    Racist.

    JD (25bb93)

  299. Well, JD, now we know why he defends Wright and Obama in their nutty conspiracy theories, don’t we?

    SPQR (26be8b)

  300. SPQR – Because he is a fucking twatwaffle whack-job?

    JD (25bb93)

  301. Sorry, Patterico.

    JD (25bb93)

  302. Well, I wouldn’t use those words …

    SPQR (26be8b)

  303. At times, I can be a bit intemperate, I admit. But I apologize.

    JD (25bb93)

  304. I wouldn’t use those word either, SPQR…

    But I would think them very, very loudly…

    Scott Jacobs (d3a6ec)

  305. hmmmm, waffles …

    SPQR (26be8b)

  306. Waffles! Tasty waffles!

    Scott Jacobs (d3a6ec)

  307. Levi – If the proof for these allegations is all over these here innertubes, it should be pretty easy for you to specifically source them. You failure to do so, or insistence that you do not have to, will constitute a tacit agreement that you were lying out your ass.

    So, you were lying out your ass, huh?

    JD (25bb93)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 1.2558 secs.