Join the Discussion

Comments So Far: 182

• 0%

  Aidenag2 months, 2 weeks ago

  Anyone else find it interesting that the percentage of people who admit to race bias, is the same percentage of people who still strongly support Bush,Iraq and the GOP?

  Reply

  77 Replies

  • 0%

    scott42612 months, 2 weeks ago

    I find it interesting, but - living in the South - I'm not AT ALL surprised. Most of the the bigots I know of tend to be Republican. They moved to the Republican Party after LBJ signed the Civil Rights Act. When bigotry against African-Americans began to lose political steam, along came Jerry Falwell (who is probably toasting marshmallows in his own special place in hell with another seat reserved for Anita Bryant) with his crusade against gays. Now the hate is aimed at Hispanics (who, of course, are always assumed to be illegal).

    One thing I have noticed: If the prejudice for one exist, dig a little deeper you'll find other prejudices (like the absurd notion that all Muslims are automatically terrorists).

    And of course, Barack Obama is the anti-Christ to these people.

    So no, I am NOT surprised...

    Reply

    36 Replies

    • 0%

      NoSpinDave2 months, 2 weeks ago

      "Most of the the bigots I know of tend to be Republican"

      I think the rescent democratic primary blew that little libtard talking point right out of the water.

      Nice try though.

      Reply

      12 Replies

      • 0%

        TimALoftis2 months, 2 weeks ago

        Both parties have their fair share.

        We saw in the exit polling in the spring primaries that over 2 in 10 voters admitted that race played an important role/part in their vote. Overwhelmingly those voters cast their ballot for Senator Hillary Clinton. Most of these voters were in Appalachia country that includes states like Kentucky and West Virginia. Most were of lower income and education.

        After the passage of the civil rights bills of the mid 60's many angry white Democrats or dixiecrats as they are often called in the south left the Democratic Party to never return. For pure economic reasons however some of these 'Backward Thinking Folks' or 'Bigots' as I would call them still remain loyal to the Democratic Party even to this day.

        Reply

        3 Replies

        • 0%

          GrandMaster2 months, 2 weeks ago

          Really sorry about the neg mistake there Tim, most def a GOOD plus plus comment all the way!

          Reply
        • 0%

          MajJohn2 months, 2 weeks ago

          Many crossed party lines to vote against Obama.

          Reply
        • 0%

          injest2 months, 2 weeks ago

          We saw in the exit polling in the spring primaries that over 2 in 10 voters admitted that race played an important role/part in their vote. Overwhelmingly those voters cast their ballot for Senator Hillary Clinton.

          2 in 10 or 20% of the dems are bigots, yet this poll has it at 3 in 10 or 30% for ALL of America.

          Are you saying that 20% of the Dems and 10% of the repubs are bigots?

          That would fit with this polls 9 in 10 repubs or 90% don't have a problem with Obama's race

          Reply
      • 0%

        mesodude2 months, 2 weeks ago

        Blew it out of the water? I think exposed some fissures would perhaps be a more appropriate characterization.

        Reply
      • 0%

        NoWayMan2 months, 2 weeks ago

        meanwhile...

        the anything-but-diverse field of candidates in the GOP primary showed what, racial harmony? or was that hegemony?

        Reply

        5 Replies

        • 0%

          NoSpinDave2 months, 2 weeks ago

          Oh wait, wasn't that the much hated GWB that had the MOST DIVERSE CABINET IN AMERICAN HISTORY? Oh yea, it was.

          Reply

          4 Replies

          • 0%

            mesodude2 months, 2 weeks ago

            "Oh wait, wasn't that the much hated GWB that had the MOST DIVERSE CABINET IN AMERICAN HISTORY? Oh yea, it was."

            --This is the equivalent of fathers bragging that they pay child support. And leave it to filthy calculating weasels like Bush and Karl Rove to totally CRAP all over the true spirit of diversity by wh0ring these people for the obvious purpose of simply making their party *appear* to be inclusive of minorities. It's the 21st Century. You should be ashamed of yourself to be getting aroused over something like this.

            Reply
          • 0%

            bluetexasvalley2 months, 2 weeks ago

            NSD: "Oh wait, wasn't that the much hated GWB that had the MOST DIVERSE CABINET IN AMERICAN HISTORY? Oh yea, it was."

            And don't they also hold the record for most turnover? :)

            Reply

            1 Reply

            • 0%

              injest2 months, 2 weeks ago

              "And don't they also hold the record for most turnover? :)"

              Uhmmm, no.

              Bush Turnover 33%

              G. H. W. Bush 38%

              Carter 40%

              Ford 64%

              Nixon 52%

              Johnson 36%

              Kennedy 65%

              Reply
          • 0%

            NoWayMan2 months, 2 weeks ago

            diverse? um, with no dems on the current cabinet and only one way of thinking. sorry. not very diverse.

            and bush's cabinet the "most diverse cabinet in american history"? puh-leeze. just more lies.

            of the 47 bush cabinet members listed on his wiki page, 33 of them (approx. 70%) are white men.

            of the 40 clinton cabinet members listed on his wiki page, 20 of them (50%) are white men.

            also under clinton...

            - first woman sec. of state (a czech/jewish immigrant).

            - first woman attorney general.

            - first woman cabinet member of middle eastern descent, who was also the first woman ever to be classifed as a "designated survivor" (google it).

            - first woman sec. of energy.

            he also had african americans, asians, hispanics, and oh yeah...white people.

            so c'mon Dave!! STOP YOUR SPINNING!!

            Reply
      • 0%

        MajJohn2 months, 2 weeks ago

        Scotts points were correct as far as he went. The southern Democratic racists did drift toward the Republican party and created huge majorities during the Regan era, but and this is a big but, the northern Democrats who are racists, remained in the Democratic fold until now and they are posed to vote against Obama in massive numbers. Had anyone but Hillary been running a strong primary effort, we would not be where we are today.

        Reply
    • 0%

      aniokly2 months, 2 weeks ago

      Would you be surprised if you lived in Chicago, and discovered most of their city people are more prejudiced then any place in the South? And they are Democrats. Democrats that promise black people in certain areas all sorts of goodies, then go back to the office, and laugh, because they know they believed them, and they will continue voting Democrat. They make one speech in the black neighborhoods, and another in the white neighborhoods. BTW, Sen Obamas name will not be on the palm cards in some of their neighborhoods.

      Reply

      1 Reply

      • 0%

        Beau78902 months, 2 weeks ago

        Chicago often ranks very high on the list of most segregated cities in the U.S. Most neighborhoods in Chicago that aren't full of transients (like college students, or people who've recently moved here) are almost entirely composed of people of the same race or ethnicity. That said, I'm not sure I'd say that they're more prejudiced than anywhere in the South--I'd just say it's closer to an equal amount.

        On the other hand, because the populations of Chicago and its aldermen (city council members) are split almost evenly been white and black, most city politicians here have learned to share the power. The Democrats in charge of the city haven't been the way you described since the days of Harold Washington and Council Wars.

        Reply
    • 0%

      JoseMadre2 months, 2 weeks ago

      1. A MUCH higher percentage of Republicans in Congress supported the Civil Rights Act than Democrats; in fact, LBJ credited GOP Senate Minority Leader Everett McKinley Dirksen for passage.

      2. Most? After passage, Stennis, Faubus, and Wallace all stayed in the Democartic Party.

      3. Hispanics? I'm Puerto Rican and the only people who have assumed that I'm "illegal" have been African-Americans.

      Too bad they don't do a poll on the racism OF African-Americans, because in my experience it has been much higher than that of Anglos, Asians, or Latinos.

      Reply

      20 Replies

      • 0%

        JoseMadre2 months, 2 weeks ago

        Re #2:

        I forgot to mention that Richard Russell, who STARTED the filibuster against the Civil Rights Act, also was a lifelong Democrat.

        Reply

        15 Replies

        • AlphaGnosisComment removed: User banned.
        • 0%

          scott42612 months, 2 weeks ago

          And I'll repeat: Many bigots BECAME REPUBLICANS and corrupted your party AFTER LBJ signed the Civil Rights Act.

          The rot has been festering for OVER 40 YEARS! Can't you smell it? God, I sure can!

          Reply

          2 Replies

          • 0%

            DaneL2 months, 2 weeks ago

            Pull your head out that's what you're smelling.

            Reply

            1 Reply

            • 0%

              scott42612 months, 2 weeks ago

              Hardy-har-har!

              No, the reason you can't smell it is because your head is buried in the sand!

              Reply
        • 0%

          NoWayMan2 months, 2 weeks ago

          Re #2:

          you also forgot to mention that the senator who came up with the brilliant plan to get the civil rights bill to the floor of the senate (Senate majority leader Mike Mansfield) was also a democrat.

          he saved the bill from being relegated to the Judiciary Committee, where it would have remained in limbo until it died.

          Reply

          7 Replies

          • 0%

            mcarpentry2 months, 2 weeks ago

            Nowayman,The point Jose was making is that if the GOP had not pushed this thru it would have failed due to the democrats.More republicans voted for the civil rights act than democrats.

            Reply

            4 Replies

            • 0%

              scott42612 months, 2 weeks ago

              Point taken. But then the Dixiecrats switched to your party and became a part of Nixon's "Southern Strategy."

              Reply
            • 0%

              NoWayMan2 months, 2 weeks ago

              and the point I am making is that if Mike Mansfield hadn't stepped up, the bill would have died. period.

              and, you're wrong. in total numbers, more democrats voted for the passage of the civil rights bill than republicans in both the house and senate.

              for the original house version, 156 dems in the house voted for the bill while 138 republicans in the house voted for the bill.

              for the original senate version, 46 dems voted in favor of the bill while 27 repubs voted in favor.

              at that time there were far fewer repubs in the house and senate than there are today. they held much less power than they do today. just a fact.

              you can also see my answer to jose's first post on this point where I explain the numbers.

              Reply

              2 Replies

              • 0%

                injest2 months, 2 weeks ago

                "for the original house version, 156 dems in the house voted for the bill while 138 republicans in the house voted for the bill."

                Wow that's strange, how did the other 294 vote?

                for the original senate version, 46 dems voted in favor of the bill while 27 repubs voted in favor.

                Wow that's strange, how did the other 27 Senators vote?

                You DO know there are 435 members of the house and 100 members of the Senate.

                Reply

                1 Reply

                • 0%

                  NoWayMan2 months, 2 weeks ago

                  no sh*t sherlock. do you not understand the math? (and your subtraction is wrong in your first question. 435 - 294 is not 294. so it sounds like you're just not getting it)

                  and I shoulda said 152 dems voted in favor of the original house bill. not 156. so your incorrect calculation should've been 290. which means I made you incorrectly answer your incorrect answer. my bad.

                  Reply
          • 0%

            libsRfunny2 months, 2 weeks ago

            "he saved the bill from being relegated to the Judiciary Committee, where it would have remained in limbo until it died."

            Saved it from Democrats burying it in committee, just as Democrats did with the recent Kucinich articles of impeachment, is what you meant.

            Reply

            1 Reply

            • 0%

              NoWayMan2 months, 2 weeks ago

              yep. it was a dem vs. dem fight basically.

              back then the GOP had much less power than they do today in both the house and senate.

              but c'mon. comparing the civil rights bill situation to kucinich's impeachment thing is ridiculous.

              Reply

        • HanymanComment removed: User banned.2 Replies

          • 0%

            scott42612 months, 2 weeks ago

            Very good post, Hanyman. Your are spot on!

            Reply
          • 0%

            MajJohn2 months, 2 weeks ago

            The interventionist part is correct, but I'm afraid the "free trade folks" are from both parties.

            Reply
      • 0%

        mesodude2 months, 2 weeks ago

        "Too bad they don't do a poll on the racism OF African-Americans, because in my experience it has been much higher than that of Anglos, Asians, or Latinos."

        -- How much research on the matter have you actually done beyond assessing what you think qualifies as empirical evidence?

        Reply
      • 0%

        NoWayMan2 months, 2 weeks ago

        1. those percentages were skewed only because of southern dems in 11 states. in the northern and western states (39 states) dems voted in higher percentages in favor of the bill than repubs. and the numbers were closer on the dem side due to the sheer volume of dems in both the house and senate as compared to repubs.

        if there were more southern repubs in the house and senate the vote would've been much closer. there were only 10 southern repubs in the house at the time (compared to 94 southern dems) and only 1 southern repub in the senate (as compared to 21 southern dems).

        overall, there were only 33 repub senators at the time.

        in the house, the bill only needed 60 of the 172 repubs to vote in favor for its passage.

        and the big fact remains: the dems controlled the presidency and had overwhelming majorities in the senate and congress during the passage of the civil rights bill. and thats very significant.

        Reply
      • 0%

        TOD3962 months, 2 weeks ago

        "Too bad they don't do a poll on the racism OF African-Americans"

        Jose, you seem to be very astute as to what is truly going on. Re-read the article and you will see that the 3 out of 10 Americans that answered with racial overtones was NOT limited to just the whites. African-Americans answered the same way to the same questions. Which actually means that all people, blacks and whites, are the same. They both have a 30 percent bloc of racists. But the article kinda slanted that only whites were the racists. Either way, I agree with Jose that I see a higher concentration of African Americans showing racism against brown skinned Americans, usually Latin-Americans.

        Reply
      • 0%

        bridgebuilder2 months, 2 weeks ago

        "Too bad they don't do a poll on the racism OF African-Americans, because in my experience it has been much higher than that of Anglos, Asians, or Latinos."

        Dear Jose, As an African American cross cultural facilitator, I want to confirm that what you say is true. However, I'd like to provide context and history so that you understand what drives this bigoted behavior. We live in a society that has suggested that there is only enough room for one Majority group and one Minority group. African Americans have been yelling for years asking to be treated with respect & dignity and the increase in Latino immigrants shifted focus from the black voice to the brown voice and African Americans feel slighted again. It is not right but it is a real emotional response. I hope this message is received in the spirit in which it is intended. I desire to connect with your humanity and humbly ask your understanding. We all hurt from an unjust system. Peace and Blessings.

        Reply

  • catstevensComment removed: User banned.16 Replies

    • catstevensComment removed: User banned.10 Replies

      • catstevensComment removed: User banned.9 Replies

        • 0%

          crespi2 months, 2 weeks ago

          Few are calling him "Old Man McCain" yet on these very pages African-American Senator Obama has already been obliquely refered to as "boy" by some of the Cons.

          But it's not his race you fear. It's Democracy.

          Reply

          2 Replies

          • 0%

            cloud152 months, 2 weeks ago

            What do you mean few are calling him old?

            Reply
          • 0%

            libsRfunny2 months, 2 weeks ago

            "...refered to as "boy" by some of the Cons."

            YOU must read different stories than I do. And I read all the Obama stories. The comments you allege as "obliquely referred to" likely is your own bias causing you to interpret them as such.

            Reply
        • 0%

          NoWayMan2 months, 2 weeks ago

          thats true. and it should be.

          difference is, age really is a factor, scientifically so. motor skills decrease, awareness drops off, etc etc. thats part of the reality of getting old.

          when the DMV pulls the driver's license of an old person, its not a matter of prejudice, its a matter of public safety.

          currently McCain is taking meds for six (yes, six!!) different ailments/conditions. that should concern everyone.

          Reply

          5 Replies

          • 0%

            jmopinion2 months, 2 weeks ago

            And I hear Obama still is addicted to nicotine.

            Reply

            1 Reply

            • 0%

              mesodude2 months, 2 weeks ago

              I think that's why it's called an addiction...

              Reply
          • 0%

            jordan112 months, 2 weeks ago

            The DMV is hardly going to pull McCain's license. You're defining 'old' with too broad a brush. McCain is 72. My father just lost his license because of his age. He's 91. The definition of "old" is relative to many factors.

            As to McCain's health, his DR just released that he's doing fine. My dad is doing fine too, and running a business while taking more drugs than McCain, at 91. It's all relative to what the drugs are for, and whether or not they're doing their job of keeping a person well. That IS the point of taking them, is it not?

            I'm not going to vote for McCain, but his age or how many medicines he takes is not an issue with me. His agenda is.

            Reply

            2 Replies

            • 0%

              NoWayMan2 months, 2 weeks ago

              McCain is 72. life expectancy of the American male is 75.4.

              and it is a scientific fact that age erodes motor skills, judgement, etc. my dad's 73 and is definitely not the man he was when he was 50 or 60 or even 65.

              yes, the definition of "old" is relative to many factors. and by most of those factors, McCain is old. he just is.

              even by social definitions he's old. he doesn't know how to use a computer at all. not even for email. and thats not because of his age. my dad's a freekin computer wiz. so that speaks to McCain's (lack of) curiosty about today's world, how people interact, how we communicate. he's simply not curious. and that speaks volumes about him.

              and yes, his policies trump his age, for sure. but his age shapes his policies as I proved above with his choice not be part of what's going on out here in reality.

              and to me, being on 6 diff meds is a factor. I don't want my pres on that many drugs just so he can keep up with the rest of us. I just don't.

              Reply

              1 Reply

              • 0%

                MajJohn2 months, 2 weeks ago

                Your Dad at 73 may be slower, more deliberate, than at an earlier age, but he's also wiser. As to matching you physically, no, but how's this important?

                Reply
    • 0%

      Candida2 months, 2 weeks ago

      catstevens: /"Anyone else find it interesting that the percentage of people who admit to race bias, is the same percentage of people who still strongly support Bush,Iraq and the GOP?"

      That is an absurd conclusion.'

      I agree with you. It's probably a coincidence. Judging from the comments made here on Propeller, most of the supporters of President Bush would never admit that race influenced their decisions.

      Reply

      3 Replies

      • catstevensComment removed: User banned.2 Replies

        • 0%

          Candida2 months, 2 weeks ago

          Just to clarify things cat, I don't think you are racist. I don't remember ever seeing a racist comment by you, but I've seen a lot by others.

          Reply

          1 Reply

          • 0%

            libsRfunny2 months, 2 weeks ago

            "but I've seen a lot by others."

            Lefties mostly.

            Reply
    • 0%

      Beau78902 months, 2 weeks ago

      cat, the article, and the methodology of the poll described in it, are not at all ridiculous. Three in 10 Americans admit to race bias according to the poll, and the article doesn't mention Iraq at all. I'm not sure what your issue is with the quotes you mentioned from the actual article.

      You're objecting to Aidenag's comment at the beginning of the thread.

      Reply
  • 0%

    NoSpinDave2 months, 2 weeks ago

    Just ONE example of what a BS assumption this is. In this poll in Florida whites only favor McCain P to @, virtually ?0 ofblacks support Obama. The numbers dont lie. Its black America that is voting along racial lines, not white America.

    THIS IS THE REAL STORY HERE!

    http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5j422UZ1PVKXp...

    Reply

    16 Replies

    • 0%

      NoSpinDave2 months, 2 weeks ago

      I dont know what happened to this post, but the point was whites favor McCain only 50-40 in Florida, while blacks are virtually 100 percent behind Obama.

      The NUMBERS tell quite a different story than this BS Ald has posted.

      Reply

      6 Replies

      • 0%

        Candida2 months, 2 weeks ago

        What you've forgot to mention that blacks are almost 100% behind the Democratic candidate in all elections independently of color.

        Reply

        5 Replies

        • catstevensComment removed: User banned.1 Reply

          • 0%

            mark-stevens2 months, 2 weeks ago

            Anyone that is truthful has a race bias. I do... I see a young 6'6" black kid, I would bet he plays basketball. A white kid I would wonder if he even has an interest. I'm sure I can think of others!!

            I missed that the survey was done by telephone... only those that like to talk took the survey... busy, productive people would have passed!!

            Reply
        • 0%

          TimALoftis2 months, 2 weeks ago

          First African American Candidate nominated by a major political party in our lifetime. Truly an historical achievement...Its only natural that the black community would overwhelming support this candidate by 92-95% especially when they have supported white Democratic candidates by a margin of 86 to 90% in previous presidential elections.

          Reply

          2 Replies

          • 0%

            mesodude2 months, 2 weeks ago

            I suspect we would have observed a similar phenomenon among women had Hillary won the nomination.

            Reply

            1 Reply

            • 0%

              MajJohn2 months, 2 weeks ago

              Liberal women.

              Reply
    • 0%

      Neophile2 months, 2 weeks ago

      These Kentucky voters disagree with your conclusions:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M8J9laUNgL4

      Reply

      8 Replies

      • 0%

        NoSpinDave2 months, 2 weeks ago

        Thanks for prooving my point, you had to dig to Utube to find a specific example of a MINISCULE portion of the Kentucky population to back your assertions. Whats the smaple size in that "example" of what you are talking about? 10?

        A bunch of white people saying they will not vote for Obama hardly rebuts a legitimate poll that suggests blacks support Obama at at ALARMINGLY higher rate that whites support McCain.

        Not to mention, your little video does not even touch on the fact that Kentucky blacks probably STILL support Obama more than Whites support McCain.

        Nice try, but posting some random utube video prooves NOTHING. You cant refute MY FACTS so you resort to diversion.

        PATHETIC...but ohh so telling.

        Reply

        7 Replies

        • 0%

          Candida2 months, 2 weeks ago

          Gore and Kerry got 93%-95% of the black vote. Was that because of their race?

          Reply

          5 Replies

          • 0%

            NoSpinDave2 months, 2 weeks ago

            no, thats because the black ministers are in the hip pocket of the Democratic party.

            Reply

            4 Replies

            • 0%

              Candida2 months, 2 weeks ago

              Whatever the reason is, it's not the race of the candidate, right? So why do you keep insisting that it is?

              Reply
            • 0%

              mesodude2 months, 2 weeks ago

              In what way are black ministers more "in the hip pocket" of the Democratic party than ministers of other races?

              Reply

              2 Replies

              • 0%

                TOD3962 months, 2 weeks ago

                Did you see the 100K grant that Obama got for the church in Chicago? Case closed

                Reply

                1 Reply

                • 0%

                  mesodude2 months, 2 weeks ago

                  "Did you see the 100K grant that Obama got for the church in Chicago? Case closed"

                  --Um...Not even in the worst communist hellhole would that qualify as an open and shut case. How is this proof that the black clergy is any more intertwined with the Democratic party than white evangelicals are intertwined with the GOP? How does the example you gavve prove that?

                  Reply
        • 0%

          mesodude2 months, 2 weeks ago

          "A bunch of white people saying they will not vote for Obama hardly rebuts a legitimate poll that suggests blacks support Obama at at ALARMINGLY higher rate that whites support McCain."

          --"ALARMINGLY higher" huh? LOL Spinner, why is it that the only time the GOP even cares that black people exist is at election time or when they want someone to fight their wars for them?

          Reply
  • 0%

    JoseMadre2 months, 2 weeks ago

    "Anyone else find it interesting that the percentage of people who admit to race bias, is the same percentage of people who still strongly support Bush,Iraq and the GOP?"

    If there were a direct relationship, perhaps, but even the article shows that this is not the case.

    Reply
  • 0%

    libsRfunny2 months, 2 weeks ago

    "Anyone else find it interesting that the percentage of people who admit to race bias, is the same percentage of people who still strongly support Bush,Iraq and the GOP?"

    No. I only find it extremely telling that you are ignorant enough to imply there is a correlation.

    Reply
  • 0%

    injest2 months, 2 weeks ago

    FTA

    "At the same time, there is an overwhelming public openness to the idea of electing an African American to the presidency. In a Post-ABC News poll last month, nearly nine in 10 whites said they would be comfortable with a black president."

    90% Of whites have no problem. THats all whites

    Reply
  • 0%

    injest2 months, 2 weeks ago

    FTA

    "While fewer whites, about two-thirds, said they would be "entirely comfortable" with it, that was more than double the percentage of all adults who said they would be so at ease with someone entering office for the first time at age 72, which McCain (R-Ariz.) would do should he prevail in November."

    Translation 66% would be "entirely comfortable" with it

    Less than 33% would be "entirely comfortable" with McCain at age 72

    It would appear from this poll age discrimination is MUCH bigger than race discrimination.

    Reply
  • 0%

    mark-stevens2 months, 2 weeks ago

    Anyone that is truthful has a race bias. I do... I see a young 6'6" black kid, I would bet he plays basketball. A white kid I would wonder if he even has an interest. I'm sure I can think of others!!

    Reply

  • JohnQPublicComment removed: User banned.
• 0%

  Spadecaller2 months, 2 weeks ago

  I am not at all surprised, either. But the worst Bigots are the ones who hide it best. And we sure have our fair share of them on here (Propeller). As a known supporter of Obama and one who is open about my Jewish background, I have received more blatant anti-Semitic slurs than I have ever experiened on Propeller. I tend to believe it is not coincidental.

  Reply

  10 Replies

  • 0%

    rimbaud2 months, 2 weeks ago

    Let's face it, the nigra race are at the bottom, all over the world, including their own countries in Africa. I am not prejudiced. I had both nigra and yid roommates in college. My kids went to a yid pre-school.

    Reply

    5 Replies

    • 0%

      mesodude2 months, 2 weeks ago

      *you* were admitted to an institution of higher learning?

      Reply
    • 0%

      scott42612 months, 2 weeks ago

      "I am not prejudiced."

      Your very racist statement SCREAMS prejudice!

      Reply

      2 Replies

      • 0%

        injest2 months, 2 weeks ago

        If Obama or his minions run on the "race card" they will lose.

        When we start to see things like "if you disagree with Obama you're a racist"

        Obama will lose.

        No doubt

        Reply

        1 Reply

        • 0%

          mesodude2 months, 2 weeks ago

          Then I guess it's a good thing Obama isn't running on the race card...

          Reply
    • 0%

      ciera-marie2 months, 2 weeks ago

      I do not agree with rimbaud's comment. I accidentally gave it a positive.

      Reply
  • 0%

    libsRfunny2 months, 2 weeks ago

    "As a known supporter of Obama and one who is open about my Jewish background, I have received more blatant anti-Semitic slurs than I have ever experiened on Propeller. I tend to believe it is not coincidental."

    Have you also noticed the anti-Semites on Propeller are lefties?

    Reply

    2 Replies

    • 0%

      injest2 months, 2 weeks ago

      LRF

      "Have you also noticed the anti-Semites on Propeller are lefties?"

      Over the years I've noticed that these folks are Nuts, like the "truthers" who ever is at the top at the time they will portray themselves as opposites.

      If the President has an R they portray themselves as EXTREEM left.

      If the President has an D they portray themselves as EXTREEM right.

      Case in point "Media Matters"

      Reply
    • 0%

      mesodude2 months, 2 weeks ago

      "Have you also noticed the anti-Semites on Propeller are lefties?"

      --I, for one, was unaware of this, libsy but since everyone here knows you couldn't possibly have any biases or any personal agenda of your own in making such a claim, I guess we'll all just have to take your word for it. ;-x

      Reply
  • 0%

    injest2 months, 2 weeks ago

    Spade

    "As a known supporter of Obama and one who is open about my Jewish background

    I have received more blatant anti-Semitic slurs than I have ever experiened on Propeller."

    Got news for ya I'm not Jewish or an Obama supporter but I often called a Jew Zionist.

    Some folks are nuts.

    Reply

• catstevensComment removed: User banned.26 Replies

  • 0%

    ADAGUY2 months, 2 weeks ago

    But somehow, I suspect that if he were on the GOP ticket, and running against Hillary, he would get your vote.

    Reply

    5 Replies

    • catstevensComment removed: User banned.2 Replies

      • 0%

        scott42612 months, 2 weeks ago

        So, cat, what you are really saying is that it's not about race OR experience (as you suggested above), but the fact that Obama is {gasp!} a liberal?

        Yep. Pretty well sums it up...

        Reply

        1 Reply

        • catstevensComment removed: User banned.
    • 0%

      libsRfunny2 months, 2 weeks ago

      "But somehow, I suspect that if he were on the GOP ticket, and running against Hillary, he would get your vote."

      Only if he changed his politics.

      Reply

      1 Reply

      • 0%

        ADAGUY2 months, 2 weeks ago

        "Only if he changed his politics."

        Wrong! Most of you are party oriented. Politics don't matter to you, but party does matter! How else can you defend a 10n trillion dollar debt?

        Reply
  • 0%

    jordan112 months, 2 weeks ago

    Obama is a risky choice, not because he is black, but because he has little experience (2 years as a Senator). >>>

    Gee. I think you forgot something, like seven years in the Illinois Senate. Have to keep you honest, catstevens.

    Reply

    14 Replies

    • 0%

      Spadecaller2 months, 2 weeks ago

      The lack of experience is an excuse. One just has to look up his record and they could figure that one out easily. This alleged lack of experience is a smoke screen.

      Reply

      4 Replies

      • 0%

        mesodude2 months, 2 weeks ago

        Well, they had to come up with *some* new justification for voting for party over country this election cycle. After all, they'd securely pegged McCain as a flip flopper (the alleged reason Kerry was unsuitable for the White House in '04) long before the horrifying moment they realized he was the best candidate the GOP had to offer.

        Reply
      • 0%

        libsRfunny2 months, 2 weeks ago

        "One just has to look up his record and they could figure that one out easily."

        His record is worse then the do-nothing Dem-led Congress. He hasn't gotten one significant piece of legislation to become law.

        Reply

        2 Replies

        • 0%

          mesodude2 months, 2 weeks ago

          "His record is worse then the do-nothing Dem-led Congress. He hasn't gotten one significant piece of legislation to become law."

          --No fair, libsy! What Congress (Democratic or Republican) could possibly compete with or surpass the current Republican leadership in terms of the sheer breadth and depth of their accomplishments (prior to their shocking and thoroughly disgraceful loss in '06)? More importantly, what's wrong with the American public that we could be so blind to such hardworking public servants who've toiled so tirelessly to meet our every demand--never once thinking of themselves? Why, God?! Whyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy?! ;-x

          Reply

          1 Reply

          • 0%

            MajJohn2 months, 2 weeks ago

            OH GAWD, who killed Lenney?? Why oh why??

            Reply

    • catstevensComment removed: User banned.6 Replies

      • 0%

        libsRfunny2 months, 2 weeks ago

        "And he was quite successful at getting a bill passed that CONS were against and the police were against, despite the IL. Senate being conservative! Not bad for a 'junior' Senator. ;)"

        You just proved your complete ignorance of the American political system.

        By "junior" senator, she means the common reference to the newest U.S. Senator in each state as opposed to the "senior" U.S. Senator with seniority over the junior. State legislatures have nothing to do with it.

        Reply

        1 Reply

        • 0%