Times Online - Race Matters

[red states rule]

More and more articles like this are showing up. Obama is a sure loser in the fall, and the Dem party is going to blow it

Of course, it will not be because Barry is a lousy candidate, it is because of white racists


Yes it's politically incorrect but race matters
The Democrats must admit it: Obama would lose to McCain

American Presidential elections have been compared with reality TV series or game shows, in which a gaggle of jumped-up nonentities aspiring to be celebrities are ritually humiliated in public and offered entertaining opportunities to self-destruct, until only one survivor remains. But this time round, a much more elevated analogy is sadly apposite.

The 2008 US election has all the makings of a Greek tragedy, in which noble heroes and heroines are forced to follow a course to catastrophe, divinely preordained as punishment for sins and blunders committed by their forefathers in the dim and distant past. In acting out their ineluctable doom, the eloquent protagonists do not just destroy themselves but also their cities, their nations and even their entire civilisations.

If this description sounds too grandiose, consider yesterday's results from the Pennsylvania primary. The outcome seemed to be precisely calibrated by the gods to maximise the agony of the Democrats. It gave Hillary Clinton just the support she needed to stay firmly in contention, but not quite enough to turn the tide in her favour.

Worse still, this result underlined the fear that senior Democrats have long been aware of, but have never dared to express in public: America may not yet be ready to elect a black President. Worst of all, it has created conditions for the possible election victory of a militarily belligerent and economically unqualified Republican candidate who supports many of President Bush's worst policies. Given the Bush Administration's domestic and foreign failures, the disasters in Iraq and Afghanistan and, most recently, the slump in the economy, the possibility of a Republican victory in November would seem to overturn every principle of proper democracy - and also the hope of America and its system of government being rehabilitated in the eyes of the world after the Bush years. The fact that Mr Obama and Mrs Clinton are both such impressive candidates, intelligent, sincere, articulate and in command of the issues, while John McCain does not qualify on any of these criteria only makes matters worse.

That Mrs Clinton will now carry on with her campaign is not just probable but essential. For the voting in Pennsylvania confirms that she has a much better chance than Mr Obama of winning the White House for the Democrats. According to the Associated Press exit polls published yesterday, 16 per cent of white Democratic voters considered race an important factor in the Presidential election and 43 per cent of these said they would either vote Republican or not vote at all, if Mr Obama were the Democratic nominee.

for the complete article

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/anatole_kaletsky/article3803520.ece

[stephanie]

The left is falling apart with the slide of their messiah...

I laughed when I read this article yesterday..:laugh2:

[red states rule]

The left is falling apart with the slide of their messiah...

I laughed when I read this article yesterday..:laugh2:

It is spreading all thru the liberal media.

Even Chris Matthews is holding back his tears as he sneers how racist whites are preventing Barry from his birthright

[theHawk]

Yup, thats all we'll hear when they lose. Either America isn't "ready" for a black or woman President. They'll completely ignore the fact that both are shitbag liberals that most Americans would run away from. And they'll ignore the fact that both of them have been caught in bold faced liies.

[Kathianne]

Yup, thats all we'll hear when they lose. Either America isn't "ready" for a black or woman President. They'll completely ignore the fact that both are shitbag liberals that most Americans would run away from. And they'll ignore the fact that both of them have been caught in bold faced liies.

I disagree, America is ready to elect a black, women, Jew, what have you, if the candidate is qualified in the eyes of the voter. Our system is drawn out, but if one can get through it relatively intact, they have a good shot.

Problem is with THIS woman and THIS black.

[red states rule]

I disagree, America is ready to elect a black, women, Jew, what have you, if the candidate is qualified in the eyes of the voter. Our system is drawn out, but if one can get through it relatively intact, they have a good shot.

Problem is with THIS woman and THIS black.

You nailed it Kathianne, but the liberal media wil play this as a race issue

Strange how the same liberal media did not attack those who dd not vote for Michael Steele, Lynn Sawnn, and Ken Blackwell

There was never a mention of racism when those conservatives blacks lost

[Yurt]

I disagree, America is ready to elect a black, women, Jew, what have you, if the candidate is qualified in the eyes of the voter. Our system is drawn out, but if one can get through it relatively intact, they have a good shot.

Problem is with THIS woman and THIS black.

i believe you and hawk agree, he said what you said

[Trigg]

Why is the news all about who the whites arn't voting for?????


93% of blacks voted for Obama in the primary.


Question: Why arn't blacks voting Clinton????????????????????????

[semi liberal girl]

Why is the news all about who the whites arn't voting for?????


93% of blacks voted for Obama in the primary.


Question: Why arn't blacks voting Clinton????????????????????????

They are voting for another black

It is a shame to watch my party turn into a bunch of race baiters, and shamless hucksters

[midcan5]

I disagree. Every national poll has Obama beating McSame. But I do we agree we are still a racist nation - probably all nations are racist - it is how we define ourselves sadly. Change 'racist' to some other equally misanthropic term. If Obama were white he would be a shoo in and really he is half white. Funny how skin tone defines a person. We have not come very far as people when all we see are qualities that are genetic and not of a person's choice. Even racists don't select to be racist they grow up with it and never question it.

[semi liberal girl]

I disagree. Every national poll has Obama beating McSame. But I do we agree we are still a racist nation - probably all nations are racist - it is how we define ourselves sadly. Change 'racist' to some other equally misanthropic term. If Obama were white he would be a shoo in and really he is half white. Funny how skin tone defines a person. We have not come very far as people when all we see are qualities that are genetic and not of a person's choice. Even racists don't select to be racist they grow up with it and never question it.

I have faced up to the facts. Sen Obama is NOT winnng over huge groups of voters

He outspent Hillary nearly 3 to 1 and lost by 10 points - and about 200,000 votes. He has lost huge Electoral College states like CA, NY, NJ, PA, and OH

He is losing white middle class working male

What does my party do. they ignore these facts and call those people racists

[Dilloduck]

I disagree. Every national poll has Obama beating McSame. But I do we agree we are still a racist nation - probably all nations are racist - it is how we define ourselves sadly. Change 'racist' to some other equally misanthropic term. If Obama were white he would be a shoo in and really he is half white. Funny how skin tone defines a person. We have not come very far as people when all we see are qualities that are genetic and not of a person's choice. Even racists don't select to be racist they grow up with it and never question it.

Garbage--Obama gets plenty of votes because he ISN'T white. If he was, Hillary would have this whole thing wrapped up by now.

[semi liberal girl]

Garbage--Obama gets plenty of votes because he ISN'T white. If he was, Hillary would have this whole thing wrapped up by now.

Here is an example of the biased new coverage Sen Obama gets. MSNBC has become the Obama 08 headquarters

Chris Matthews is the campaign manager

Chris Matthews: White People Willing to Pick Up Black Heroes, If They’ll Win For Their Side
By John Stephenson | April 25, 2008 - 16:43 ET

Chris Matthews remains clueless that support and opposition to Obama for the majority of Americans has nothing to do with the color of his skin. Opposition to Obama has much more to do with his policies and the controversial company he keeps. Listen to the advice he has for Obama:

MATTHEWS: You got to talk like a firebrand because if you‘re carrying their fight for them, they‘re going to like you. You know, a lot of white people root for black athletes because they‘re winning for the home team. People are quite willing to pick up black heroes, if they‘ll win for their side.

To see the video

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/john-stephenson/2008/04/25/chris-matthews-white-people-willing-pick-black-heroes-if-they-ll-wi
I

[Trigg]

I disagree. Every national poll has Obama beating McSame. But I do we agree we are still a racist nation - probably all nations are racist - it is how we define ourselves sadly. Change 'racist' to some other equally misanthropic term. If Obama were white he would be a shoo in and really he is half white. Funny how skin tone defines a person. We have not come very far as people when all we see are qualities that are genetic and not of a person's choice. Even racists don't select to be racist they grow up with it and never question it.

If Obama were white he would have been ignored by the MSM because he is a Jr. Senator who hasn't even completed 1 term. He was sworn into office January 2005 and immediately started running for President. So far he hasn't even done the job he was elected to do.

He would have been laughed right out of the race.

[semi liberal girl]

If Obama were white he would have been ignored by the MSM because he is a Jr. Senator who hasn't even completed 1 term. He was sworn into office January 2005 and immediately started running for President. So far he hasn't even done the job he was elected to do.

He would have been laughed right out of the race.

Sen Obama should be laughed out of the race right now

Better late then never

[mundame]

Worse still, this result underlined the fear that senior Democrats have long been aware of, but have never dared to express in public: America may not yet be ready to elect a black President.

We would be ready if blacks were ready. While blacks far disproportionately to their numbers commit most of the crime, take much more drugs and traffic it, have AIDS in huge numbers, do much more prostitution, are in prison far more, don't graduate from high school let alone colleges, collect welfare, don't bother to marry but have children anyway ------------------------

Why SHOULD the rest of us elect a black president, with all the baggage of approval of this sort of bad lifestyle that implies? With all the income transfer from whites to blacks that any black will be pressured to do?

No, I don't think so.

People are mostly not going to talk about it openly as I am, but they should. They are going to shut up and simply not participate in letting it happen. And that's what the Times analyst has figured out.



That Mrs Clinton will now carry on with her campaign is not just probable but essential. For the voting in Pennsylvania confirms that she has a much better chance than Mr Obama of winning the White House for the Democrats. According to the Associated Press exit polls published yesterday, 16 per cent of white Democratic voters considered race an important factor in the Presidential election and 43 per cent of these said they would either vote Republican or not vote at all, if Mr Obama were the Democratic nominee.


http://bestsmileys.com/signs11/16.gif I had heard 8% --- but that is people willing to say that they won't vote for a black. There aren't going to be a lot of people willing to talk about it. The ballot is secret, and they'll vote secret, but it won't be for some halfrican Obalamabama. For heaven's sake! This is just sad, that we can't do better than some young, inexperienced, not-not-even-one-term-senator who was a half-African illegitimate child and who goes to one of these Black Power churches!! Darn. And to cap it off, he seems to be a socialist! He has the furthest left voting record in the entire U.S. Senate!! How could such a turkey possibly get elected? I can't see it happening, and it been no wonder to me this whole election why so many rightist have been talking him up: they very much want McCain to run against Obama, because he'll be easy to beat.

This is good that at least the LONDON Times has started talking about it. We should probably start talking about it as a country, why white and Latino people are resistant to the idea of a black being president. There are good reasons, and they should be aired. Blacks have a lot to answer for, but they mostly just assume an attitude of indignation and don't accept responsibility for the black community's many, many grave faults.


At any rate, I agree that Hillary Clinton had better hang in there, or we get yet another dose of Bush, McCain as Bush III.

But I think the superdelegates are beginning to figure it out.

[semi liberal girl]

A year ago, my party was saying what a great guy Joihn McCain was. How he constanly stood against Pres Bush

NOW, they are saying if you vote for John McCain we will get Bush 3

Which is it? Or is this politics and folks trying to have it both ways?

[mundame]

A year ago, my party was saying what a great guy Joihn McCain was. How he constanly stood against Pres Bush

NOW, they are saying if you vote for John McCain we will get Bush 3

Which is it? Or is this politics and folks trying to have it both ways?


It's not one or the other: it's something else.

John McCain drastically changed! He WAS independent of Bush, and I liked him and supported him!

Then that fateful day he said he supported the cursed Surge...............

And his whole campaign collapsed.

Not satisfied with that, now he's saying we have to fight on however many years it takes so we can occupy Iraq for a hundred years...

Strangely enough, this did not reassure me.

Yeah, he wants to go on and on with Bush's war, which makes him Bush III, because people care about nothing else much except that terrible war and when we are ever getting out of it.

[Kathianne]

It's not one or the other: it's something else.

John McCain drastically changed! He WAS independent of Bush, and I liked him and supported him!

Then that fateful day he said he supported the cursed Surge...............

And his whole campaign collapsed.

Not satisfied with that, now he's saying we have to fight on however many years it takes so we can occupy Iraq for a hundred years...

Strangely enough, this did not reassure me.

Yeah, he wants to go on and on with Bush's war, which makes him Bush III, because people care about nothing else much except that terrible war and when we are ever getting out of it.

Actually, he suggested "the surge", as it came to be called, well before the press noticed any change. In actuality, 'the MSM' and democrats in general were 'for McCain' when they wanted to set the Republican agenda, once the presumed nominee, they were done with him. This is from November of '06:

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8LG86M01&show_article=1





View larger image

WASHINGTON (AP) - Sen. John McCain, a front-runner among GOP presidential contenders for said Sunday the U.S. must send an overwhelming number of troops to stabilize Iraq or face the possibility of more attacks in the region and on American soil.

"I believe the consequences of failure are catastrophic. It will spread to the region. You will see Iran more emboldened. Eventually, you could see Iran pose a greater threat to the state of Israel," said McCain, R-Ariz.

"We left Vietnam. It was over. We just had to heal the wounds of war," said McCain, who spent 5 1/2 years as a prisoner of war after his Navy plane was shot down in 1967. "We leave this place, chaos in the region, and they'll follow us home. So there's a great deal more at stake here in this conflict, in my view, a lot more.

McCain said he based his judgment partly on the writings of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the al-Qaida leader in Iraq who was killed in a U.S. air raid, and of Osama bin Laden.

"The consequences of failure are so severe that I will exhaust every possibility to try to fix this situation. Because it's not the end when American troops leave. The battleground shifts, and we'll be fighting them again," McCain said. "You read Zarqawi, and you read bin Laden. ... It's not just Iraq that they're interested in. It's the region, and then us."

With about 141,000 U.S. troops in Iraq more than 3 1/2 years into the war, the American military has strained to provide enough forces while allowing for adequate rest and retraining between deployments.

Democrats poised to take control of the House and Senate are pressing for a substantial reduction of U.S. troops in Iraq and a timetable for their withdrawal.

"As a practical matter, there are no troops to increase with," said incoming House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md. "Our objective was to remove Saddam Hussein and create an environment in which a democracy could be established. That has been done."

But Hoyer said Democrats would continue funding the existing troop levels.

"That's not an option, of not supporting our troops in the field and making sure they're as safe as we can make them," he said. "Very frankly, their lack of numbers exposes them on a daily basis to danger and death, unfortunately. But clearly, we're going to have discussions going forward as to how we change this policy and change it in the short term, not the long term.

Gen. John Abizaid, the top U.S. commander for the Middle East, told the Senate Armed Services Committee last week that believes troop levels should remain steady for now. He said it was possible to add 20,000 troops for a short time, but it would be unrealistic to raise troop levels as proposed by McCain and Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.

Abizaid said the American military in Iraq is stretched too thin already, and sending over a bigger, more permanent presence would undercut efforts to force Iraqis to take on more responsibility.

McCain disagreed, saying it was time to use decisive force with a clear exit strategy.

"You've got to ask yourself some questions. One, are we winning? And I think the answer is no. The other is, what are the consequences of defeat?" McCain said. "Can we still win? Yes, I believe we can. It'll be tough, but we need to do it."

Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., said he thinks U.S. general have been put "in a a very, very difficult position."

"What I don't have confidence in is the policy. And General Abizaid is giving us a diagnosis that is based on the current policy. But that policy has to change, and it can change."

Kerry spoke on "Fox News Sunday," while McCain and Hoyer appeared on ABC's "This Week."

[semi liberal girl]

Why are so many in my party in a state of denial over the successes in Iraq. Iw as opposed to going into Iraq, but we are there, and we owe it to our troops to make sure the job is finished before we leave

[mundame]

Garbage--Obama gets plenty of votes because he ISN'T white. If he was, Hillary would have this whole thing wrapped up by now.


True, and that's a good point, Dilloduck: it wasn't so long ago we were deploring how many young (white) people were all excited about the trans- or post-racial candidate Obama. Sure, they ARE voting for him because he's black, or a first-term, young, unknown senator would hardly be able to run for president!

If he were white, he wouldn't be a candidate.


However, the issue is the numbers. Blacks don't matter: only 10%, and many won't be able to vote because they don't have government IDs.

So are there more whites who will vote for Obama BECAUSE he's black, or more whites who will vote against Obama because he's black? That's what's really going on, I think, but I didn't work it through till your post, Dilloduck.

[mundame]

I was opposed to going into Iraq, but we are there, and we owe it to our troops to make sure the job is finished before we leave


You were smarter than me, then.........................

I favored going in, more fool me. 'Course, I supposed we were going to win in a "cakewalk," like most people thought, including the administration.

Well, I think the job IS done. We've killed a gazillion Arabs, so Muslim heads of state are very, very eager to suppress terrorists in their country; we've regime-changed Saddam's ass, so Muslim heads of state will think twice about being pests themselves. Mission accomplished, let's go home.

We can only succeed in doing what WE have the power to do: like kill people. We can't make people into democrats and liberal and treat women right and be nice to opposition politicians and not want to kill all the people in another religious sect. That's something they are in charge of, and I'd rather they got on with all that (or not) out of my sight and mind, because I doubt it will ever go well.

[semi liberal girl]

You were smarter than me, then.........................

I favored going in, more fool me. 'Course, I supposed we were going to win in a "cakewalk," like most people thought, including the administration.

Well, I think the job IS done. We've killed a gazillion Arabs, so Muslim heads of state are very, very eager to suppress terrorists in their country; we've regime-changed Saddam's ass, so Muslim heads of state will think twice about being pests themselves. Mission accomplished, let's go home.

We can only succeed in doing what WE have the power to do: like kill people. We can't make people into democrats and liberal and treat women right and be nice to opposition politicians and not want to kill all the people in another religious sect. That's something they are in charge of, and I'd rather they got on with all that (or not) out of my sight and mind, because I doubt it will ever go well.

and so many in my party is now willing to toss aside the remarkable gains for surrender

Iran is sitting on the sideline licking their chops at the prospects of Democrats sweeping in November

Hamas has endorsed Sen Obama

Other terrorist groups have endorsed Hilllary

that should tell you somehting when our enemies are supporting Democrats - but alas, it is ignored by many in my party. They are binded by hate for Pres Bush, and their lust for political powr

[mundame]

Other terrorist groups have endorsed Hilllary




Wasn't that also Hamas? Maybe it was in Gaza.

She instantly came back saying we could and would "obliterate" Iran if they attacked Israel............................

And nobody said anymore about her endorsement by these Arabs!

Very good political strategy; I think she's head and shoulders over Obama in her abilities.

[semi liberal girl]

Wasn't that also Hamas? Maybe it was in Gaza.

She instantly came back saying we could and would "obliterate" Iran if they attacked Israel............................

And nobody said anymore about her endorsement by these Arabs!

Very good political strategy; I think she's head and shoulders over Obama in her abilities.

Here is the info on Hillary

It's official: Terrorists endorse Hillary in '08
On the record, Mideast jihadi leaders say she's best hope for victory in Iraq

Posted: October 7, 2007
10:29 p.m. Eastern

WASHINGTON – With presidential primaries approaching and the race for the White House heating up, Muslim terrorist leaders in the Middle East have offered their endorsement for America's highest office, stating in a new book they hope Sen. Hillary Clinton is victorious in 2008.

"I hope Hillary is elected in order to have the occasion to carry out all the promises she is giving regarding Iraq," stated Ala Senakreh, West Bank chief of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades terrorist group.

Senakreh is one of dozens of terror leaders sounding off about American politics in the new book, "Schmoozing with Terrorists: From Hollywood to the Holy Land, Jihadists Reveal their Global Plans – to a Jew!" by WND Jerusalem bureau chief Aaron Klein.

Abu Hamed, leader of the Al Aqsa Brigades in the northern Gaza Strip, explained in "Schmoozing" Clinton's repeated calls for a withdrawal from Iraq "proves that important leaders are understanding the situation differently and are understanding the price and the consequences of the American policy in Iraq and in the world."

"The Iraqi resistance is succeeding," stated Hamed. "Hillary and the Democrats call for withdrawal. Her popularity shows that the resistance is winning and that the occupation is losing. We just hope that she will go until the end and change the American policy, which is based on oppressing poor and innocent people."

The Brigades, together with the Islamic Jihad terrorist group, took responsibility for every suicide bombing in Israel the past three years. The Brigades also has carried out hundreds of recent shootings and rocket attacks.

Abu Ayman, an Islamic Jihad leader in Jenin, said he is "emboldened" by Clinton's calls for an eventual withdrawal from Iraq.

"It is clear that it is the resistance operations of the mujahideen that has brought about these calls for withdrawal," boasted Abu Ayman.

for the complete article

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=57970

[mundame]

Abu Hamed, leader of the Al Aqsa Brigades in the northern Gaza Strip, explained in "Schmoozing" Clinton's repeated calls for a withdrawal from Iraq "proves that important leaders are understanding the situation differently and are understanding the price and the consequences of the American policy in Iraq and in the world."

"The Iraqi resistance is succeeding," stated Hamed. "Hillary and the Democrats call for withdrawal. Her popularity shows that the resistance is winning and that the occupation is losing. We just hope that she will go until the end and change the American policy, which is based on oppressing poor and innocent people."



Yes.

Well.

I don't care for the company, I admit, but I am convinced we have long since lost hope for achieving Bush's overblown and unimportant war aims and never can, now. So it's time to get out, however many depraved Musselmen also want us out.

Besides, if Hillary wins and DOESN'T get out, this war will eat her entire presidency, just as it has eaten up Bush's presidency.

I think she's got much more sense than to allow that to happen.

[semi liberal girl]

Yes.

Well.

I don't care for the company, I admit, but I am convinced we have long since lost hope for achieving Bush's overblown and unimportant war aims and never can, now. So it's time to get out, however many depraved Musselmen also want us out.

Besides, if Hillary wins and DOESN'T get out, this war will eat her entire presidency, just as it has eaten up Bush's presidency.

I think she's got much more sense than to allow that to happen.

Alas, so many in my once proud party ignores the obvious as they go along their merry way

Hillary (and Bill) have shown so many times they do not care about anything accept what benefits them