McCain May Be Old, but He's Still a Threat

posted by Katha Pollitt on 02/24/2008 @ 6:12pm

Email
Print
Share
- Buzzflash
- del.icio.us
- Digg
- Facebook
- Mixx it!
- Reddit
What is this?
Take Action
Comments (96)

Subscribe Now

Liberal smarties and sophisticates are having fun mocking John McCain , but assuming he gets the nomination, he will a formidable candidate. He may look like a grumpy old man -- specifically, as my friend Kathleen Geier joked, the grumpy old man who yells at kids to get off his lawn -- or the nutty old uncle who rags on everyone at Thanksgiving before passing out in front of the football game. But that's another way of saying McCain is a familiar, indeed family, character. It does not require an imaginative stretch to get John McCain. How many voters know someone like Barack Obama?

McCain is white, male, patriarchal, a war hero with decades in the Senate. So what if he's old? In politics old can be good ( for men), especially to the older voters -- older white voters -- who dominate the polls. Besides, McCain's not so old that he couldn't get himself a much younger trophy wife, and even if Cindy McCain looks brittle and unhappy and like she hasn't eaten in a decade, she is always there by his side, a visual reminder of his manly prowess. McCain is brash and sly and seemingly unguarded, unlike the famously self-protective Hillary Clinton, and he loves to schmooze with reporters, who adore him and like most of the rest of America, refuse to see how conservative he is. It's like they're saying, Oh go on, Uncle John! you're just saying you love Sam Alito to get me riled up!

Obama v. McCain could be change/youth/black/exciting/internationalist against experience/maturity/white/steady/superpatriot. Put that way, it could come down to how many white male Democrats, who might vote for Hillary, won't vote for a black man, let alone one whose middle name is Hussein. They won't care about McCain's favors for business --too complicated, and anyway everyone does it -- and they certainly won't care if he had an affair with lovely lobbyist Vicki Iseman, as the New York Times sorta-kinda suggested. They might like him even better for that.

We've been patting ourselves on the back a lot for having a black and a woman vying for top spot on the ticket of one of the two major parties. November will tell us whether or not we have really come all that far.

Comments (96)

And don't forget your colleague John Nichols cheerleading a Ralph Nader run, in the help that McCain will get!

Posted by Mask at 02/24/2008 @ 6:50pm
So now we have the two angry white men going after the Democratic nominee whoever it is (I'm not a prognosticator nor a betting man so I won't assume which will get it yet) and all of a sudden things get interesting really fast. However, underestimating Grandpa is a HUGE mistake. If he didn't have at least a few of the Republican ducks in a row behind him he would have folded much earlier in the process. Whatever else happens, McCain needs to be treated seriously and taken on as any other Republican should be.

Posted by yutsano at 02/24/2008 @ 7:01pm
Assuming that Obama continues to win out in the remaining primaries (Texas now looking possible, Ohio strangely lagging but likely to swing his way over next 9 days), it becomes a matter of how many states a liberal, northerner African American candidate can take going up against an aging but far from unattractive hero from a war long ago, in a place far, far away that fewer and fewer Americans know of as more than a syndrome.

Bottom line, Obama has to keep all the blue states Kerry won and find a way to turn Florida, Ohio, or both. Because in a general election, he will not likely win a single southern or Rocky Mountain/Plains state, following Kerry's precedent in 2004.

So how can Obama do this? Wow, I have no idea. Rather than keeping all Kerry's blue states, it seems likely that he will lose some. Minnesota seems vulnerable, for instance, as do both New Hampshire & Maine. These states both have huge white majorities and harbor strongly conservative contingents that may not always show their strength. But let McCain talk up his "new" border strategies, his love for the 2nd Amendment & the Bible, and you will see how competitive he will prove against a liberal Black candidate. It's possible that Missouri with its two metropolitan areas & sizable Black minority can put this state into Obama's column. But the chance is about as good as Ohio, with its three metropolitan areas and significant Black vote. Both of these states have strong Bible-thumping conservative Southern undercurrents even though most analysts think of them as Upper Midwest or "Northern" states. But Missouri has a considerable "Deliverance" affinity as does Ohio, which many people forget borders Kentucky and shares more the culture of this state in the southern half of the state than it shares with its usual comparitor, Michigan. People in the south of Ohio talk like Bubba, they think like Bubba, and they vote like Bubba too. Obama had better plan on spending a huge amount of his summer at Nascar events and professing his love of the martyr of the speedway, No. 3.

There is almost zero chance Obama can take Florida. People think, "Oh, Dade County, that's where all the votes are and those are people I can talk to." But even Gore, a southern white man, at last found that he could not swing enough of the gator eatin' moonshine swillin' rest of the state to keep Bush/Baker from stealing the state from him. Obama's chances are so much the worse.

So as much as I would like to bathe in the audacity of hope, a realistic appraisal of Obama's chances in November make me skeptical. Not that I won't campaign. I'm used to the futility by now and am too old to change. But unless the aggregate intelligence of the country, like that of Lake Wobegon, has decided to defy gravity and somehow hover above average, November looks like a good month for Mad Mac & Miss Vicki.

Posted by goyadad at 02/24/2008 @ 7:42pm
KATHA: ....let alone one whose middle name is Hussein.

Uh, Oh.....Now, you've done it......after I got hammered by MASK mimicking his "Obamaphobia" with copy-cat "Husseinphobia".....heheheheh!! It's gonna be fun, fun, fun!

Let's see, is Obama black? Yes & No.

Is he a Boomer? Yes to Boomers but No to the cultists.

Is he the Messiah? No to Boomers but Yes to Gen X & Y.

Is he Experienced? No compared to McCain (or even Hillary) but Yes to Gen X & Y.

Man, gotta go back to my tax return....

Posted by Happy at 02/24/2008 @ 7:46pm
Posted by HAPPY 02/24/2008 @ 7:46pm

HAP, don't let METT hear you say that. The man drinks from the Obama cup everyday. Just like HSUB drinking from Gore's cup before it turned cold and bitter to the taste.

Posted by ACook at 02/24/2008 @ 8:43pm
Posted by GOYADAD 02/24/2008 @ 7:42pm

Never met a stereotype he couldn't offend.

Posted by Sliver at 02/24/2008 @ 8:47pm
Is it too much to expect that voters will choose a candidate with more consideration of policy positions and less consideration of white/black, young/old, man/woman, etc.?

Yes, it is too much to expect. Thankfully, Senator McCain is the old white guy who is wrong on virtually every issue that matters.

Posted by Be Good at 02/24/2008 @ 8:58pm
Posted by HAPPY 02/24/2008 @ 7:46pm

I think the difference is, KATHA thinks using Obama's middle name as an attack is a BAD thing to do and bigoted.

You endorse it.

Posted by Mask at 02/24/2008 @ 9:10pm
We ignore McCain at our peril and the lessons could be sobering. McCain favors permanent tax cuts, permanent war, and corporate privilege. How far will we go to support an old uncle who sends our children to die, de-stabilizes the middle class, and destroys our nations economy? Whether Hillary, who is not my first choice, and Barack -- whom I support because of his principled stands, nuanced opinions, and leadership stance -- is nominated as the Democratic Standard Bearer, our nation will be forced to confront our personal demons of race and gender discrimination.

God Bless America and pray for our collective conscience.

Posted by donnaspeaks at 02/24/2008 @ 9:48pm
You endorse it.

Posted by MASK 02/24/2008 @ 9:10pm

Prove that I "endorse it"! Use exact quotes!

To you, "expecting" is same as "endorsing".....after all, you're famed for repeating "Don't trust her but will vote for her!".....Obviously, "Don't Trust" means "Endorse" to you! Easy for you to claim "expecting" means "endorsing"....MASKian logic!!!

I wonder anybody else thinks "expecting" a recession means "endorsing" a recession? Or, "expecting" more pollution mean "endorsing" such? "Expecting" WMD attacks mean "endorsing".........

I fully expect, but don't endorse, the MoveOns, the Kos, & the MASKs to twist and besmirch McCain and his age, as Katha already acknowledged the "mocking" of (grandfatherly) McCain. by "Liberal smarties and sophisticates". How can your MASKian logic be so sure she isn't "endorsing" this?

Posted by Happy at 02/24/2008 @ 9:50pm
and even if Cindy McCain looks brittle and unhappy and like she hasn't eaten in a decade,

HEY! that's petty.

Posted by frosty zoom at 02/24/2008 @ 10:07pm
Posted by HAPPY 02/24/2008 @ 9:50pm

Then we will await here for your harsh rebukes and stern criticisms when it happens....and wait....and wait....and wait.

Posted by Mask at 02/24/2008 @ 10:12pm
please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, not again.

please.

Posted by frosty zoom at 02/24/2008 @ 10:16pm
please.

Posted by frosty zoom at 02/24/2008 @ 10:17pm
Obama is a clear contrast to the republicans. I think part of the problem for me with serious democratic candidate in the past is that they dont embrace their progressiveness. Its like Liberal is a dirty word for them. Obama is the only serious candidate I've seen who will say in his stump speeches that he is a strong progressive. Democrats in the past seem to have an identity conflict they dont know where they stand and they end up taking on qualities like republicans. I want someone who provides a strong contrast to republicans and who is PROUD of that fact. Republicans are proud of being republicans but sometimes I feel like democrats are not proud of being democrats. I firmly believe this lack of pride and ambivalence is one of the reasons they lose. obama is not ashamed to say he is liberal and he will defend it as he did yesterday in one of his speeches. He defends it in such a way that by the time he is done he makes you think you know what it makes sense. I want a candidate that loves liberalism and all this talk about oh he is too far left they are not going to elect someone that far to the left. I think thats hogwash. I think voters want a clear contrast and if they dont get it apathy sets in and they stay home.

Carol

Posted by harriscrl3 at 02/24/2008 @ 10:39pm
Posted by HARRISCRL3 02/24/2008 @ 10:39pm

That's all good, CAROL.

Now that you've preached to the choir and persuaded all but the Pub trolls on this blog, how do propose that we also persuade the beer-belching, knuckle-dragging, knee-jerking NONPROGRESSIVE TRADITIONALIST MAJORITY in America who are suspicious of those who don't match their gender, their skin color, their religious prejudices, or their "convictions" on guns, the "Boarder" (sic), pickup trucks, turkey hunting, Nascar, and the sundry other pressing issues that preoccupy them?

Just wondering.

Posted by goyadad at 02/24/2008 @ 10:54pm
In a country that's 90% nonblack, Obama can't win an election based on only race. That seems obvious, which may explain Pollit's thudding irrelevence. Dispense with identity politics and stay on the war. That's how Obama wins this thing.

Posted by bagehot at 02/24/2008 @ 11:03pm
well unless the general election is in another country he has been winning so far in a country thats 90% nonblack. I think Obama is a lot smarter than he is given credit for. Before Obama experience use to be the most important quality in a President Obama came and experience became a dirty word associated with the status quo. Hillary had to abandon her whole experience campaign because Obama showed the American people experience is a big part of the problem. Hillary started saying get real. She made it seem like Obama was som ghuru duping the masses. Obama turned it around on her to say that she is implying the people supporting him are delusional. If he is the nominee and Foreign Policy becomes his weak area going up against John McCain. I have no doubt that he will redefine our conception of foreign policy so that it fits him.

He is extremely tactical but for some reason unknown to me his opponents think he is naieve, idealistic and lacking substance.

Carol

Posted by harriscrl3 at 02/25/2008 @ 12:21am
imagine a title:

Barack Obama May Be Young, But He's Still The Black Guy.

Posted by frosty zoom at 02/25/2008 @ 08:44am
Why does Katha Pollitt hate thin women?

Posted by ZERO 02/25/2008 @ 12:59am

Despite the cosmic irony of that statement....ya gotta say, ZERO coming to the defense of Cindy McCain JUST because "upper class feminist" Katha Pollitt attacks her...

is a HILARIOUS thing to see!

Posted by Mask at 02/25/2008 @ 09:27am
You know, it will be interesting to see just what the Libs do this time: For years they have touted their concern for the advancement of minorities. They've pushed programs through and tromped on the constitution and promoted unfair wealth distribution and created protective classes, all in an effort to be the champion of the little guy, to "save" him against the machinations of the Big Bad Uncaring, Uncompassionate Republican. Well, now one of their flock is running for President. They should be proud (even though it was more traditional values that enabled him to get there-no one rises through handouts.) So, will they vote for him? C'mon Libs, so vote for him already. Screw Hillary. Will they allow themselves to be placed under HIS wing? Or didn't they REALLY mean it?

I hope he wins. I hope he takes it all and turns the country on its head. Hillary speaks derisively about Obamas' "magic wand" fixing everything. But with no alternative but the same old ineffectual leadership we've had for the past 16 years, I'll take a chance with the wand: Its gotta be better than what we've got now.

Over the next few months we're going to see just how truly Liberal the liberals are.

Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 02/25/2008 @ 10:47am
Posted by ZERO 02/25/2008 @ 12:59am

True that was harsh. It was also funny as hell. I look at the woman and would be scared she'd break in half if I touched her. I'm sure she's a fighter, though. Alot of skinny women I know don't mind fighting even though they usually get their asses whooped. Of course to listen to the comedienne Mo'nique, "skinny bitches are evil".

Posted by k330k at 02/25/2008 @ 11:04am
Posted by FROSTY ZOOM 02/25/2008 @ 08:44am

LOL!!!!!

Posted by k330k at 02/25/2008 @ 11:04am
Posted by MEGACEPHALUS 02/25/2008 @ 05:46am

Cool. Politicians are just like us......except when it comes to the law. Okay so just I get everything straight. McCain's wife was a drug addict, Obama did drugs in his youth, and Bill Clinton did drugs up until the presidency. Boy, that war on drugs is kicking ass!!

Posted by k330k at 02/25/2008 @ 11:07am
Bringing Our Troops Home

"Obama will immediately begin to remove our troops from Iraq. He will remove one to two combat brigades each month, and have all of our combat brigades out of Iraq within 16 months. Obama will make it clear that we will not build any permanent bases in Iraq. He will keep some troops in Iraq to protect our embassy and diplomats; if al Qaeda attempts to build a base within Iraq, he will keep troops in Iraq or elsewhere in the region to carry out targeted strikes on al Qaeda."

Seems little difference between any of the candidates on Iraq.

In fact Obama is talking about withdrawal in May 2010 if and only if "al Qaeda does not attempt to build a base in Iraq".

That gives Obama all the wriggle room he needs to join Pelosi and other Democrats who promised much on Iraq and delivered nothing. Poor gullible "progressives". It could take Obama "one hundred (McCain) years".

Or for those concerned with the billions spent on Iraq, this:

Regional Diplomacy

"Obama will launch the most aggressive diplomatic effort in recent American history to reach a new compact on the stability of Iraq and the Middle East. This effort will include all of Iraq's neighbors -- including Iran and Syria. This compact will aim to secure Iraq's borders; keep neighboring countries from meddling. inside Iraq; isolate al Qaeda; support reconciliation among Iraq's sectarian groups; and provide financial support for Iraq's reconstruction."

Those policies raise questions such as how Obama will do all this without a strong military presence;perhaps a magic wand? One could speculate that he is lying about his intentions to do all this in Iraq and the ME (as it affects Iraq) or that he is pretty much (secretly) committed to pursuing the same objectives in Iraq as Bush, Clinton and McCain which brings us back to the means.

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/iraq/

Posted by harvey 79 at 02/25/2008 @ 12:09pm
I think the assessment presented in this blog might apply to Obama if he hadn't already demonstrated his ability to draw new voters by the thousands.

True, McCain is the white guy, and there are millions who will vote for him based on that alone, but ultimately there are millions more of us who are ready to move forward.

And, Nader's presence might also draw some of those "white guy" votes...maybe THAT's why he's running!

Posted by nicR at 02/25/2008 @ 2:21pm
Posted by NICR 02/25/2008 @ 2:21pm

Well, we'll see.

I suspect that what we'll learn this fall about the Democratic nominating process is what Samuel Johnson said of second marriages: they are the triumph of hope over experience. (Haven't checked the citation, but I think he meant that ironically.) I'm not at all sure that progressive hopes are strong enough to triumph in a nation that has a 240 year history of valorizing ignorance over knowledge, greed over civic selflessness, prejudice over science.

Best of luck, though. Who knows-- maybe the DNC will find a way to repeal the Law of Gravity (provided that would advantage the insiders sufficiently).

BTW-- I'm not sure that voters in Democratic primaries are a representative sampling of US majority opinion. Anyone got a line on that one?

Posted by goyadad at 02/25/2008 @ 3:07pm
When did being a older person and white become such a hated thing in America? Talk about discrimination. I am just truly amazed by the hypocritical double standards the left applies. It should not be whether Obama appears black or Hillary is a woman. It should be about who is the best candidate. Seems to me it is the left that always makes race and gender an issue and this article is living proof of that. Add to that, apparently being a Republican is also evil incarnate to the left. I just wish the left would just stop, take a step back and really listen to themselves. Those that preach tolerance seem to me to be the most intolerant people on the planet of anyone that dares have a differing opinion from the left's opinions. By the way, I am a foreigner living in America and giving my view as from the outside looking in. I am not saying the GOP is perfect, they aren't. But, the American left has this holier-than-thou attitude down perfectly and appear to be much less tolerant of those who are different than anyone.

Posted by Steelman at 02/25/2008 @ 6:03pm
Posted by STEELMAN 02/25/2008 @ 6:03pm

Dude, if it was really such a bad thing in politics to be old and white, we wouldn't have a history rich with old white guys in politics. Old white guys have the demographic advantage; that's the point of the article. I'm sorry you and others have a tough time getting it.

Posted by MATTMAN at 02/25/2008 @ 7:08pm
communistic leaning socialism !

Posted by RIO BRAVO 02/25/2008 @ 7:23pm

Medication time big guy!

Posted by MATTMAN at 02/25/2008 @ 7:56pm
communistic leaning socialism !

Posted by RIO BRAVO 02/25/2008 @ 7:23pm

You forgot "extremist muslim!" in that post!

Posted by MATTMAN at 02/25/2008 @ 7:58pm
Being a Black Republican, I find the three remaining candidates useless:

1. Hillary was married to the man who raised my taxes in 1993 and she will do the same. That was the year I became a Republican

2. Obama will remind America of the Jimmy Carter era and as a Black man, I don't want that for Black America

3. John McCain gave us: a. McCain-Feingold which begot MoveOn.Org b. McCain-Kennedy which would have given us 12 to 20 million people who may want to give California, Arizona, New Mexico back to Mexico c. Didn't support Tax Cuts

4. Have the supporters of Obama or Hillary, did you guys ever do the math on their programs? Get a supercomputer or get a bunch of zeroes.

5. Finally, I will probably vote for McCain, because the Justices that Obama or Hillary will nominate will help ruin America i.e. Ginsberg et al

Posted by MajorBarb at 02/25/2008 @ 11:19pm
s a HILARIOUS thing to see!

Posted by MASK 02/25/2008 @ 09:27am

well, i pointed that out, too.

it's very petty.

Posted by frosty zoom at 02/26/2008 @ 12:39am
Boy, that war on drugs is kicking ass!!

Posted by K330K 02/25/2008 @ 11:07am

yeah, just ask the folks at phillip-morris or coors.........

Posted by frosty zoom at 02/26/2008 @ 12:40am
Posted by DONNASPEAKS 02/24/2008 @ 9:48pm

Obama's principled stand? If Brooks is right, and his claims can be checked, Obama is dishonest or ill informed:

http://tinyurl.com/2wryav

Posted by harvey 79 at 02/26/2008 @ 05:19am
1. Hillary was married to the man who raised my taxes in 1993 and she will do the same.----Posted by MAJORBARB 02/25/2008 @ 11:19pm |

Wow, how much were you making in 1993?

Posted by Mask at 02/26/2008 @ 09:15am
Posted by FROSTY ZOOM 02/26/2008 @ 12:39am

I swear Katha Pollitt could post an article on "How cute are kittens?"...

and ZERO would attack the "knee-jerk upper class feminist idealization of baby felines!!!!"

LOL!

Posted by Mask at 02/26/2008 @ 09:16am
Let's see here. McCain's the "old white guy," while Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are primarily referred to according to their gender and their racial identities.

What the heck ever happened to "judging a person according to the content of their character and not according to the color of their skin (or the shape of their genitalia)?"

When did it become so trendy among the cognoscenti to use racial and gender identity issues as a primary criteria for selecting a candidate for President? We've "come so far" if we vote for the woman or the African-American but we "haven't come so far" if we vote for the "old white guy?" C'mon! If we vote for *any* of these three candidates based on this line of reasoning we've regressed as people into something far removed from and below anything Martin Luther King or John F. Kennedy would have ever envisioned.

Posted by L'art at 02/26/2008 @ 09:22am
Republicans are proud of being republicans but sometimes I feel like democrats are not proud of being democrats. I firmly believe this lack of pride and ambivalence is one of the reasons they lose. Carol

Posted by HARRISCRL3 02/24/2008 @ 10:39pm

No, I think the reason they don't want to claim they are liberal is that if they appear to be too liberal, big business won't throw cash their way in the form of campaign donations. So, they hedge their bets to try to skirt the line of getting votes from the left side and donations from the middle right side.

Kind of like baseball players kicking the chalk line in the back of the batters box so they can move back in the box (actually outside the batters box). Since the chalk line is basically smeared around to where it's about 3 feet wide, hitters can wait a little longer on the fastball. It's against the rules, but major league upmires don't call them on it. We, the democrats, don't call our elected left wing officials on it either.

Posted by Wolfgang1 at 02/26/2008 @ 09:57am
5. Finally, I will probably vote for McCain, because the Justices that Obama or Hillary will nominate will help ruin America i.e. Ginsberg et al

Posted by MAJORBARB 02/25/2008 @ 11:19pm

don't forget kerouac and burroughs..........

Posted by frosty zoom at 02/26/2008 @ 10:46am
Senator Obama is not likely to have as much trouble as you seem to beleive. Kerry was perhaps the weakest candidate the Democrats could have fielded last time. And he came fairly close. Obama will do much better, and McCain is not near the candidate that President Bush was. This election is very like Ford-Carter, when many conservative voters sat it out to wait for someone they could feel good about. McCain isn't that person. Look for a sweeping Obama victory in November. Clinton still has a better chance against him than McCain.

Posted by LeeA at 02/26/2008 @ 11:18am
It is SAD that in this country that's what it really boils down to. This is the country that sends it young men and women to other country to fight for the so-called DEMOCRACY and people die for this cause, yet, in our own country everything is based on the color of your skin. White America loves to chastize others for "voting race" yet, White America ALWAYS vote race. They says one thing when interviewed or in the streets, but once they get in the voting booth its ALL ABOUT RACE no matter if the white guy IS A BUM like the one in ofice now. In America the white man only worries about its IMAGE. It is all about IMAGE and that is the reason we get upset with people that exposes us.

Posted by Gusto at 02/26/2008 @ 12:07pm
5. Finally, I will probably vote for McCain, because the Justices that Obama or Hillary will nominate will help ruin America i.e. Ginsberg et al

Posted by MAJORBARB 02/25/2008 @ 11:19pm

MAJORBARB,

I see, so you like the supreme court the W has put into power? The same supreme court that sides with big business on every issue and slams the door on any type of liability lawsuit that comes in the way of big business be it the Exxon Valdez, or the most recent suit against Medtronics where the FDA approved device failed, but since the FDA approved the device, patients can't sue the manufactuerer?

Stay in the military Major and let them do your thinking for you because you evidently can't think for yourself. McCain will appoint morons equal to those W appointed...in the hip pockets of big business. They don't stand for justice, they stand for the almighty dollar to those who wield the most power. The rest of us don't get justice, we get stomped on like the cockroaches they perceive us to be.

Posted by Wolfgang1 at 02/26/2008 @ 12:10pm
It is SAD that in this country that's what it really boils down to. This is the country that sends it young men and women to other country to fight for the so-called DEMOCRACY and people die for this cause, yet, in our own country everything is based on the color of your skin. White America loves to chastize others for "voting race" yet, White America ALWAYS vote race. They says one thing when interviewed or in the streets, but once they get in the voting booth its ALL ABOUT RACE no matter if the white guy IS A BUM like the one in ofice now. In America the white man only worries about its IMAGE. It is all about IMAGE and that is the reason we get upset with people that exposes us.

Posted by Gusto at 02/26/2008 @ 12:14pm
In America the white man only worries about its IMAGE. It is all about IMAGE and that is the reason we get upset with people that exposes us.

Posted by GUSTO 02/26/2008 @ 12:14pm

Good points Gusto. I'll one better you though. Most of those people our soldiers are ordered to kill are not white. So, this country is consistent to a certain degree with it's racism.

It's alright to vote like an asshole as long as you pretend at church that you're a good Christian and pretend to follow the ways of Jesus.

In short, it's ok to be a racist jack ass and support wars in other nations, but it's un-American to oppose those who would allow racist opinions to influence their votes and also influence their views on who and where our military is dispersed to kill the locals.

I'm a pissed off white guy who has been lumped in with the rednecks due to my skin color but find that I don't have a leg to stand on to defend myself because we have so many white male rednecks in this country who evidently outnumber those of us who aren't...why else would a guy like W be the president?

Posted by Wolfgang1 at 02/26/2008 @ 12:35pm
because we have so many white male rednecks in this country who evidently outnumber those of us who aren't...why else would a guy like W be the president?

Posted by WOLFGANG1 02/26/2008 @ 12:35pm

maybe it's because most Americans don't support the Fed taking more and more of their pay.

maybe it's because most Americans prefer to keep our sovereignty

maybe it's because most Americans don't want the jihadists to have free reign to bring havoc, death, and destruction to Americans.

Maybe it's because while liberals propose all kinds of "free" government services, when Americans read the fine print, they realize that the "free" was a lie by liberals.

Case in point. My youngest son is a fireman and single. But because he makes a solid 6 figure income as fireman, he is considered wealthy by most liberals. They want to tax him more, he wants to know how to keep more of his money.

Posted by lvliberty1 at 02/26/2008 @ 1:24pm
Most of those people our soldiers are ordered to kill are not white.

Posted by WOLFGANG1 02/26/2008 @ 12:35pm

neither are many of the soldiers.

Posted by frosty zoom at 02/26/2008 @ 1:26pm
maybe it's because most Americans don't support the Fed taking more and more of their pay.

•••••• actually, the "fed" is responsible for turning their money to rubber.

maybe it's because most Americans prefer to keep our sovereignty

•••••• long gone. welcome to the corporatocracy.

maybe it's because most Americans don't want the jihadists to have free reign to bring havoc, death, and destruction to Americans.

•••••• that's what republicans are for.

Maybe it's because while liberals propose all kinds of "free" government services, when Americans read the fine print, they realize that the "free" was a lie by liberals.

•••••• yeah. that money is for making cluster bombs.

Case in point. My youngest son is a fireman and single. But because he makes a solid 6 figure income as fireman, he is considered wealthy by most liberals.

•••••• actually, by most humans.

They want to tax him more, he wants to know how to keep more of his money.

•••••• gold.

Posted by LVLIBERTY1 02/26/2008 @ 1:24pm

Posted by frosty zoom at 02/26/2008 @ 1:29pm
'Diebold Accidentally Leaks Results Of 2008 Election Early'

http://tinyurl.com/3797sh

Almost as bad as:

"A wealthy old lady decides to go on a photo safari in Africa , taking her faithful aged poodle named Cuddles, along for the company.

One day the poodle starts chasing butterflies and before long, Cuddles discovers that he's lost . Wandering about, he notices a leopard heading rapidly in his direction with the intention of having lunch.

The old poodle thinks, 'Oh, oh! I'm in trouble now!' Noticing some bones on the ground close by, he immediately settles down to chew on the bones with his back to the approaching cat. Just as the leopard is about to leap the old poodle exclaims loudly, 'Boy, that was one delicious leopard! I wonder if there are any more around here?'

Hearing this, the young leopard halts his attack in mid-strike, a look of terror comes over him and he slinks away into the trees.

'Whew!', says the leopard, 'That was close! That old poodle nearly had me!'

Meanwhile, a monkey who had been watching the whole scene from a nearby tree figures he can put this knowledge to good use and trade it for protection from the leopard. So off he goes, but the old poodle sees him heading after the leopard with great speed, and figures that something must be up. The monkey soon catches up with the leopard, spills the beans and strikes a deal for himself with the leopard.

The young leopard is furious at being made a fool of and says, 'Here, monkey, hop on my back and see what's going to happen to that conniving canine!

Now, the old poodle sees the leopard coming with the monkey on his back and thinks, 'What am I going to do now?', but instead of running, the dog sits down with his back to his attackers, pretending he hasn't seen them yet, and just when they get close enough to hear, the old poodle says.

'Where's that damn monkey? I sent him off an hour ago to bring me another leopard!

Moral of this story...

Don't mess with old farts...age and treachery will always overcome youth and skill!

Bull and brilliance only come with age and experience. "

Or, is it really the question: When is BS not really just BS-- 'new' BS you can spot coming, but 'old' BS only stinks after you've accidentally kicked it over...

Posted by hsuBfools at 02/26/2008 @ 1:33pm
Don't forget what happened to Ned LaMont! Had all the liberals, bloggers and the youth. Until, he ran up against the old, conservative white guy who betrayed his party and ended up with all those "crossover" voters who usually vote Republican.

Please say it ain't so.

Posted by Desert Son at 02/26/2008 @ 1:48pm
And then there is the plain 'ol'-fashioned' cheating thing:

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=5738#more-5738

Posted by hsuBfools at 02/26/2008 @ 2:19pm
Posted by FROSTY ZOOM 02/26/2008 @ 1:29pm

so you also dislike firemen? you don't think that their compensation for putting their lives on the line to save others is worthwhile?

Posted by lvliberty1 at 02/26/2008 @ 2:39pm
I think your viewpoint of a McCain vs Obama race comes down to mainly racial attitudes is a 20th century perspective. This is the 21st century and it requires a little more work to figure out the landscape. McCain is a nothing candidate! Just like G.W. Bush was a nothing candidate and skin color was not an issue in 2004.

What the Republicans have working for them is a propaganda machine that has the awesome horsepower to get "Daffy Duck" elected president. WHOEVER gets the Democratic nomination will be facing the overwhelming ower of the Republican National Propaganda Machine (RNPM) and this baby sure ain't "chopped liver"!!

The main engine for the RNPM is the 2000+ AM radio stations blanketing the American airwaves with Limbaugh, Coulter, Savage along with a multitude of copycat wannabees. Group conglomerates like Talk Radio Network have "affiliate Stations" in every corner of the nation that as a mechanism continuously airs every iota of the Republican message, broadcast as "editorials" by these so called conservative commentators.

Heavy handed propaganda techniques like this are generally dismissed by today's modern progressives as being inconsequential. But like the well oiled, well preserved old John Deere tractor, turn it on and it goes to work! Preservation of the RNPM is exactly why the Republicans fought (are still fighting) tooth and nail against the recent Senate bill S-2332 and House bill H.R. 4835 which would require the FCC to promote broadcast of LOCAL Programming and content. These bills have been effectively stalled so the RNPM will be in peak and expanding form for the upcoming general presidential election. This is what the Democrats have to overcome in order to win in November.

One last word. The reason why the RNPM was ineffective in the last Congressional elections lies in the fact that there is LITTLE OR NO local content broadcast by these stations, due to the syndicated nature of the main programming material. It is an ironic fact that the programming nature of this syndicated material out of necessity must concentrate primarily on national issues. Therefore discussion of issues of real concern to local voters about their Senators or Representatives in congress is absent from these AM outlet affiliates. As a net result local Democratic candidates were able to gain ground against many encumbent Republicans. At this point many high level Democrats still fail to comprehend the difference in capability of the propaganda landscape for the Congressional election and for the presidential election. This has resulted in a feeling of smug confidence among Democratics that the Republicans have little chance in the upcoming presidential election. This represents a serious misreading of the national capabilities of the RNPM.

Posted by parvenu at 02/26/2008 @ 2:50pm
The foregoing is. from my vantage point, a distraction. I prefer to accept the fact the John McCain, unless he dies first, will be our next president. The people elected Al Gore in '00 and John Kerry in '04. 'Nuff said.

Please turn off the media, Clinton-Obama, circus and insure that Mr. McCain will have congress that will support him in shutting down the war machine. The only ones benefiting from this theater are the media moguls.

Please, please direct your energy to putting a progressive in congress.

www.pdamerica.org

Posted by pdcarey at 02/26/2008 @ 4:52pm
Case in point. My youngest son is a fireman and single. But because he makes a solid 6 figure income as fireman, he is considered wealthy by most liberals. They want to tax him more, he wants to know how to keep more of his money.

Posted by LVLIBERTY1 02/26/2008 @ 1:24pm

I would guess that your son doesn't make much over 100k. That's not rich. He's not going to starve to death, but he's not rich. If he wants to keep more of his money, invest it in an IRA, 401K and invest in his home and possibly a second piece of property would be my best guess. So, here's one liberal guy who doesn't think he's wealthy.

From the latest talk the politicians on both sides of the coin tell us, those earning less than 250k are of the lesser quality type. Maybe MBB and Happy make more than that, but most of us here probably make what your son does or less. I think firemen definitely earn every cent they make. They put their lives on the line for people every day.

Posted by Wolfgang1 at 02/26/2008 @ 5:04pm
neither are many of the soldiers.

Posted by FROSTY ZOOM 02/26/2008 @ 1:26pm

Good point.

Posted by Wolfgang1 at 02/26/2008 @ 5:05pm
communistic leaning socialism !

Posted by RIO BRAVO 02/25/2008 @ 7:23pm

Communism is just socialism on steroids!

Posted by dscott at 02/26/2008 @ 7:28pm
RE: "John McCain May Be Old, but He's Still the White Guy"

Some people used to think McCain like any other politico is crooked. Now it turns out he the less crooked among the running candidates: straight, and unlike Mr. Obama, never afraid of admiting his sins in the past. So who's more hypocrite? Pity angry liberal men of any races or McCain?

Posted by HelenDAO at 02/26/2008 @ 10:02pm
so you also dislike firemen? you don't think that their compensation for putting their lives on the line to save others is worthwhile?

Posted by LVLIBERTY1 02/26/2008 @ 2:39pm

nonsense. firefighters have my 17,658,456% respect, unlike bomb makers.

i'm just saying that even i am wealthy compared to most of the world.

Posted by frosty zoom at 02/26/2008 @ 11:32pm
When some people are running scared, they resort to personal attacks. Wake up, Katha Pollitt! Disparaging comments on McCain's wife and his unprobable affair with a lobbyist take away from the issues at hand. Interesting how you don't have to be either left or right to write such drivel.

Posted by geoberts at 02/27/2008 @ 01:35am
Some people used to think McCain like any other politico is crooked. Now it turns out he the less crooked among the running candidates: straight, and unlike Mr. Obama, never afraid of admiting his sins in the past. So who's more hypocrite? Pity angry liberal men of any races or McCain?

Posted by HELENDAO 02/26/2008 @ 10:02pm

Helen, Whether or not McCain is honest or not has nothing to do with the fact that he will be a crappy president. If you like George W Bush's policies, then by all means vote for McBush, but if you don't like the direction this country is heading, you may want to keep in mind that he wishes to continue this war in Iraq that is bankrupting our nation, destroying the military and making the U.S. less and less respected throughout the world while at the same time continuing down the path of keeping this country a corporate welfare state. Is that what you really want?

Posted by Wolfgang1 at 02/27/2008 @ 07:43am
I just readed Nam/vets have a diffent story of the white guy.Radio broadcaster is one.

Posted by legion at 02/27/2008 @ 09:25am
I just readed Nam/vets have a diffent story of the white guy.Radio broadcaster is one.

Posted by legion at 02/27/2008 @ 09:26am
Posted by WOLFGANG1 02/27/2008 @ 07:43am

You're looking at the prototype of a Hillary'ite talking point for why they're going to vote for McCain and not Obama.

In other words, "If our candidate doesn't win, we're going to screw over her primary opponent out of spite!"

Posted by Mask at 02/27/2008 @ 09:56am
You're looking at the prototype of a Hillary'ite talking point for why they're going to vote for McCain and not Obama.

In other words, "If our candidate doesn't win, we're going to screw over her primary opponent out of spite!"

Posted by MASK 02/27/2008 @ 09:56am

Mask,

I believe you may be dead on with that. I can't figure out either side of the equation on this particular subject. We've got dems out there who won't vote for Obama if Hillary loses or say they will vote for McCain. Then, there's republicans out there who say they will vote for Hillary because they don't like McCain (note that you don't hear them saying they'd vote for Obama).

What kind of logic do these people apply to their voting positions? Evidently none. As you pointed out, if their candidate doesn't win the primary, then they are going to vote for the opposition to make sure that the party that thinks the closest to their way of thinking loses. If they can't get their way, then they are going to screw themselves over. Like I said, no logic is being applied by these folks.

Posted by Wolfgang1 at 02/27/2008 @ 10:27am
I'm waiting (probably in vain) for either Hillary or Barack to address the military-industrial-congressional complex, it's obscene morbid obesity, it's unflinching greed, and need to desparately hold on to its very special interests. It's the Elephant in the room, the gorilla in the backyard, and the tigers in the trees.

Posted by moze at 02/27/2008 @ 1:00pm
People may tolerate their grouchy old uncle at family gatherings, but they go out of their way to avoid him the rest of the year. He's fun in small doses, but he'd drive you to despair if you had to see him everyday. You certainly don't want him as President. His bad ideas and terrible sense of humor--"bomb Iran"--would become international incidents, and his emotional instability would become a matter of national security. McCain is like Bob Dole with anger issues. There is too much at stake to go with the old crank in this election. I suspect that Americans are ready to try the sharp newcomer with energy and fresh ideas.

Posted by Andy O at 02/27/2008 @ 1:44pm
FINALLY! A realistic appraisal of Obama's chances in the general election. I'd come to believe I'd never see this in the Nation! If people sense that the nation and their livelihood along with it, are in serious trouble, with the outlook bleak and uncertain, they have to choose between an experienced plain spoken white guy with a military background, and an inexperienced sweet talking black guy with a Muslim name and no military background, who do you think most of them are going top pick?

The big money (Wall Street, oil companies, big corporations) wants a Republican president, and since the GOP is presently in such bad shape, they're pushing to get the weakest Democrat to run against the GOP in the fall. The weakest Democrat (all bogus polling aside) is Barak Obama; the Clintons actually have a record of beating Republicans. The big money has been promoting Obama for over a year, with glowing, almost entirely positive media coverage (remember, the big money owns the media). Isn't it interesting that the initial, positive, media roll out of Obama last year was by right wing media pundits? In fact Obama received much of his early funding from the same right wing Republicans who funded the Swift boat attack on John Kerry. Well, it looks like their plan is working; the marketing has been first rate.

Posted by wgilwood at 02/27/2008 @ 9:56pm
FINALLY! A realistic appraisal of Obama's chances in the general election. I'd come to believe I'd never see this in the Nation! If people sense that the nation and their livelihood along with it, are in serious trouble, with the outlook bleak and uncertain, and they have to choose between an experienced plain spoken white guy with a military background, and an inexperienced sweet talking black guy with a Muslim name and no military background, who do you think most of them are going to pick?

The big money (Wall Street, oil companies, big corporations) wants a Republican president, and since the GOP is presently in such bad shape, they're pushing to get the weakest Democrat to run against the GOP in the fall. The weakest Democrat (all bogus polling aside) is Barak Obama; the Clintons actually have a record of beating Republicans. The big money has been promoting Obama for over a year, with glowing, almost entirely positive media coverage (remember, the big money owns the media). Isn't it interesting that the initial, positive, media roll out of Obama last year was by right wing media pundits? In fact Obama received much of his early funding from the same right wing Republicans who funded the Swift boat attack on John Kerry. Well, it looks like their plan is working; the marketing has been first rate.

Posted by wgilwood at 02/27/2008 @ 9:57pm
....the marketing has been first rate.

Posted by WGILWOOD 02/27/2008 @ 9:57pm

Yes, it is! But the hardest was to get many of the Feminists to go against Hillary....that was my job at The Nation, heheheheh.....and I must say, I've helped to push them away from HRC :~))))

Posted by Happy at 02/27/2008 @ 10:16pm
The boy's club always supports each other; the democratic boy's club is supporting Obama, with help from misguided women. If Obama becomes the democratic nominee, it wouldn't surprise me if all the white boys's who voted for Obama, vote for McCain the in general election. White men often support each othe just because; blacks support each other just because (all one has to do is observe Georgia politics) and Latinos support other Latinos due to the immigration issues and the need to have their interest represented. Women are STUPID and don't usually play team sports, so subjectaging differences of opinion to gain political power is not a habit. I won't count McCain out; he is a warrior and has a warrior mentality to survive and win.

Posted by Rockerbabe at 02/27/2008 @ 11:19pm
I'm waiting (probably in vain) for either Hillary or Barack to address the military-industrial-congressional complex, it's obscene morbid obesity, it's unflinching greed, and need to desparately hold on to its very special interests. It's the Elephant in the room, the gorilla in the backyard, and the tigers in the trees.

Posted by MOZE 02/27/2008 @ 1:00pm

Moze, I agree with you about obscene amount of money we spend on the military industrial complex, but don't hold your breath on any of these candidates doing a damn thing about it.

With McCain, we'll get 4 more years of W's policies which suck. With Clinton or Obama, they may shift the tax burden on the wealthier honest folks that pay their taxes, but they won't stop our tax dollars being bled out by the military industrial complex. Neither of them has mentioned anything about reducing military spending, they just talk about getting us out of Iraq which is at least a step in the right direction.

Posted by Wolfgang1 at 02/28/2008 @ 06:58am
Yes, that will be a real test. We will see whether the US really won the Cold War or whether it is in fact America that has struck her colors and accept the Left's mindset.

Posted by MARKCANYON 02/27/2008 @ 6:05pm

That's the longest line of horseshit I've read in sometime. Go wave your flag elsewhere. WWI, WWII, the Korean conflict, Vietnam, both Iraq wars etc. were not fought solely by right wing rednecks with beliefs just like yours. Many a liberal has been drafted, volunteered and are still volunteering and dying in the U.S. military.

You idiots don't own this country, nor do you own the word patriotism. Get off your high horse jack ass. Displaying a flag in your yard doesn't make you a patriot, it means you are somebody who puts a flag pole in his yard to hang a flag on. Saying the pledge of allegiance doesn't make you a patriot. You can display the flag, say the pledge of allegiance and still be a coward who wants others to do his fighting for him.

Sacrificing for your country makes you a patriot. People like you bitch about paying their taxes. You don't even want to contribute money to your government let alone fight for it. What the hell have you sacrificed more than people on the left?

Posted by Wolfgang1 at 02/28/2008 @ 07:09am
In the meantime, it is okay to trash someone for their age? That is what I detest most about these pampered limo liberal feminists who blew their credibility by sneering at the women Clinton exploited as "trailer trash" and now rally around the dutiful wife who rode in on hubby's coattails and stuck by her man and assisted in trashing the women her husband exploited as a vetriliquest for the patriarchy-- as a vote for feminism against the patriarchy.

Meanwhile it is okay to poke fun of someone in a mean way because of their age.

That is what I despise most of all about these daughters of privilige- they are like their wealthy white male counterparts, in that they only really only advocate for their own.

Posted by Lil at 02/28/2008 @ 08:10am
I'm waiting (probably in vain) for either Hillary or Barack to address the military-industrial-congressional complex, it's obscene morbid obesity, it's unflinching greed, and need to desparately hold on to its very special interests. It's the Elephant in the room, the gorilla in the backyard, and the tigers in the trees.

Posted by MOZE 02/27/2008 @ 1:00pm

and the albatross hung around your neck............

Posted by frosty zoom at 02/28/2008 @ 09:50am
Do NOT call Obama an "internationalist" Cathy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by Stubine at 02/28/2008 @ 09:56am
What in Obama's campaign indicates he will do anything but take McCain seriously? After beating Hillary, a seemingly impossible feat just weeks ago, he will concentrate on a man who was shot down while bombing the Vietnamese some 40 years ago, the torture victim who refuses to stand against torture. 100 years of war? Or peace and universal health care? Care we say ``landslide?'' Yes we can!

Posted by unclechet at 02/28/2008 @ 10:25am
I am no longer a fan of liberal blogs or liberal media. When it comes to swift-boating people with personal attacks, it is far worse than the corporate media.

Posted by kevin99999 at 02/28/2008 @ 10:42am
Excellent analysis GOYADAD, history may prove you right. (Though I don't appreciate the stereotyping- no one from the South is actually named Bubba or BillyBob etc., I do get your point)

Further, our nation is so polarized, our districts so gerrymandered, our M$M so corporatist, that what would lead us to believe that 2008 will have any wider a margin that '04 or '00. It doesn't seem to matter that there are more people living in urban areas (blue) than rural ones (red). It doesn't seem to matter that there are more registered Democrats than registered Republicans.

With out issues, this is a popularity contest, built on stereotypes. If The War were to enter back into the national debate, or even the front page, maybe I would feel better about Obama's margin- that is if people weren't also so dissatisfied with the "Democratic Controlled Congress" (I know you don't legislate overnight, and there are forces I don't understand, but come on guys!).

What pop culture frenzy, what irrelevant mood will we be in to accept the next President? It won't be won on substance, it will be won on taste. All promises will be hollow, on both sides. That being said, I think Obama is prettier.

How did we, here on this site, come to think that this election would be vastly different from past ones? I do feel the slow, lumbering, silent, common turn against both parties as people overturn the lies fed to them by corporations, as more people finally feel the pain of being duped- yet who are they blaming? Everyone is at fault, to some degree, I only hope that they blame the big corporations and their government enablers.

THERE IS HATE AND FEAR today in this country. So, in spirit of the article today, be careful of who you mock or demonize. You may very well solidify your "republican neighbor". ESPECIALLY on this site. there are a lot of "opinionated" people here- this is where we need to hone our discussion, where we need to learn how not to "embolden the enemy" for we take these thought out into the real world, out from our safe liberal website.

A lesson I am still learning: don't call anyone names, don't make assumptions about others, and don't Tell anyone what to think (as opposed to voicing your opinion in an open way) if you do that the person will HATE you. Good luck on any future conversation.

People ask "How did we get to this point? Why do we seem to want to pick a president based on race or gender, and not the issues?" One may as well ask "why is American Idol so popular?" My uninformed opinion: All of the problems of the world have come full force right up against our own front doors. "Hiding in ignorance" is a different thing these days. We recognize more of the horrors and threats, domestic and foreign, real or designed; we see more of the giant monster of greed, and we feel more powerless than before. If I felt powerless about an impending manmade horror, I would find comfort in voyeuristic ridicule of others. I would separate myself from the rest of humanity, labeling all others as evil. I would be divided, easily conquered.

Back to the election, in response to other posts here, all candidates and campaigns seem way too familiar, and it seems that people will fall into there categories in greater numbers than those who will be independent. The only difference I've seen this time around is that Obama is pretty. And fashion goes a LONG way in America.

Relax. take a breath. Look around you, as far as you can. really look. You will find that everyone has more in common with you, that the "redneck white guys" or any "others" you have labeled are actually real people, not that different from you. We all hold the same hopes and fears, we all are subject to the same fight against tyranny and greed that has been going on for thousands of years. The slight differences between us are the different lies we've chosen to believe, the different stereotypes we've chosen to identify ourselves with.

Use your personal power. It may seem like a trickle against the wave of Election, Inc. and the Clinton-Obama circus, but it is the power you have. Join and participate in any neighborhood association or group you can, pay attention to what you are buying and from whom so as to truly leverage your own personal buying power/influence, write letters to the editors, vote, run for local office, read, volunteer, write your own opinions down in order to develop a more articulate message to others, know your neighbors, and above all, TELL PEOPLE WHAT YOU ARE DOING! Voting is not the most important part of democracy, participation is a wonderful and varied thing. Your vote doesn't matter if you tell no one about it. A voting block is powerful. Create or join one. You'll make new friends too.

Posted by dustinchicago at 02/28/2008 @ 10:48am
Why did you edit the title from yesterday's "John McCain May Be Old, but He's Still the White Guy" to today's " McCain May Be Old, but He's Still a Threat"

You see this is precisely the "colored" problem!

Posted by Sam Johnson at 02/28/2008 @ 11:37am
Why did you edit the title from yesterday's "John McCain May Be Old, but He's Still the White Guy" to today's " McCain May Be Old, but He's Still a Threat"

You see this is precisely the "colored" problem!

Posted by SAM JOHNSON 02/28/2008 @ 11:37am | ignore this person

Posted by Sam Johnson at 02/28/2008 @ 11:45am
Why did you edit the title from yesterday's "John McCain May Be Old, but He's Still the White Guy" to today's " McCain May Be Old, but He's Still a Threat"

You see this is precisely the "colored" problem!

Posted by SAM JOHNSON 02/28/2008 @ 11:37am | ignore this person

Posted by Sam Johnson at 02/28/2008 @ 11:47am
Posted by DUSTINCHICAGO 02/28/2008 @ 10:48am

Nice sentiment, but the name calling was branded by the republican party long ago. President Reagan and company somehow managed to make the term liberal an evil entity though a good portion of those using the term in a negative way want their family members to be liberal with gifts at Christmas time, they just don't want to be "liberal" with their fellow countrymen with a lesser income.

I live in the south and believe me, there is a mutltitude of folks with little to no respect for any views other than the good ole fundamental southern baptists version of morality. That morality is Godliness at the end of a muzzle or blade if one holds beliefs or views differing from theirs.

It's the political parties catering to these folks which has polarized this nation so badly in the first place. This 20 or 30% of the population now believes that they own the country and the rest of us out here shouldn't have a voice and they are dangerously close to getting their way. I find it hard to sit back calmly and let someone crap all over me.

Posted by Wolfgang1 at 02/28/2008 @ 11:57am
Why did you edit the title from yesterday's "John McCain May Be Old, but He's Still the White Guy" to today's " McCain May Be Old, but He's Still a Threat"

You see this is precisely the "colored" problem!

Posted by SAM JOHNSON 02/28/2008 @ 11:37am | ignore this person

Posted by SAM JOHNSON 02/28/2008 @ 11:47am | ignore this person

Posted by Sam Johnson at 02/28/2008 @ 12:14pm
I like how you used the term 'branded'- how true! Name calling and such have been around since language, yet it does seem the Propogandist, and most recently under the "republicans" have added such depth and power to that tactic- especially when you look at modern media tools and consolidation.

Yes there are fundementalists of all sorts. I do my best never to continue an argument with one as soon as I identify them as such. I have a feeling that you know what I am saying, and know it to be true. Further, you will never get through to such a person by any form of 'yelling', only with kindeness may you break through. That is not an easy or welcome task for sure, yet it seems to be the only one with any small chance of long term success.

There is a difference between calmly sitting back and let someone crap all over you and not taking personally any attack while continuing to assert your own power for change as you can. Gandhi did not preach submission, he preaced non-violence. It gets even harder when I start thinking that the powers that be would tolerate 10 MLKs before even 1 Malcom Xs.

What does all this have to do with John McCain? Because how we talk here we take out into our everday conversations. What sentiments we refine here, we display in our daily actions. I've noticed most people posting here- myself included- are merely venting, instigating or otherwise shouting in an anonymous place because they cannot shout at those around them. Alas, this may never go away. I can only hope that I portray dileberate kindness and inclusive debate, that some people here will read things that help them in their own reasoning and debate, that someone will receive strength to stay kind and inclusive in order to impart a few 'progressive' sentiments onto the ignorant or nonbelievers.

Posted by dustinchicago at 02/28/2008 @ 12:39pm
Posted by DUSTINCHICAGO 02/28/2008 @ 12:39pm

yep.

Posted by frosty zoom at 02/28/2008 @ 12:50pm
hey,

you changed the title.

that's good.

but still,

in my eyes being old

is a gift from god,

not a liability.

Posted by frosty zoom at 02/28/2008 @ 3:34pm
I can only hope that I portray dileberate kindness and inclusive debate, that some people here will read things that help them in their own reasoning and debate, that someone will receive strength to stay kind and inclusive in order to impart a few 'progressive' sentiments onto the ignorant or nonbelievers.

Posted by DUSTINCHICAGO 02/28/2008 @ 12:39pm

Point well taken. You win.

Posted by Wolfgang1 at 02/28/2008 @ 4:49pm
I said, the election looks like it will become a showdown between those who are proud and happy with this country, and those who despairs and sees their only hope in changing America fundamentally. That is what Obama is promising. That is his message when he says, he offers hope and change and fundamental change.

I recommend Wolfgang, you sit your tuchus down on a pointed flagpole till it scratches the itch in your liver.

Posted by MARKCANYON 02/28/2008 @ 6:42pm

Mark,

No you didn't. This is what you said...."Yes, that will be a real test. We will see whether the US really won the Cold War or whether it is in fact America that has struck her colors and accept the Left's mindset."

That would imply that the Left's mindset isn't patriotic. Winning the cold war took from after WWII up through Reagan's presidency. Neither party won the cold war, it was done over a long period of time. Reagan just happened to be the president during the inevitable collapse of the Soviet Union.

Your implications are that unless you say the pledge of allegiance and waive the flag around, that one isn't a patriot. Maybe some folks who are athiests out there have a problem with the "one nation under God" part. Ever thought about that? You konw, separation of church and state? I personally don't have a problem with it, but I sure as hell wouldn't accuse someone of not honoring their country because they happened to be an athiest, but you evidently hold that position.

Just for the record, I'm not German, I come from a lineage of mostly Irish and English folks and also for the record I served in the U.S. Armed Forces which shows that I am somewhat of a patriot even though I happened to be of that "left mindset".

Posted by Wolfgang1 at 02/29/2008 @ 06:55am
Let's hope that the second coming of Christ is white, born in America, speaks perfect English and doesn't have a funny sounding name or the republican party will have him/her hanging on the cross or dangling from a tree. Just my humble opinion.

Posted by anny at 02/29/2008 @ 08:41am
there is a difference between Patriotism and Nationalism

Posted by dustinchicago at 02/29/2008 @ 11:50am
english is one of the most imperfect languages........

Posted by frosty zoom at 02/29/2008 @ 1:27pm
Let's hope that the second coming of Christ is white, born in America, speaks perfect English and doesn't have a funny sounding name or the republican party will have him/her hanging on the cross or dangling from a tree. Just my humble opinion.

Posted by ANNY 02/29/2008 @ 08:41am

You mean like the first appearance of Christ? I still maintain that it will be really funny of God turns out to be a woman and it would even be more funny if God is a woman and isn't white. There would be a lot of gnashing of the teeth I would suspect. LOL

Posted by Wolfgang1 at 02/29/2008 @ 4:22pm
I'm truly impressed by the racism of at least several of the posters on this forum...and I'll ignore the "ageism" for the moment!!

My immediate concern is: shall I be perceived as a RACIST or a SEXIST.........hmm...................I chose SEXIST to my wife's dismay.......HOW ABOUT YOU-- WHAT ARE YOUR PREJUDICES???

Posted by marbiol at 03/01/2008 @ 12:45am
HOW ABOUT YOU-- WHAT ARE YOUR PREJUDICES???

Posted by MARBIOL 03/01/2008 @ 12:45am

pork.

Posted by frosty zoom at 03/01/2008 @ 9:42pm
pork.

Posted by FROSTY ZOOM 03/01/2008 @ 9:42pm

belly or jerky?

Posted by Happy at 03/01/2008 @ 9:46pm