SYNDICATED COLUMN: Bigotry, Apology, Repeat as Necessary

THIS WEEK’S SYNDICATED COLUMN: BIGOTRY, APOLOGY, REPEAT AS NECESSARY

The Rise of John McCain

In the 1993 film noir “Romeo is Bleeding,” the late Roy Scheider plays a mob boss. “You know right from wrong,” he tells a hopelessly corrupt cop portrayed by Gary Oldman. “You just don’t care.” It’s a perfect summary of John McCain’s political career.

Time after time, McCain weighs a decision. Then, after careful consideration, he chooses evil over good. In the short run, evil gets him what he wants. Later, when the devil comes to collect his due, McCain issues a retraction.

Running for president in 2000, John McCain squared off against George W. Bush in the key South Carolina primary. Asked whether the Confederate battle flag should continue to fly over the state capitol, McCain sided with the rednecks: “Personally, I see the flag as symbol of heritage.”

A few months later, he’d lost South Carolina and quit the race. He apologized–not to the African-Americans he’d offended, but to a friendly audience of Republicans. “I feared that if I answered honestly, I could not win the South Carolina primary,” he admitted. “So I chose to compromise my principles.” It wasn’t the first time, or the last.

Also in 2000, McCain insulted Asians. “I hate the gooks,” John McCain hissed, “and I will hate them for as long as I live…and you can quote me.” After a few days of negative press attention, he took it back: “I apologize and renounce all language that is bigoted and offensive, which is contrary to all that I represent and believe.”

What does McCain “represent and believe”? In 2000 McCain attacked George W. Bush for speaking at Bob Jones University, a freaky institution that smeared Catholics, banned jazz and interracial dating. Six years later, however, it was McCain’s turn to suck up to the Christianist right. He appeared at the Rev. Jerry Falwell’s extremist Liberty University, which–like BJU–bans gays and denies pregnant students the right to seek an abortion.

No apology for that one.

In 1983, John McCain was a freshman congressman from Arizona, then one of the most right-wing states in the country. In order to appease his Republican Party’s base–racist whites–he voted against the bill that established Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Day. “I thought that it was not necessary to have another federal holiday, that it cost too much money, that other presidents were not recognized,” he explained in 2000. Do Chester Arthur or Gerry Ford deserve holidays? Anyway, MLK Day didn’t cost employers a cent; Washington’s Birthday and Lincoln’s Birthday were replaced by the generic President’s Day.

He also floated the “states rights” excuse (with its own racist signifiers) that referenced his support for Confederate “heritage” in South Carolina. “I believe it’s an issue that the people of South Carolina can settle, just as we in Arizona settled the very divisive issue over the recognition of Dr. Martin Luther King as a holiday. I resented it a great deal when people from Washington and pundits and politicians and others came to my state to tell us how we should work out a very difficult problem.”

Healthcare is “a very difficult problem.” Iraq is “a very difficult problem.” MLK Day, like the Confederate flag “issue,” was a simple question of right and wrong.

True to his pattern, McCain understood that the racist pandering he used to launch his political career could come back to haunt him in the more enlightened–the John Birchers who contributed to his early campaigns might say “politically correct”–election year of 2008. Time for another apology: “I was wrong and eventually realized that, in time to give full support for a state holiday in Arizona,” he concedes. “We can all be a little late sometimes in doing the right thing, and Dr. King understood this about his fellow Americans.”

A little late?

“Well, I learned that this individual was a transcendent figure in American history, he deserved to be honored, and I thought it was appropriate to do so,” McCain explained about his change of, um, heart. Dr. King was assassinated in 1968. McCain voted no on the MLK bill in 1983. That’s 15 years later. How much longer did McCain need to “learn” about “this individual”?

The big question is: Is McCain racist? Or is he pandering to racists? And is there a difference?

His 2007 use of the term “tar baby” pretty much settles it. Unless, of course, you’re a sucker for yet another apology: “I don’t think I should have used that word and it was wrong to do so.”

It’s the 21st century. Even Nazi skinheads don’t use terms like “tar baby.”
God, if you’re up there, please grant us this wish: Don’t let John McCain become president. But if you do, don’t let him meet any foreign leaders who don’t happen to be white.

COPYRIGHT 2008 TED RALL

36 Comments.

  • MLK Day was an issue of right and wrong, but the Confederate flag was not originally an issue of strict racism. It was represenative of the states who favored state's right and the constitution over a strong federal government and the constitution-subverting republican party. Certainly, in this day and age, it has been hijacked by the same racists who opposed MLK Day (many continue to do so by labeling it N-word Day) but to allow them to 'color' a historical symbol, even one of a fledgling nation like the CSA who, like the USA still recognized legalized slavery, does an injustice to history as a whole and the men who bravely fought and died fighting against federalized tyranny in their day. Lest we forget, Lincoln's vaunted Emancipation Proclamation only freed slaves in Confederate-held territory. It would be equalivalent to the modern US granting Universal Sufferage to women in Saudi Arabia. Sure, its PC nowadays to make the generalization you made, but it sure isn't very smart.

  • I don't want John McCain as President. Either of the Democratic candidates OR Ralph Nader is fine. But I have to say: I never heard any racist use of the term "tar baby."

    If "tar baby" is being used as a racial slur, then I need some equivalent short phrase that I can use to mean a situation wherein every effort to extricate oneself results in further involvement.

    Quagmire? No good: both our recent national "quagmires" will end up being resolved in the same way. We will declare a victory, leave as quickly as we can, and come back 20 years later to become pals again.

    It's that simple, if unsatisfying; it is hardly a "tar baby", where everything you do makes it worse. We could have resolved Iraq or Viet Nam the way I've described at any time during our involvement.

    Any other suggestions for a pithy phrase we can use instead of "one hand on the tar baby?" Or do I have to ask Atlantic Magazine to get involved?

    wfar (works_for_a_republican)

  • I agree with the comments about the Confederate flag not necessarily being a race issue. It is part of their state's history and if they wish to fly that flag as a reminder of that history I don't see the problem (I see it as similar to the 'six flags' of Texas). Of course it's not nice to see racists using the Confederate flag as a symbol of their hatred, but it doesn't mean we should necessarily assume that's what the state of South Carolina is doing.
    Although, on the other hand, I believe I've read that the Confederate flag went up over the SC State House in the 60's, so assume what you will about what perhaps prompted the reintroduction of the flag as a "heritage symbol".

  • The Reverend Mr. Smith
    April 9, 2008 5:00 PM

    As a native of the capital of the confederacy, I have conflicted feelings about the whole thing…the confederate flag obviously stands for a lot more than slavery, as the swastika has a deeper meaning than the nazis. I've never been there but I've heard the near and far east are filled with them. Symbols are symbols, and usually have more than one meaning. I have a confederate flag coaster on my coffee table and it doesn't make me feel like a closet nazi, or even a southern sympathizer. My girlfriend found it at one point and we use it. That being said, I would have moved to the north immediately upon turning 18 had I lived back then. As for the tar baby, there is NOTHING racist about the phrase, as it comes from early American folklore and was probably used in its proper context as a metaphor for a sticky and hopeless situation. Calling Br'er Rabbit and the Tar Baby racist is like calling Adventures of Huckleberry Finn or Blazing Saddles racist. I don't buy the whole "Song of the South is racist" thing and I never will. John McCain needs to be defeated for numerous reasons, but I don't think sucking up to frustrated confederates constitutes racism.

  • The issue with the Confederate flag, as with many symbols, is that its meaning changes over time. Yes, in the late 1800s it stood for states rights, even if one of those rights was slavery. But in the 20th century, it bacame a symbol for those who opposed much of the civil rights movement. At that point, it became a symbol of racism. The person who wants to lead the United States should be smart enough to know that the meaning of symbols can change, and their use must change with the meaning.

    I also don't buy the states right arguement. People were not asking McCain if he would legislate that SC remove the flag, just for a statement of what he thought was right. It should have been an easy enough statement to say, "I think it is inappropriate for SC to fly the CSA flag, and I hope that the government of SC chooses to do the right thing; however, it is ultimately a decision for them to make."

  • Here we go again about racist Republicans. I'd like to point out (again) that the KKK was started by racist Democrats in the south. THe racist south, until recently, has been lahrgly run by Democrats. Democrats were the ones that fought against school integration in the south. Robert Byrd, senior Democrat was a Grand Klegal and recently used the word "white-nigger". Bill Clinton's mentor was segregationist William Fulbright. It was Democrat Governor Bill Clinton who flew the confederate flag over the Arkansas state house.

    Here are some quotes attributed to Democrats, starting with my favorite:

    "I'll have those n*ggers voting Democratic for the next 200 years."

    — Lyndon B. Johnson to two governors on Air Force One according Ronald Kessler's Book, "Inside The White House"

    Blacks and Hispanics are "too busy eating watermelons and tacos" to learn how to read and write." — Mike Wallace, CBS News. Source: Newsmax

    (On Clarence Thomas) "A handkerchief-head, chicken-and-biscuit-eating Uncle Tom." — Spike Lee

    "You cannot go to a 7-11 or Dunkin Donuts unless you have a slight Indian Accent."
    -Senator Joe Biden

    Mahatma Gandhi "ran a gas station down in Saint Louis."

    -Senator Hillary ClintonClinton-and-Obama-Economic-Plans Mar-08

    Some junior high n*gger kicked Steve's ass while he was trying to help his brothers out; junior high or sophomore in high school. Whatever it was, Steve had the n*gger down. However it was, it was Steve's fault. He had the n*gger down, he let him up. The n*gger blindsided him."

    — Roger Clinton, the President's brother on audiotape

    "You'd find these potentates from down in Africa, you know, rather than eating each other, they'd just come up and get a good square meal in Geneva."
    — Fritz Hollings (D, S.C.)

    "Is you their black-haired answer-mammy who be smart? Does they like how you shine their shoes, Condoleezza? Or the way you wash and park the whitey's cars?"

    — Left-wing radio host Neil Rogers

  • The first commentor is right about the emanicpation proclamation only applying to the CSA. Lincoln couldn't make law for the United States only congress can create amendments. But as Commander and Chief he felt that he could issue the order as military rules to cause disorder in the south. (There was much discuss as to whether he actually had that power.)

    Congress wanted to pass an antislavery amendment during the war but Lincoln wanted them to wait until the rebellion was over first.

    Lincoln never supported slavery but he was a very clever politician and used all his powers to perserve the union.

  • Also, the American version of the story originated among slaves (it was based on Cherokee stories and myths)–the Br'er Rabbit represented a slave outsmarting his masters. "Tar baby" is a reference to that, and it's about as offensive as saying "a sticky situation". In the original stories, it was not a racial term, nor was it even symbolic of a black child–why would a black child outwit the slave? This really isn't something McCain needed to apologize for–in fact, I would say he's at fault here for apologizing in the first place and not explaining (more slowly for the media) what he meant and what the origins of the term were. Of course a politician will get a lot of mock outrage and quoted out of context for such a "gaffe", but that's not really something I expect from your columns.. You let me down, maaan.

  • Well, I suppose as far as the CSA flag goes, you have to question whether you have to accept the "changed" meaning that a group gives it. Do we just allow the KKK and racists to take that flag as their own and abandon any "legitimate' usage of it? I think a lot can be garnered from context as well. A confederate flag flying off the back of a motorcycle probably has a different meaning than it flying over the statehouse as a memento of the country it used to be a part of. Although I suppose once the "changed" meaning of something has become part of popular culture, it's hard to justify to the masses that it still has a different meaning. For example, the swastika will always conjur up images of the Nazis in Europe and America. Though it is still in wide use in East Asia as a Buddhist symbol (though it is a "backwards swastika" I believe), one wearing a swastika necklace in the European world will probably be accused of being a Nazi, despite the innocent truth of the matter.

  • Ok – the flag in question is never the Flag of the Confederate States of America – it is the 20th century adaptation of the Confederate Battle Flag.

    You will notice that while only 11 states succeeded from the Union, Stars and Bars bears 13 stars. Why is that? In a word, the flag was representative of an expansionist desire to seize both Kentucky and Missouri – it was a boast about future conquests of free states.

    There are in fact many, many Confederate Flags one could fly to show pride in heritage: the bonnie blue flag, the first Confederate Navy Jack (if an ancestor served in the Confederate Navy), and the many, many state flags of the South that existed before reconstruction. In fact, the Virginia state flag is the only ante-bellum Southern State flag that still flies today.

    The flag that is always flown with the cheap excuse of heritage does not even date back to the Civil War: it is a 20th century bastardization. Furthermore, it is based not on the many flags that did indeed symbolize heritage, but rather a flag that symbolized expansion, conquest, and indeed racism. After all, it was under this flag that the Army of Northern Virginia announced that any African captured in Pennsylvania during the Gettysburg campaign – freeman or slave – would immediately be sold to auction.

    Take it from this Civil War buff – know your flags before you stand by them.

  • Oh, one more thing. "Tar Baby" is not and should not be considered a racist slur. While "Song of the South" is uncomfortable to watch today, the written "Uncle Remus" stories should be required in all American grammar schools.

  • If a politician apologized every time he/she made someone on the politically correct left upset over a remark or a visit to an establishment that might have bigtoed roots, we'd have no time to get anything productive done.

    McCain said "tar baby". Boo-hoo. Now let's move on.

  • I'm from SC. I voted for McCain in the 2000 SC Republican Presidential Primary. While I believe the primary was stolen from McCain (See below…), I now not only regret voting for him (His foreign policy being the major reason) but I will not support him. Why? After the primary, he embraced the same people who did everything they could- legal and illegal- to smear and defeat him.

    Here are some examples. In 2000, a C-SPAN cameraman caught State Senator Mike Fair urging George Bush to "hit his (i.e. McCain's) soft spots", to which Bush replied, "I agree. I'm not going to do it on TV."
    http://archive.salon.com/politics2000/feature/2000/02/16/ugly/index.html
    In 2006, Fair endorsed McCain for President. and was his legislative Co-Chair.
    http://www.gwu.edu/~action/2008/mccain/mccainorgsc.html

    In 2000, Bush benefited from a public endorsement by the head of the SC National Guard, Adjutant General Stan Spears.
    http://politics1.com/bush2k.htm
    (It should be noted that, under DoD Directive 1344.10, it is a crime for a military official on active duty to use their capacity to "Use his or her official authority or influence for interfering with an election; affecting the course or outcome of an election; soliciting votes for a particular candidate or issue; or requiring or soliciting political contributions from others.")
    http://www.dod.mil/dodgc/defense_ethics/ethics_regulation/1344-10.html
    (It should be noted that, in SC, the Adjutant General is elected. That said, it's still a violation of DOD regulations for him to engage in such activities. Bush later repaid Spears by endorsing him in the Republican primary two years later, but I digress.)
    Spears not only endorsed McCain in 2006, but was a member of his SC "Truth Squad" to counter negative attacks on John McCain and was also a State Co-Chair.
    http://timesonline.typepad.com/uselections/2008/01/mccains-truth-s.html

    Finally, while most outlets didn't report it (or forgot it after they reported it) over 1/5 the polling places in the SC Republican Presidential Primary didn't open in the 2000 Primary. (In addition, a court order required the public to be informed of closed precincts at least 24 hours prior. In Greenville County, my home county, 21 polling places were closed with under 24 hours notice- including one with Bush stickers placed on the door.)
    http://archive.salon.com/politics2000/feature/2000/02/19/poll_scandal/
    While both John McCain and Alan Keyes called for an investigation, Bush dismissed any calls for an investigation, saying, "If he's got a problem, call up the chairman of the Republican Party."
    http://graphics.boston.com/news/politics/campaign2000/news/South_Carolina_gives_Bush_major_GOP_primary_win+.shtml
    The said SC party Chairman was Henry McMaster, who since was elected SC Attorney General. He not only endorsed McCain, but was a key member of said "Truth Squad" and was one of the Chairs of McCain's SC organization. (See the GWU link above.)

    I was in SC during the primary of 2000, and that experience helped make me extremely anti-Bush. (I sometimes say that I was the first person to consider Bush illegitimate-before Florida.) My support for McCain declined as he refused not only to defend against Bush but to protest the illegal and unethical actions of Bush- and this was still in the 2000 campaign. My opinion of McCain has only declined since then.

    I apologize for taking up so much space and including so many links, but I do want this story to get out, and to provide some evidence to back it up. And, yes, I am a regular reader of Ted's columns and comics and not a spammer.

  • I am fond of collecting flags, pretty much any flag I can find. I even have a Nazi flag brought back from Germany by my grandfather which I keep tucked neatly away lest people get the wrong idea. On the subject of the Confederate flag as a symbol of racism and not history/heritage I look at it this way: The flag, the Confederate battle flags… anything historical IS historical and should be treated as such. A Confederate flag emblazoned with "The South Shall Rise Again!" or some other such nonsense is CLEARLY racist and bearers should be treated as such. Like the Swastika (Manji in East Asia and still visible in many places in Japan at least) the symbol has been perverted: Manji by reversing its course and CSA flag by emblazoning of slogans. Any southern state which wishs to take pride in its past should not feel racist to do so. Remember, the US had legalized slavery too. Do we see the Stars and Stripes as a racist symbol? The villification of the CSA and its symbols were teh right of the victor, who gets to pen the history.

  • If memory serves, McCain made very clear he was only referring to his Vietnamese captors as "gooks". I suppose he's somewhat entitled in that case, after being tortured by them for several years.
    And though it sounds Scroogish, I'm sure the addition of another federal holiday would be a worry for business owners, whatever it may be for. The issue may not have been race so much as keeping his masters a little bit more cashed up.

  • 1. Southern states like South Carolina added the Stars and Bars to their state flags as a way to symbolize their opposition to integration and the civil rights movement.

    2. My French relatives refered to Germans by the slur "les Boches." I understand why, of course. They suffered terribly during the Occupation. Still, the use of such terms is bigoted and wrong. No French leader would have used such scurrilous language, even just after World War II.

    3. Indeed, employers opposed the addition of MLK Day because they thought they'd lose productivity, er, exploitation time. Nevertheless, McCain's opposition was plainly done to appease his right-wing white base.

  • So Ted, I'm curious: do you still consider "Tar Baby" a racial slur? And if so, why?

  • Ted's observation highlights something more fundamental about McCain: He is bascially reactive, i.e., if you put him in a situation, he reacts to that situation. There is no "big picture" or guiding set of principals. There is just context and event-driven Brownian motion.

    This is great if you are a fighter pilot where a) you have to have supreme confidence in your immediate judgment and b) you are doing great if you can think two steps ahead. However, it is likely to be disasterous for a president. No president or single individual can possibly have the knowledge and understanding necessary to immediately form expert judgments. Instead, they have to be able to assess the competency and credibility of those on whom they must, and should, rely.

    The "maverick" trademark is not an asset and the alternative is simply being "conventional."

    This is not a matter of "flip/flopping." This makes him vulnerable to being manipulated by those who have the most access. They can play to this weakness and get him to take ill-advised positions. All they have to do is be three steps a head and keep telling him he is so right when he calls other idiots.

    Thanks to Ted, we can also see that they will be able to get him to apologize at appropriate moments so he won't seem quite as arrogant as the current occupant of the White House.

    I take no comfort that he is now establishing a persona that can screw up big time and then say "oops" and get a way with it.

    (Aside, the phrase "tar baby" has a history related to Disney's Song of the South and the civil rights movement. Disney has not re-released the film for decades because of the controversy that surrounds it. It is not the phrase itself but its historical context that gives it a charge. You can use "quicksand" or "sticky" if you are looking for a similar metaphor.)

  • Edward,
    Every one of those racist, southern democrats changed parties after liberals hi-jacked their party, and turned the good-ol-boy committee system on its head.

    Regardless of party affiliation, Conservatives have always been the racists dumbasses. Against abolition, against integration, against equal rights Who is going to defend conservatism? Ted said it best. Conservatism is un-American.

  • "Conservatism is un-American"

    Yet if someone said that about liberalism, you'd freak. Hypocrite.

  • Angelo,
    You are are wrong. Most of those quotes are from people who are still members of the Democratic party. Dumbass

  • Since Angelo seem incapapble of googling 'racist democrats" I'll help him here, starting with the Democratic party platform in the mid 1800's:

    "Resolved, That claiming fellowship with, and desiring the co-operation of all who regard the preservation of the Union under the Constitution as the paramount issue–and repudiating all sectional parties and platforms concerning domestic slavery, which seek to embroil the States and incite to treason and armed resistance to law in the Territories; and whose avowed purposes, if consummated, must end in civil war and disunion, the American Democracy recognize and adopt the principles contained in the organic laws establishing the Territories of Kansas and Nebraska as embodying the only sound and safe solution of the 'slavery question' upon which the great national idea of the people of this whole country can repose in its determined conservatism of the Union–NON-INTERFERENCE BY CONGRESS WITH SLAVERY IN STATE AND TERRITORY, OR IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA" (emphasis in original).

    –Platform of the Democratic Party, 1856

    If blacks were given the right to vote, that would "place every splay-footed, bandy-shanked, hump-backed, thick-lipped, flat-nosed, woolly-headed, ebon-colored Negro in the country upon an equality with the poor white man."

    –Rep. Andrew Johnson, (D., Tenn.), 1844
    President, 1865-69

    Blacks are "a subordinate and inferior class of beings who had been subjugated by the dominant race."

    –Chief Justice Roger Taney, Dred Scott v. Sandford, 1856
    Appointed Attorney General by Andrew Jackson in 1831
    Appointed Secretary of the Treasury by Andrew Jackson in 1833
    Appointed to the Supreme Court by Andrew Jackson in 1836

    "I hold that a Negro is not and never ought to be a citizen of the United States. I hold that this government was made on the white basis; made by the white men, for the benefit of white men and their posterity forever, and should be administered by white men and none others."

    –Sen. Stephen A. Douglas (D., Ill.), 1858
    Presidential nominee of the Democratic Party, 1860

    "My fellow citizens, I have said that the contest before us was one for the restoration of our government; it is also one for the restoration of our race. It is to prevent the people of our race from being exiled from their homes–exiled from the government which they formed and created for themselves and for their children, and to prevent them from being driven out of the country or trodden under foot by an inferior and barbarous race."

    –Francis P. Blair Jr., accepting the Democratic nomination for Vice President, 1868
    Democratic Senator from Missouri, 1869-72
    His statue stands in the U.S. Capitol

    "Instead of restoring the Union, it [the Republican Party] has, so far as in its power, dissolved it, and subjected ten states, in time of profound peace, to military despotism and Negro supremacy."

    –Platform of the Democratic Party, 1868
    "While the tendency of the white race is upward, the tendency of the colored race is downward."

    –Sen. Thomas Hendricks (D., Ind.), 1869
    Democratic nominee for Vice President, 1876
    Vice President, 1885

    "Republicanism means Negro equality, while the Democratic Party means that the white man is supreme. That is why we Southerners are all Democrats."

    –Sen. Ben Tillman (D., S.C.), 1906
    Chairman, Committee on Naval Affairs, 1913-1916

    What say you Angelo? Seems the Democratic party is founded on racism and bigotry. Dumbass.

  • Watch it, folks. Keep the remarks civil and substantive. Nothing wrong with spirited debate, but keep name-calling to a minimum.

  • Of course, while some Democrats did sue to (try and) force the SC Republican Party to open all the polling places for their presidential primaries (See my long post above), they didn't open all of them until 2004.

    In a different vein, Greg Palast has written of how the Democrats didn't stick up for minority voters in New Mexico as a way White New Mexico Democrats could retain authority in the party.

  • Owen, you know that is not true. What are the big progressive initiatives that conservatives are responsible for? Conservatism is anti-progress.
    stay in the cave. Stay British. No New Deal.

    That said, there is clearly a time and place for conservatism, but what is so American about it? Nothing. America is about progress; equal rights for all, education for all, the common welfare. Face it, conservatives:

    Everything you are proud of has very little to do with conservatism.

  • edward, Did you actually write that? Or was it someone trying to make a fool of you?
    All of those racist pricks you listed were forced to switch parties in the 60s because Liberals and progressives who believed in things like equal rights, and took over. The racists still chaired the committees however, so the liberals changed the rules of how committee leaders were picked, giving more power to the party leadership. This spelled the end of the good ol boys system. But the racists found a warm welcome in the republican party, where they and their hyperconservative constituents remain to this day. I know this is not part of republican liturgy, but it is nonetheless what happened.

    And how dare you impugn my google skillz. I hope I can one day use cut-n-paste to make your points for you, love.

  • Political parties, like nations, religions, and pretty much everything else shift with the winds. I've been a Democrat for much of my short life, but I think anyone with insight can see how quickly a party's values are inverted. So, Edward/Angelo, your gamesmanship can go all night, but it's in vain. It's like debating "American" values. Absent the context of time, it makes no sense. For instance, who is the party of big government, aggressive spending, military adventurism, globalism, and weak immigration policies? W argues it's the GOP, no? Things change fast. It's better if your values start with you; then find a party that matches. Be prepared that like a lover, they may not be yours for the long haul. (And like a lover, you probably shouldn't read too much into their past. You'll never find one that's totally clean of pecadillos.)

  • sds, time to face the facts.

    Liberals brought us:
    Independence
    Emancipation
    Womens Voting
    the New Deal
    Civil Rights Amendment

    Conservatives:
    (balanced budget?)

    True conservatives believe in the primacy of markets and responsible fiscal policy. There is obviously a need for that. But no serious conservative legislator is going to argue that they were responsible for any of the large progressions Americans are proud of. I don't think anyone here is arguing that either.

  • "God, if you're up there, please grant us this…"

    Welcome to the club of desperate people who could see a remote chance of hope.

  • Angelo,

    Sort of, but only in the hazy hindsight perspective we all force-apply. Yes, the ends you and I like were achieved by primarily "liberals". But the party name is a tough one to push on it. And it's not so simple as to blame the South for all of pre-1954 Democratic ills. The Democrats made a callous decisions to take advantage of post-Civil War sectarianism. The DEMOCRATS (before the South got involved) helped spearhead the destruction of Reconstruction. (Count me in the category that says Andrew Johnson was given a criminally raw deal.) Also, don't forget that it was Teddy R. as a REPUBLICAN who advanced a lot of early breakthroughs for labor rights that began the course correction from robber-baron America. (As well as deeply corrupt social services.)
    And most of all, as a minority (it's fun to say that!), I will say that I am less than impressed with ALL American parties between say 1865 and 1969. That's being charitable. The complete failure to secure human rights when the issues had been raised was a moral failure of gigantic proportions.
    The funniest part, Angelo? It shows that us liberals are best at bickering with each other. The reason I make a point here though is this: I hate W. I despise neo-cons to their core. And the biggest boondoggle of this millennium was how W convinced GOP voters to align with him. Why? The right masthead. But, in what way did he advance conservative OR Republican values? And to believe that the Democrats couldn't be boondoggled by some similarly verminous monster as Chimpo, is to be naieve. It's reason ONE why we need to end the Patriot Act. Horrors don't end when Bush leaves office. Things could get worse. You just never know.

  • sds, to say the those advancements are ones only "we" wanted is a fallacy of the golden mean. The middle is rarely the correct position. Now do liberals have lame beliefs and causes? absolutely.

  • anonynonynonymous
    April 15, 2008 1:10 PM

    An "ignore user" function would be a welcome addition to this blog.

  • An "ignore user" function would be a welcome addition to this blog.

    I can't think of anyone I would like to ignore except for people who keep challenging Ted on facts (like 2+2=4), and then disappear when we link them to the proof.

  • angelo parody
    April 15, 2008 7:02 PM

    Last word!

  • originality rocks

  • Tar Baby – really, Ted, tell me this isn't the best you can do. He wasn't talking about black people. He was using the expression the way most people have for years. You're crazy.

    Hate the Gooks — I think he said "hated the gooks" and he was referring to the prison guards who tortured him. He wasn't talking about his drycleaner (uh-oh, stereo-type alert – and yes, I realize Chinese and Vietnamese are differnt).

    MLK Day – I was 9 at the time of the vote so I don't know the politics that went into it – but I can put in perspective that it was only 15 years since MLK's assisination so it probably looked differently than it does today.

    The bottom line is that by writing that McCain embraces evil, you display that you don't fully comprehend what evil is. And to use McCain as a racist as your motif – it is crazy, especially considering he has a non-white adopted daughter.

Comments are closed.

css.php