~~ Unfortunately for KIRO fill-ins Frank Shiers and David Goldstein; these shrimp cocktails
were hired during Passover to fill in for Ron & Don (m-f, 3-6p). "They're not kosher," said PD Rod Arquette, "but few in the R&D audience knew the difference."
~~ "You don't know what you're talking about." We've been trashing MSNBC's Chris Matthews lately because he gets spittle on his jaw when he talks, and what he's usually talking about generally reveals him to be a supercilious ass. But Thursday, we gotta hand it to you, Chris: you done good. KRLA talk host Kevin James came on to discuss Bush's pointed attack on the Democrats in the Knesset today, where he accused Barack Obama of the "appeasement" of terrorists, comparing him obliquely to Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain, British Conservative appeaser of Hitler. James, who's a
blabbermouthed fool his own self, kept referring to Chamberlain until Matthews could take it no more. "What did Neville Chamberlain do wrong in 1939?" he demanded. James motored on without answering the question. Then Matthews went after him like a school marm on meth until he got James to finally admit he didn't know what the hell Chamberlain actually did in the hideous history he was trying to hang on Obama. "He's as bad as the White House Press Secretary that doesn't even know what the Cuban Missile Crisis was," Matthews said later. Kevin James is an attorney, and the exchange was utterly satisfying. The incident, which can be viewed here, was added almost immediately to James' Wikipedia entry found here.
~~ "Honky Whitesville" on line 1... Right-wingers like Sean Hannity are always blaming liberals and Obama for "making race the issue." (As if in this brave new world of an interracial presidential field race would not be mentioned)
In the tiny world of conservative talk radio, the mere fact that blacks vote
for Obama is in itself considered racist -- that's the troglyditian political opportunism we're dealing with here. The execrable Glenn Beck (KTTH m-f,
6-9a) recently devoted a 15-minute segment mocking Michelle Obama with
a faux caller named "Honky Whitesville." (Are you laughing yet?)
Beck attacked her for attending Princeton and Harvard, claiming her
test scores were “too low” and ev
en threw in a suggestion of alcoholism: BECK: "And there she is. As
always, they are trying to raise the bar a little higher like they did
when she went to Princeton and then Harvard and now possibly the first
lady." WHITESVILLE: "Is it possible she was holding onto the bar as
they were raising it?" BECK: "No, I think she might have made a trip to
the bar. I’m not sure." (Beck
is employed by CNN; is from Mt. Vernon, WA; and is a devout Mormon,
none of which should surprise anyone. His genitalia is reportedly so
small, he frequently puts on his pants backwards, and pretends to be
leaving when he's actually coming).
~~ A gala by golly: Join Chip Hanauer, Darcy Burner, Major General Paul Eaton (Ret.), members of the Northwest Progressive Institute, Master of Ceremonies Mike West, Jazz guitarist Don Mock for an evening of politics, music, dinner, crazy-pants fundraising; young, liberal quickstudies in ties; and maybe a beer or two. It's for the Northwest Progressive Institute (NPI), an organization dedicated to fighting for progressive values and common sense policies for America. What could be a better cause than that? The event starts at 7p at the Redmond Town Center Marriott. Tickets are $60 for individuals or $90 for a household.
~~ AAR shit: get thee together. Seattle's Ron Reagan is finishing up the week as a try-out host for Air America's American Afternoon, the
show that might one day replace Randi Rhodes. (sorry, it's not available to Seattlites on KPTK, although you can catch the podcasts here). Former WABC host Ron Kuby will take over next week. Sam Seder's contract has expired, and according to LTR:
"It could be a possibility that Seder could take over another slot,
since the 6-9A ET morning slot has been vacant since the beginning of
this year, and the network could possibly move another host, such as
Rachel Maddow, into afternoon drive." It's a mess, with Rachel being
the brightest spot on the Air America horizon, with a management so
fucked up decisions are left on the table like dirty forks.
~~ The state of the blogger; the blogger of the state. The DNCCC announced this week that former
KIRO talk host David Goldstein's blog, Horsesass.org is
the Washington State blog to be credentialed for the Democratic
Convention. Goldy will be heading to Denver in August. Congratulations,
Goldy.
(photo: Goldy and friend in better days)
~~ tiny, sick children, drawings, fun-runs: now Ron's box of produce. Here's what makes KIRO's mynorthwest.com the fascinating net stop that it is.

Interesting that idiots like Beck and Bush don't value education, evidently it's ok to be a "C" student at Yale with self deprecating comments but if a black person attends two of the highest rated universities, watch out! Whitey gets mad.
(since Beck refers to himself as Whitey, more republican self-loathing here)
Posted by: GOBAMA | May 16, 2008 at 05:29 AM
Chris Matthews nailed James but of course what was missed is that Matthews himself screws up later in that same broadcast by getting his historical reference wrong. Pot meet kettle.
But the 'best' of MSNBC is Olby's 'special comment' the other night. That hairpiece must be biting into his skull or something but that 12 minute rant was positively Randi-esque. No wonder Russert and Williams are reluctant to appear on the desk with him.
Olby came across as this fellow
Oswald Bates
at best and a 9-11 Truther at worst.
Posted by: PugetSound | May 16, 2008 at 06:35 AM
Yes, Bush "gave up golf" for the troops as he felt like a good catholic does during lent, who gives up candy. But the onus was on Bush for lying and being caught on camera. Easy for Bush to continue with the lies. Now 4100 dead.
Posted by: GOBAMA | May 16, 2008 at 08:16 AM
Matthews knows his stuff when he wants to stop being cute and get down to business. I've heard him expound pretty intelligently before but rarely on Hardball.
Also, I wondered where bloggers are getting their "Marxist" terminology and Michelle jokes. Heard a segment of Rush's the other day in which he was spouting "Marxist" name calling so I guess Rush is the history book of choice on the right.
Well, easier than reading the real stuff or knowing wtf you're talking about.
Another meaningless post from puts. Matthews erred? Is this wishful thinking, did he self-correct, or what?
Something factual in your claim would be nice, puts.
Posted by: joanie hussein | May 16, 2008 at 08:26 AM
BTW, Michael, I LOVE shrimp!
And I've been wanting to check out Reagan's AA broadcasts. Thanks for the link.
I'm going to miss Sammy on Sundays! Always excellent.
Posted by: joanie hussein | May 16, 2008 at 08:29 AM
What part wasn't factual the hairpiece biting into Olby's skull or the salient point about the self indulgent 12 minute long silly Randi-esque rant?
Got to give it to Olby, he can be damn funny with that mock serious Howard Beal tone.
You didn't REALLY believe him did you?
You do REALIZE he is putting you on. Kind of clever version of Stephen Colbert.
Still haven't seen you posting outside of these 'warm waters' yet. Wouldn't last more than a couple of posts at best.......
Posted by: PugetSound | May 16, 2008 at 10:29 AM
Kevin James is such a dishonest scumbag he did not even address his appearance on Hardball even though it was the most national publicity he ever got in his life. One caller managed to get through and mentioned Chris Matthews. James hung up immediately and blamed it on the AT&T phone system.
Posted by: abob | May 16, 2008 at 10:40 AM
Your post about Goldy reminds me how much I miss him on the radio. What I really miss are the non-brand names we used to get on evenings and weekends. Like Frank Shiers, Bryan Styble, Lou Pate, Mike Webb, NY Vinnie... you know... the ones who are NOT Dori and Dave who used to give us a little flavor, personality and local quirk.
Posted by: Freakin' | May 16, 2008 at 11:01 AM
More shrimp please! great post. I so much miss KIRO in the afternoon.
Posted by: sig | May 16, 2008 at 11:03 AM
"It's a mess, with Rachel being the brightest spot on the Air America horizon, with a management so fucked up decisions are left on the table like dirty forks."
Is Air America still in business? If I were Ron Reagan, I'd think twice before associating with that outfit.
Posted by: Sam | May 16, 2008 at 11:08 AM
Chamberlain infamously declared in a radio broadcast on 27 September 1938:
How horrible, fantastic it is that we should be digging trenches and trying on gas-masks here because of a quarrel in a far away country between people of whom we know nothing. I am myself a man of peace from the depths of my soul.
Sounds like something Joanie would say. Chamberlain's basic premise was that if Germany hadn't been treated so poorly after WWI, they (the Germans) wouldn't be so pissed. Kinda like if we hadn't pissed in the Arabs sand box, they wouldn't be fuckin with us now.
By August of 1945 70 million people were dead. That worked out well.
Posted by: Recife | May 16, 2008 at 11:12 AM
Recife: Obama says talk to your enemies, (as we have for the 200 yrs prior Bush43) Chamberlain signed away half of Czechoslovakia. Haven't we had quite enough of the consequences of not engaging enemies (or our friends) except militarily? How's that worked? You want to go to war w/Iran?
Posted by: choch | May 16, 2008 at 11:37 AM
Tell Jesus to resurrect Mike Webb. We need him on the radio more than ever before.
Posted by: abob | May 16, 2008 at 12:05 PM
Bill O'Reilly at his absolute best:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5j2YDq6FkVE
Posted by: abob | May 16, 2008 at 12:12 PM
Choch,
Do I wish for war between the US and Iran? Absolutely not, nor do I want a policy of guilt ridden appeasement. Being a former member of the US Military, and having friends and family currently serving that’s the last thing I want. I want a foreign policy that leaves no doubt in either our friends or foes minds of our resolve. Any action taken has consequences, do nothing the results will be one thing. What that will be who knows, but think everyone will agree that if the very existence of Israel was threatened (and by that I mean if Tel Aviv were to vanish in a fireball) the consequences would be dire to say the least. What are the chances of that happening? I dunno, but on one hand we’ve got wackos that think the Rapture will begin when the temple is restored in Jerusalem or some such non sense, and a lunatic that thinks the sacred Imam (SP?) is waiting in a well. Either way, whoever is elected to lead our country in November is screwed.
Posted by: Recife | May 16, 2008 at 12:22 PM
that's fair, Recife. We agree on all of that. I believe what Obama is saying is that we must resume diplomacy from a our position of strength. Until recently in Bush's foreign policy meanderings, diplomacy has been off the table. We've lost our vital allies, and sunk to a policy of pre-emption, gpoing it alone, and saber rattling. The first part of Teddy Roosevelt's famous dictum, remember, was "Speak softly..." We haven't been speaking at all, and it has failed. Bush tries to hang "appeasement" onto any mention of "talk-talk."It's as much to save face as anything
Posted by: choch | May 16, 2008 at 12:41 PM
Bush 'talked' to Gaddafi, even though his pariah status still remains with regards to human rights. It's all about oil.
Posted by: Lentil | May 16, 2008 at 06:26 PM
Actually Bush talked to Ghaddafi as part of Ghaddafi's move to renounce terrorism.
here you go!
Posted by: PugetSound | May 16, 2008 at 06:45 PM
Anyone know if the article has been found to be in error. It is a David Sanger and 'Judith Miller' NY Times piece.
If so, cite the source. I thought that this was one piece from Miller that was still cited as being accurate.
Posted by: PugetSound | May 16, 2008 at 08:07 PM
What a wonderful day was today! I defy any raindrop to plop in my eye . . . (Roar of the Greasepaint...)
Now, what was it wonderful you ask?
First Rachel was in for Olberman. She's great! Her guest was Matthews in one of his few sensible appearances. I saw the Hardball segment repeated several times. It was energizing!
Then, I heard Huckabee turning off an NRA crowd with a joke about Obama ducking for cover from a shooter. Oh, that was delicate, wasn't it? Someone later said that the truth comes out in jokes. I believe that.
And, then, Johnathan Alter (Alterman? - who cares) said the right had this motto of KISS - keep it simple stupid - when addressing their constituency!
Also, I heard Bush giving the Knesset the luxury of his wisdom and comparing Obama? - nah - to Chamberlain.
And asking the Sauds to bring down the price of oil. Can't do that. After all, it is a matter of future supplies and supply and demand. Right Mr. Free-Marketer C-average MBA?
And then several airings of McCriminal McCain contradicting himself over whether or not one should or should not talk to one's enemies. Fascinating.
And, finally, I saw several times a parody of O'Reilly being taken on by a cameraman and then several other segments of spoofs as well.
What a fun day it was!
Finally, I saw Obama take the stage to respond to Bush's frat boy comments.
It was like an adult finally entered the room.
You know, I heard on the radio today that somebody shot himself in the spine while scratching his back with his gun.
Must have been a Republican.
Michael, if you have any doubts about an Obama win this November, they should have all been dispelled today.
Posted by: joanie hussein | May 16, 2008 at 08:53 PM
putsie, I asked you what Matthews said that was wrong. I get back random blather about hair pieces and skulls?
You are the Kevin James of BW.
Posted by: joanie hussein | May 16, 2008 at 08:57 PM
Choch, you are wasting your time waiting for an answer from these rightwingers. They don't have a clue. They are party loyalists who cannot support their own comments or respond intelligently to any inquiry.
Remember: When conversing with a conservative, KISS!
Posted by: joanie hussein | May 16, 2008 at 09:01 PM
Keep it going with those leftwing talking points. Not saying that conservatives are high and mighty - they lost their direction and chances are that the Dems will pick up some decent gains in Congress.
But the Dem Party leadership is morally bankrupt and has been that way since the 90's and that will keep them from getting a vetoproof congress.
If Obama does not win this time out, and there is at least an even chance that he won't, especially if the Clinton's play the end game for 2012, is this not a screaming message that the Dems need to change and move toward the center. Barry O needs more than just his rhetoric to show that he is fit to take on the huge foreign policy challenges that we face. If someone more to the center like Jim Webb or Heath Shuler were running for Pres., they would be unbeatable in a year like this.
Posted by: KS | May 16, 2008 at 09:50 PM
Sorry Joanie, happy to school you again.
The mistake was an easy one and I would have thought even you could pick up on it.
Matthews stated that the USS Cole was attacked under the Bush Presidency when in fact it was the Clinton Administration.
Choch, glad to have you onboard.
Quick tip on Joanine. If you do want to get an answer from her try to get a response earlier in the afternoon. Pretty much anytime after 9 pm she is fairly looped and when you see those 2 am postings you'll wonder how she can even manage to type.
Posted by: PugetSound | May 17, 2008 at 06:47 AM
KS
Spot on as always.
Posted by: PugetSound | May 17, 2008 at 07:31 AM
This is a cute site. Lets all read America Alone by Mark Steyn and meet back here next week, when we have the facts. Whaddya say, gang?
Posted by: Blaine | May 17, 2008 at 07:38 AM
Correct, Blaine - that is a must read for those who choose not to be ignorant about the current state of the world. I doubt seriously that Barry O has read anything like it.
To a number of others, facts and the truth just get in the way. Of course, several weeks at Schick-Schadel could help those be more receptive to the truth.
Posted by: KS | May 17, 2008 at 09:08 AM
Freaking: 100% spot on.
Posted by: Dana | May 17, 2008 at 12:00 PM
Good stuff. America Alone would be a great reading assignment. Mark Steyn is brilliant.
Joanie, don't bother trying to read Steyn.
He is an author of substance who uses facts and analysis to draw well supported conclusions. If that isn't enough to make you dizzy he doesn't play the 'Evil America' card to trade on white liberal guilt.
All in all not your cup of tea or should I say Long Island Tea.
Posted by: PugetSound | May 17, 2008 at 01:26 PM
Looks like the bath house gang is here, where's nevets?
Posted by: Paul Lynde | May 17, 2008 at 04:03 PM
I was gonna ask the same question about Dick Gregory...
Posted by: PugetSound | May 17, 2008 at 08:08 PM
Folks, I was going to say something about Luke Burbank, but Mama always said "if you can't say anything nice about someone don't say anything. Ladies and Gentlemen, let me explain a few things to you. First of all- Mr. Obama can't win. Sure he won the white Dem vote in Idaho, but will he win Mark Furman's vote there? The man's "popularity'' is a mirage built mostly by exploiting corrupt caucus affairs in little crackerbox states. They brought in the bullyboy Obama activists. Now i was tempted to make a joke at Dori's expense at this point in my post, but Mama always said, "if you have to make small penis jokes , don't make jokes at all".
Posted by: Steve Bozell | May 17, 2008 at 09:40 PM
Steve, you haven't been listening very carefully. You didn't say one nice thing about Mr. Obama. You will have to sleep on the couch tonight!
Posted by: Mama | May 17, 2008 at 10:06 PM
A vote for Obama is a vote for to regress back to the foreign policy used by Jimmy Carter and to blindly trust rogue nations that sponsor terrorism and get taken advantage of - screw that !
Guess I'll also have to sleep on the couch tonight - eh Mama.
Posted by: KS | May 17, 2008 at 10:16 PM
Ohh, Ohh, Ohh Mama. I know, I know. I can say something nice, Mama.
Obama is a very happy man. That's nice Mama. Isn't it? He is very happy and his wife is a real...Oh, that's not nice and I wont say it Moma.
Sorry
Posted by: chucks | May 18, 2008 at 06:50 AM
"A vote for Obama is a vote for to regress back to the foreign policy used by Jimmy Carter and to blindly trust rogue nations that sponsor terrorism and get taken advantage of - screw that !
Guess I'll also have to sleep on the couch tonight - eh Mama.
Posted by: KS | May 17, 2008 at 10:16 PM"
Hey, lets not forget the 444 some odd days that the Iranians held our people hostage -in our own Embassy- while Jimmy Carter was President. The Iranians blew us off and humiliated the Great Satan.
Within hours of Reagan assuming the Presidency those same hostages were released.
Wonder who those Iranians respected/feared as President. Carter or Reagan?
Might be a lesson. And for those willing to trot out Carter's post presidential life lets not forget that
he was the one who brokered the 1994 deal in which the Clinton administration agreed to provided food and oil to North Korea, in exchange for its promise not to develop nuclear weapons-a promise the North Koreans promptly broke, allowing them to threaten us with a nuclear bomb today!
Posted by: PugetSound | May 18, 2008 at 07:16 AM
Klueless: ...leftwing talking points...
Such as?
Not saying that conservatives are high and mighty - they lost their direction and chances are that the Dems will pick up some decent gains in Congress.
This is an erudite prediction.
But the Dem Party leadership is morally bankrupt...
Umm, what constitutes "moral" bankruptcy?
...is this not a screaming message that the Dems need to change and move toward the center.
No. Anything else?
Barry O needs more than just his rhetoric to show that he is fit to take on the huge foreign policy challenges that we face.
Hmm. I might agree. It was, after all, the C-average MBA,beer-drinking next-door-neighbor who got us into this "foreign-policy challenged" environment.
I like Jim Webb for VP. Edwards for AG.
Well, I see they gave putsie computer privileges this weekend.
Posted by: joanie hussein | May 18, 2008 at 08:34 PM
"What did Neville Chamberlain do wrong in 1939?"
Puts, what is wrong with this question? It makes me laugh that B'lam didn't even catch it.
Posted by: nevets | May 18, 2008 at 08:46 PM
"Not saying that conservatives are high and mighty - they lost their direction and chances are that the Dems will pick up some decent gains in Congress.
This is an erudite prediction."
Erudite is the word that best describes the tone of 90% of your comments.
"But the Dem Party leadership is morally bankrupt...
Umm, what constitutes "moral" bankruptcy?
...is this not a screaming message that the Dems need to change and move toward the center.
No. Anything else?"
That confirms that you are apathetic about deceiving the public through the leftist-biased media - as long as it favors the progressives - that's OK, screw the rest of us with different stands. Neo- Conservatives have played that game and I detest that also.
Moral Bankruptcy consists of using the principle of Goebbels - to repeat a lie continuously in the hope that more people fall for it and take it as the truth (i.e. don't let the facts get in the way), what the Democrat leadership under the phony leadership of Howard Dean and defending the indefensible in the name of politics. Moral Bankruptcy breeds corruption - case and point - The Clintons.
Jim Webb would be a good pick for Vice Pres.
Next !
Posted by: KS | May 18, 2008 at 08:53 PM
Addendum:
Should read: what the Democrat leadership under the phony leadership of Howard Dean espouses and also defending the indefensible in the name of politics
Case and point - During the presidency of BJ Clinton.
Maybe the Dems have wised up a little since then re: the Clintons, based upon the Presidential nomination process.
Posted by: KS | May 18, 2008 at 08:58 PM
And wouldn't Chamberlain have to had talked to Hitler first in order to appease him. What Chamberlain wanted was to turn a blind eye to what was happening in Europe and what it got him was being forced to resign and make his country a target for Nazi rockets. Hmmm, sounds like the Clinton years. Will we get the same thing from Obama if for some miracle he is elected?
Posted by: nevets | May 18, 2008 at 09:00 PM
Erudite is the word that best describes the tone of 90% of your comments.
Sort of hoped 100%. But, thank you.
Goebbels . . . repeatedly lie...
What's the lie?
...phony leadership..."
What's "phony" about it?
Posted by: joanie hussein | May 18, 2008 at 09:15 PM
What was Obamas response to Bushs speech? Something about using Reagan and Kennedy diplomacy. If this is true then we should be in for some fireworks if he is elected.
Kennedy put a quarantine on Cuba and took us to the brink of nuclear war. Also he sent the first troops to Vietnam. How long did that war last?
Reagan, he just shot first then asked questions later.
Now that is diplomacy. Sounds like more of the same instead of "CHANGE". Boy has he got you Libs duped.
Posted by: nevets | May 18, 2008 at 09:19 PM
Is it true that Kennedy had his people buy him Cuban Cigars prior to extending the embargo on Cuba.
Posted by: nevets | May 18, 2008 at 09:23 PM
75,000 people to see Obama in Portland today. WOW. Those are Pope numbers.
Posted by: nevets | May 18, 2008 at 09:37 PM
Goebbels . . . repeatedly lie...
What's the lie?
Dems said that the Republicans suppressed the blacks from segregation, when it was really the Democrats who voted against segregation in the 60's and the Republicans actually passed Civil Rights legislation. The Republicans are partly at fault, because they have not publicized this enough and let that lie go unchecked.
Another one; Anyone who opposed racial quotas and set asides were racist and were guilty of suppressing blacks, when in reality - racial quotas kept blacks from obtaining admission to schools based on merits - what it really did was keep blacks on the plantation because there was crutch (like welfare) that was used at every turn and this policy adopted by the Democrat-controlled congress was called a boost to them and that was lie repeated innumerable times that influenced them to vote Democrat when it was the Republicans who wanted to liberate them from this crutch. The Republicans were able to get part of this removed in this state by passing Initiative 200. Any black who opposed racial quotas will get smeared by being called Uncle Tom's, but actually these people like Thomas Sowell, JC Watts, Dr. Walter Williams and sometimes Bill Cosby are the smart ones and see the truth. There is where they used Goebbel's playbook. As a result the blacks, who actually voted a split ticket in the 50's and before now typically vote 90%+ Democrat.
I don't you will get what I said, because you will want to believe that the Dems are doing blacks a favor, and they continue to make them believe that they are supporting their liberation, when they are doing the opposite - one of the great lies of our times.
Posted by: KS | May 18, 2008 at 09:56 PM
should read:
I don't see that you will get what I said, because you will want to believe that the Dems are doing blacks a favor...
Posted by: KS | May 18, 2008 at 09:58 PM
If you read the whole thing, steven, you'll note that the international court did not find the US' actions justified.
I think - and if you did any thinking you'd agree - that Obama is referring to Reagan's continued diplomacy and talking with Gorbachev.
Are you now suggesting that Iran-which we attacked when our CIA helped to leverage the coup which overthrew a popular leader with the Shah's puppet government-are you suggesting that Iran and the Soviet Union are analogous?
You see them as being the same?
And a quarantine bringing us to the brink of war is the same as...
what?
As for Nam, most of us learned from that mistake. A few warmongers, it seems, did not. We'll never know if Kennedy was intending to end it or not.
I do recall that Carter managed to keep the hostages alive; made peace between Egypt and Israel; and tried to alter our energy-dependent course by using his scientific mind to find alternatives.
But, those with nothing else on their minds but war and fighting couldn't see the good he did and continue to dwell on the negative - a situation that was out of his control just as this current energy crisis is out of the control of the current White House resident.
Where Carter used diplomacy to keep those hostages alive; your I'll-give-up-golf-oh-no-I-won't-let's -go-golfing drinking buddy will go down in history for sending his toy soldiers back into battle over and over and over until they're dead or might as well be.
Oh, you are the compassionate conservative, aren't you. And, we're all still waiting for you to sign up. Are you as old as McCain? I think he should sign up again, too.
Posted by: joanie hussein | May 18, 2008 at 10:00 PM
...when it was really the Democrats who voted against segregation...
Isn't that a good thing? Are you for segregation?
... in reality - racial quotas kept blacks from obtaining admission to schools based on merits...
That doesn't make sense. Where did you find this talking point? If any person, black, white or asian, applied on merit and they were outstanding applicants - are you telling me they were rejected?
How can you explain that more Blacks - several of the ones you mentioned, in fact - are products of the educational system and affirmative action in the sixties?
- what it really did was keep blacks on the plantation because there was crutch (like welfare) that was used at every turn...
I don't understand the confluence of educational merit and welfare?
... lie repeated innumerable times...
and the lie is exactly?
I get the "crutch" part - I think - you think welfare is a crutch, right? Do you realize there are more white people on welfare than black?
You know, Klueless, a crutch is a device meant to help people who are temporarily or permanently disabled. Are you against assisting people who need help?
Posted by: joanie hussein | May 18, 2008 at 10:17 PM
...when it was really the Democrats who voted against segregation...
J Hussein wrote:
Isn't that a good thing? Are you for segregation?
>My bad - I meant integration. Now does that make help connect the dots ?
... in reality - racial quotas kept blacks from obtaining admission to schools based on merits...
J Hussein wrote:
That doesn't make sense. Where did you find this talking point? If any person, black, white or asian, applied on merit and they were outstanding applicants - are you telling me they were rejected?
>What about it doesn't make sense ? Yes, if the quotas were reached, outstanding applicants are rejected using this system and less deserving individuals of other races were accepted - racial quotas - get it ?
J. Hussein wrote:
How can you explain that more Blacks - several of the ones you mentioned, in fact - are products of the educational system and affirmative action in the sixties?
>They may have been, but they did not like it and have stated it publicly, because the playing field was not level and disparities occurred and the grades went soft. By the way, do you know which of the blacks mentioned were products of affirmative action ? (that's OK if you don't - just admit it)
- what it really did was keep blacks on the plantation because there was crutch (like welfare) that was used at every turn...
J. Hussein:
I don't understand the confluence of educational merit and welfare?
>Try looking at the big picture. Less deserving people get both, while others did not, but you are missing the point and trying to change the argument - moving on...
J.Hussein wrote:
and the lie is exactly?
>The lie is that the left kept saying that the Republicans don't care about blacks because they opposed affirmative action and the Dems really passed Civil Rights legislation (the truth: A Democrat President signed the bill, but it was the Republicans in Congress that really passed the bill that LBJ signed). These lies have been repeated enough times by the left that they were believed by blacks and Republicans gave up -like the stupid party they are. The truth is that blacks should be pissed off at Democrats as a whole for manipulating them, while the Republicans wanted to give them the honest opportunity to better themselves. (Bet this will spawn more questions)
J Hussein wrote:
I get the "crutch" part - I think - you think welfare is a crutch, right? Do you realize there are more white people on welfare than black?
>Consider - there are also about 8 X more whites than blacks, but you will find a disproportionate number of blacks are on welfare
J.Hussein wrote:
A crutch is a device meant to help people who are temporarily or permanently disabled.
>When welfare is administered indiscriminately, it serves as a crutch - it has improved some after Clinton signed welfare reform. You seem to favor the nanny state - I oppose it because it weakens the character of the people. Past indiscriminate administration of welfare helped produce the following results over the past 40 years - the breakdown of the family, more children from broken homes, gang banging and contributing to a general cultural breakdown.
Are you for equality ? BTW- Equality is a cornerstone of Marxist societies.
Posted by: KS | May 19, 2008 at 07:41 PM