GOP Appoints Racist to Judiciary Committee

On Tuesday, the GOP announced that Alabama Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL) will replace Pennsylvania Senator Arlen Specter (Republican now turned Democrat) as the head of the Senate Judiciary Committee. This Judiciary Committee is responsible for approving judicial nominees - most importantly - Supreme Court nominees.



--a black former assistant U.S. Attorney in Alabama named Thomas Figures--testified that, during a 1981 murder investigation involving the Ku Klux Klan, Sessions was heard by several colleagues commenting that he "used to think they [the Klan] were OK" until he found out some of them were "pot smokers

Sessions had called a white civil rights lawyer a "disgrace to his race" for litigating voting rights cases.

Senate Democrats tracked down a career Justice Department employee named J. Gerald Hebert, who testified, albeit reluctantly, that in a conversation between the two men Sessions had labeled the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) "un-American" and "Communist-inspired." Hebert said Sessions had claimed these groups "forced civil rights down the throats of people."

I see you are taking talking points from the moonbat blogs . You see;it's their strategery . If he opposes Obama's nominee to SCOTUS they can preemptively shout "RACIST " and that will automatically diminish his objections.

But you see ;their slime is already discreditted with the fact that he voted in favor of Eric Holder. WHAT?? A Racist voting for a black Sec Dept. of Justice?? Who'da thunk it ?

The truth is that he is fair minded and will give a decent respect to whoever is nominated regardless of race .He will certainly give a fairer hearing than Clarence Thomas got from the Dems. They committed character assassination against him. They threw the race card at Sam Alito also .It's their MO .

Sessions knows full well what a nominee is subject to under the Dems Q and A because they used these old out of context smears against him in his 1986 bid for a federal judgeship . In all the confirmations hearings he has done since he became a Senator he has conducted himself with the class that the Dems in the Senate can only dream about.

By the way Sessions was already on the committee. You mean he was named Ranking member.
Also since the Dems are in power he is the ranking minority member .
Sen. Pat Lehey is the "head " of the committee... or as they like to call it the "Chairman". Leahy is the meanest, most partisan, most ruthless most vicious Democrat in the Senate.But the good news is that when the Republicans regain the majority next year,Session will be the Committee Chair.

I see you are taking talking points from the moonbat blogs . People in glass houses...

Correct . I frequently surf moonbat blogs and read the NY Slimes to deconstruct their pablum.

You know what I meant tommy. :)

The truth is that he is fair minded and will give a decent respect to whoever is nominated regardless of race .Hello tom:

Snicker... Guffaw... Bwa, ha ha ha. You guys are ridiculous.

excon

The only time I have ever seen a black candidate ridiculed and mistreated in the Judiciary Committee hearings was by the Dems...

Sessions was slimed during his hearings and his record distorted . He filed 20-30 civil rights lawsuits to desegregate schools in his time.

DEM Sen Specter was a Republican who voted against Sessions during his hearings. Later Specter said :
"My vote against candidate Sessions for the federal court was a mistake because I have since found that Sen. Sessions is egalitarian"

Sessions says the following about the coming hearings :
"I think we have a high responsibility to base any criticisms that we have on a fair and honest statement of the facts, and that nominees should not be subjected to distortions of their record, taking things they've done out of context,"

He knows because he experienced Democrat slime 1st hand.

The truth is that he is fair minded and will give a decent respect to whoever is nominated regardless of race .Hello again, tom:

Here's some stuff about your "fair minded" racist a$$hole. He's NEVER backed off from ANY statement.

A career Justice Department employee named J. Gerald Hebert, who testified, albeit reluctantly, that in a conversation between the two men Sessions had labeled the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) "un-American" and "Communist-inspired." Hebert said Sessions had claimed these groups "forced civil rights down the throats of people."

In his confirmation hearings, Sessions sealed his own fate by saying such groups could be construed as "un-American" when "they involve themselves in promoting un-American positions" in foreign policy. Hebert testified that the young lawyer tended to "pop off" on such topics regularly, noting that Sessions had called a white civil rights lawyer a "disgrace to his race" for litigating voting rights cases.

Sessions acknowledged making many of the statements attributed to him but claimed that most of the time he had been joking, saying he was sometimes "loose with [his] tongue." He further admitted to calling the Voting Rights Act of 1965 a "piece of intrusive legislation," a phrase he stood behind even in his confirmation hearings.

It got worse. Another damaging witness--a black former assistant U.S. Attorney in Alabama named Thomas Figures--testified that, during a 1981 murder investigation involving the Ku Klux Klan, Sessions was heard by several colleagues commenting that he "used to think they [the Klan] were OK" until he found out some of them were "pot smokers." Sessions claimed the comment was clearly said in jest. Figures didn't see it that way. Sessions, he said, had called him "boy" and, after overhearing him chastise a secretary, warned him to "be careful what you say to white folks." Figures echoed Hebert's claims, saying he too had heard Sessions call various civil rights organizations, including the National Council of Churches and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, "un-American." Sessions denied the accusations but again admitted to frequently joking in an off-color sort of way. In his defense, he said he was not a racist, pointing out that his children went to integrated schools and that he had shared a hotel room with a black attorney several times.

I'm not surprised YOU dodo's think he's " Sessions denied the accusations but again admitted to frequently joking in an off-color sort of way. In his defense, he said he was not a racist, pointing out that his children went to integrated schools and that he had shared a hotel room with a black attorney several times.

I'm not surprised YOU dodo's think he's ".

excon

all you just did was restate the op . And all that is a rehashing of 26 year old smears against him dredged up recently by the Guardian and later Politico. The closest he has ever come to saying something nice about the KKK was saying good morning the Sen Robert Byrd.(his past is easily dismissed )

It is an undeniable fact the Sessions ; the racist a$$hole;not only voted for Eric Holder but openly supported his nomination .
I see just another Alinsky style smear happening here. It is now standard DEM playbook.
Tea parties = racist
Accuse ACORN of voter fraud = racist
Obama spends too much money= racist

the tactic is getting old and boring already .

You're right, Leviston. The GOP has appointed a "racist" as GOP leader of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Let's leave aside the fact that this "racist" has a 56% approval rating among his constituency, which ain't too bad for anyone, much less a "racist". (Consider that Congress as a whole has a 29% approval rating.) Let's also not consider that he was next in line in terms of seniority for the position, and that you have to hae a pretty compelling reason to eliminate him from contension for the position if he's most senior.

Let's instead focus on the fact that someone once said that he said he supports the KKK except for their drug use. The allegation has, of course, never been proven.

Let's also focus on the fact that he once investigated the ACLU and the NAACP for voter fraud. Let's also leave aside the question of whether there actually WAS voter fraud.

Let's find every possible thing we can to support an argument of racism, regardless of reality.

Somehow, this "racist" keeps getting elected in general elections.

Whatever. The GOP are a bunch of racists. And Churchgoers are in favor of torture. And anything that isn't liberal is evil, unfair, immoral, and to be rejected.

Peekaboo, I see you, Leviston.

I've said many times that I don't blame Cheney for telling Leahy to "f*** off." I'm sure Leahy earned it.

I visit moonbat blogs, too. I also visit Hotair, Atlas Shrugs, Power Line and others. So what. I don't just copy the talking points down and I give credit where credit is due. By the way, here is Ex's TNR article (http://www.tnr.com/story_print.html?id=8dd230f6-355f-4362-89cc-2c756b9d8102). :D

Hello Elliot:

Like a minnow who swims among the sharks, a Jew who supports racists has to tread very carefully or he'll be eaten himself.

excon

Excon,

A JEW always has to tread carefully, regardless of who is in the water with him. But Jews also have a very finely tune "racism sensor". We can tell racism from bull$h!t accusations. Well, some of us can... I have my doubts about Abe Foxman at the ADL.

A JEW always has to tread carefully, regardless of who is in the water with him.
Why?

Why?

History.

Historically speaking, we have been attacked by our "friends" just as much as our enemies.

For instance, from the early 1800s until 1927, Jews in Germany were a very welcomed group. We were among the most successful people in the country. Our input, both economic and scientific, was highly accepted and sought after. We had become among the highest members of German society.

In fact, the Reform Movement within Judaism started in Germany because German Jews wanted to join the German army in order to be good Germans. The food they were able to eat was limited because of kosher law, and so they always had problems getting enough protein. However, beans were kosher, and became a major staple of the Jewish German soldier's diet. The problem was that on Passover, beans are Rabinically prohibbited (the term is "kitnyot"). The soldiers appealed to their Rabbis for a dispensation to allow them to eat beans during Passover so that they could be good soldiers and fight for the motherland. The Rabbis denied their request on the basis of Halacha (Jewish Law). These soldiers were not satisfied, and broke off from the mainstream Orthodoxy of Judaism, and Reform Judaism was born.

My point is that Jews were a welcome part of German society, and considered themselves the friends of German. Moreover, they believed that Germany was friendly to THEM.

That friendliness bit them on the butt big-time when a former Private in the German Military got elected and started persecuting the Jews, sending them first to ghettos, then work camps, and eventually death camps for mass slaughter. The thought of most German Jews at the time was that it wasn't real... Germany really loved them... this Hitler guy wasn't serious... it was all just a fad and it would pass as the economy improved. They believed right up until the end that Germany was really their friend.

THAT (and many other historical examples) is why any Jew who has a basic inkling of his own national history treads very carefully among others... even those who seem to be his friends. It is also why we have a very well-trained racism and anti-semitism sensor. It's a matter of national survival.

Elliot

Ah yes, the persecution complex.

THAT (and many other historical examples) is why any Jew who has a basic inkling of his own national history treads very carefully among others... even those who seem to be his friends. It is also why we have a very well-trained racism and anti-semitism sensor. It's a matter of national survival.Hello again:

The Wolverine and I don't disagree on this point. That's why I question his support for a southern religious racist..

If it's because evangelical Christians support the state of Israel, he should know that the only reason a southern Christian supports Israel, is because the idea of Jewish state supports their view of the end times.

In the "end", however, the Jews are kicked to the curb, as usual...

excon

Ah yes, the persecution complex.

Um, if you'd paid any attention to the last election you would have seen the persecution complex displayed by many a black American. I think the Holocaust, the fact that the Jewish state is surrounded by Arabs that want them exterminated and Jews around the world live among an increasing Muslim population that openly thinks of them as apes and pigs is plenty enough reason to want to watch your back if you're Jewish.

But you're in the US.

Ah yes, the persecution complex.

No, not really. I don't consider myself persecuted in the USA.

(Although I find it interesting that Blacks, which constitute 14% of the American population are considered a minority, Hispanics, which constitute about 20% of the US population are considered a minority, but Jews, which are about 1% of the US population are not considered a minority. But that is a discussion for another time.)

But I stay aware of the goings-on around me because of my family and national history. It's a survival trait that has served us fairly well through the past 2 millennia.

A "complex" indicates a psychological condition that results in an irrational thought pattern that has no basis in reality. A psychological illness, if you will. This isn't a "complex" because there is an historical reality on which it is based, and it is a rational protective reation to that historical reality. NOT learning the lessons of our past would constitute a "complex".

Like if a person gets robbed on the street every day and never changes the route he uses to walk home to avoid getting robbed, you have to wonder why he isn't learning from his past in order to protect himself.

Another aspect of this historical background is the Jewish ability to, within a generation of coming to a new country, be able to blend in with the people around them, become successful members of the society and make a good life for ourselves. The ability of the families of Holocaust Survivors to integrate into American society, become lawyers, doctors, businessmen, and high-level politicians within a single generation is not something that every culture can accomplish.

My family did it in less than one generation. My father is a nationalized citizen (he came here at the age of three, having been born in a German DP camp), but he is an attorney, a successful money manager and real estate owner, and fairly well to do. My brother is a doctor (MD, Radiology), my sister is a high school AP science teacher, and I'm a banker. We have become successful in this country within a single generation because of an ethic that was built out of a history of being thrown out of country after country and having to start over again many times throughout our history.

It's not a complex... it's an ethic of survival and success that drives us.

Elliot

Hello again:

The Wolverine and I don't disagree on this point. That's why I question his support for a southern religious racist..

If it's because evangelical Christians support the state of Israel, he should know that the only reason a southern Christian supports Israel, is because the idea of Jewish state supports their view of the end times.

In the "end", however, the Jews are kicked to the curb, as usual....

excon

It's because he isn't a racist. For those who say that he's a racist, I just have to say that my racism sensor is not going off. But my bull$h!t radar is.

Elliot

It's because he isn't a racist. For those who say that he's a racist, I just have to say that my racism sensor is not going off. But my bull$h!t radar is.Hello again, El:

For a rightwing hardliner, you're an awfully lot more forgiving than me. Maybe it's because the guy you want to forgive is a rightwinger too.

Me?? I don't have a racism sensor. I have a BRAIN! I couldn't care less what wing he belongs to. He uttered racist remarks. They have been documented. He has NEVER apologized for them, nor has he withdrawn them. Until he does, I assume he stands by them.

If you weren't wearing right wing blinders, you'd see it too.

excon

Here's a little shocker for you, Focus on the Family has no problem with an openly gay justice (neither does Sessions if that hasn't been mentioned yet).


In a move that will surprise gay activists and liberals (http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/republican-party/top-religious-right-group-we-wont-oppose-gay-scotus-pick/), a spokesperson for Focus on the Family, a top religious right group, tells me that his organization has no problem with GOP Senator Jeff Sessions‘ claim today that he’s open to a Supreme Court nominee with “gay tendencies.”

The spokesperson confirms the group won’t oppose a gay SCOTUS nominee over sexual orientation.

“We agree with Senator Sessions,” Bruce Hausknecht, a spokesperson for Focus on the Family, which was founded by top religious right figure James Dobson, told me a few minutes ago. “The issue is not their sexual orientation. It’s whether they are a good judge or not.”

Their sexual orientation “should never come up,” he continued. “It’s not even pertinent to the equation.”

Gay activists had expected that the group would oppose an openly gay nominee, since the group has been an outspoken foe of gay marriage and has worked to convert gays to heterosexuality.

In an interview on MSNBC this morning, Sessions, the key Republican on the Judiciary Committee, said: “I don’t think a person who acknowledges that they have gay tendencies is disqualified per se for the job.”

“We need to be looking for a person that can gain full respect of the American people, who can apply the law fairly, when they put on that robe will be non-partisan and non-biased, no promoting any agenda, personal, religious, or moral, and follow the law faithfully,” Sessions continued.

“Our concern at the Supreme Court is judicial philosophy,” FOF spokesperson Hausknecht continued. “Sexual orientation only becomes an issue if it effects their judging.” For example, he said, “If someone says, `I don’t care what the law says, on the next case involving sexual orientation, I’m going to decide the case in favor of the openly gay party,’ that would be a breach of judicial duty.”

To some degree, the group’s surprising statement reflects the fact that an openly-gay SCOTUS nominee would take religious rights groups, and the rest of us, into uncharted political waters, since there hasn’t been one before. And it also suggests that some leading members of the Republican Party may find themselves to the right of leading religious groups on the question of whether to tolerate an openly gay Supreme Court justice.

Personally I'm a little offended that this should "surprise gay activists and liberals" but what the heck, let 'em be surprised. I'd just like to see them applaud FOF for this.

Ah yes, the persecution complex.

An earned one, I'd say.

Btw, I'm not Jewish, I'm Irish, just so you'll know.

I see you are taking talking points from the moonbat blogs . You see;it's their strategery . If he opposes Obama's nominee to SCOTUS they can preemptively shout "RACIST " and that will automatically diminish his objections.

But you see ;their slime is already discreditted with the fact that he voted in favor of Eric Holder. WHAT ??? A Racist voting for a black Sec Dept. of Justice ????? Who'da thunk it ?

The truth is that he is fair minded and will give a decent respect to whoever is nominated regardless of race .He will certainly give a fairer hearing than Clarence Thomas got from the Dems. They committed character assassination against him. They threw the race card at Sam Alito also .It's their MO .

Sessions knows full well what a nominee is subject to under the Dems Q and A because they used these old out of context smears against him in his 1986 bid for a federal judgeship . In all the confirmations hearings he has done since he became a Senator he has conducted himself with the class that the Dems in the Senate can only dream about.

btw Sessions was already on the committee. You mean he was named Ranking member.
Also since the Dems are in power he is the ranking minority member .
Sen. Pat Lehey is the "head " of the committee ......or as they like to call it the "Chairman". Leahy is the meanest, most partisan, most ruthless most vicious Democrat in the Senate.But the good news is that when the Republicans regain the majority next year,Session will be the Committee Chair.

A person who calls an African American working under him boy and tells him he better be careful when he is dealing with white people is not racist.Hmmm.You argument here is he cannot possibly be a racist because he has black friends.Really.IS this the best you can do.

The republican party is at rock bottom, and if they keep on appointing hillbillies and racist ,God help them.People like you will vote for anyone as long as they are republican so your vote really doesn't count, its independents that they seem to driving out in droves

It's because he isn't a racist. For those who say that he's a racist, I just have to say that my racism sensor is not going off. But my bull$h!t radar is.

Elliot

You racism sensor is out of whack,

You can't be prejudiced against hillbillies . I bet you are even friends with one.

You argument here is he cannot possibly be a racist because he has black friends.Really.IS this the best you can do.

Don't be ridiculous and don't put words in my mouth .

I believe in actions more than words and Sessions has a lifetime of achievement and record of being tolerant and open minded.

You can't be prejudiced against hillbillies . I bet you are even friends with one.

Don't be rediculous and don't put words in my mouth .

I believe in actions more than words and Sessions has a lifetime of acheivement and record of being tolerant and open minded.

No I am not friends with you.If you really believed in actions you would see a racist.But I cannot convince people like you.So this is just a waste of both of our time

I have researched Sen. Sessions' alleged racism, and it appears they are based on vague, unproven allegations by people who didn't like his political views. I wouldn't defend a proven racist, but he should be innocent until proven guilty. I saw a video of that fat, drunk, moron, murderer "Senator" Ted Kennedy denouncing him, he of all people shouldn't judge others.

Look at my response #7 & #9 and you will see by what I mean by actions if you can remove your liberal blinders. .

All you have in your hate filled posting is the words of people discredited 2 decades ago and who have continued to be discredited by Sessions actions as a Senator .

look at my response #7 & #9 and you will see by what I mean by actions if you can remove your liberal blinders. .

All you have in your hate filled posting is the words of people discredited 2 decades ago and who have continued to be discredited by Sessions actions as a Senator .

As I said before it is a waste of my time to be dealing with people like you

Transcript of the Sessions hearings--over 500-pages worth--and it turns out there's quite a bit more. We're still going through it, of course, but the Figures testimony alone contains some damning details.

Figures recalled one occasion in which the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division sent them instructions to investigate a case that Sessions had tried to close: "We had a very spirited discussion regarding how the Hodge case should then be handled; in the course of that argument, Mr. Sessions threw the file on a table, and remarked, 'I wish I could decline on all of them.'"

All of them, according to Figures, meant civil rights cases generally. As he explained at one point: "[T]he statement, the manner in which it was delivered, the impression on his face, the manner in which his face blushed, I believe it represented a hostility to investigating and pursuing those types of matters."

Figures said that Sessions had called him "boy" on a number of occasions, and had cautioned him to be careful what he said to "white folks. "Mr. Sessions admonished me to 'be careful what you say to white folks,'" Figures testified. "Had Mr. Sessions merely urged me to be careful what I said to 'folks,' that admonition would have been quite reasonable. But that was not the language that he used."

Source Sessions Subordinate: I Thought I'd Be Fired If I Objected To Being Called 'Boy' | TPMDC (http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/05/sessions-colleague-i-thought-id-be-fired-if-i-objected-to-being-called-boy.php)

I also have a copy of the 500 pages of the senate hearing if anyone is interested but I doubt anyone ill be interested.

alinsky rules for radicals 11: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, polarize it. Don't try to attack abstract corporations or bureaucracies. Identify a responsible individual. Ignore attempts to shift or spread the blame.

The way I figure it ;if a Senator has not been targeted by the race baiters then that Senator is not doing their job. It is no coincidence that these vicious attacks on Sessions began at the same week that Benedict Arlen switched parties ,and a SCOTUS opening happened.

While you are doing all that reading ;why don't you take the time to read up on Henry Francis Hays ;the KKK dude that Sessions prosecuted for murder while he was a US Attorney?? Sessions later as AG handled the appeal and made sure the execution was carried out. It was the first time a white man had been executed for a crime against an African American since 1913.

The case also led to a $7 million judgement against the KKK in a civil suit.The conviction ruined the Klan in Alabama.

While you read those 500 pages I'm sure you'll come across the testimony of the lawyers from the Justice Department's civil-rights division who worked the Hays case with him and testified on his behalf.

So repeat the unfounded smears . They have already been debunked.

As i said before it is a waste of my time to be dealing with people like you

People like who? Have you looked in the mirror lately?

People like who? Have you looked in the mirror lately?

Yes I have and I like what I see, why do you ask??

Hello tom:

Snicker.... Guffaw.... Bwa, ha ha ha. You guys are ridiculous.

excon


Shhhhhh... I think I LIKE them... lol...

I think I LIKE themHello I:

I like 'em too. I'd like 'em better if they agreed with me.

excon

Hello I:

I like 'em too. I'd like 'em better if they agreed with me.

excon

Now what fun would that be?

Sweet inconsistency! How fair thou art, beloved by multitudes.

You can get your shorts in a wad if you think someone might get a position in this administration if there is any hint of racism in his background.

You are quite comfortable with the appointment of anyone who favors abortion, gun confiscation, or giving huge sums of money to failed businesses.

Go figure!

Edit: Oh, WAIT! That was a Republican thing. You don't approve? What a surprise!

Now what fun would that be?

Yeah, that's what I say... lol

Sweet inconsistency! How fair thou art, beloved by multitudes.

You can get your shorts in a wad if you think someone might get a position in this administration if there is any hint of racism in his background.

You are quite comfortable with the appointment of anyone who favors abortion, gun confiscation, or giving huge sums of money to failed businesses.

Go figure!

Edit: Oh, WAIT! That was a Republican thing. You don't approve? What a surprise!


SO being againts guns and abortion is the same as being a racist.:confused::confused:

Edit: Oh wait you don't know what you are talking about

SO being againts guns and abortion is the same as being a racist.:confused::confused:

Edit: Oh wait you dont know what you are talking about
Hahahahaha!. :D

SO being againts guns and abortion is the same as being a racist.:confused::confused:

Edit: Oh wait you dont know what you are talking about

No, being against guns and [pro] abortion (I assume that's what you meant) is not racist. But talking about people who "get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations," is quite biggoted, don't you think?

Not racism, but definitely bigotry.

"get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations," is quite biggoted, don't you think? Not racism, but definitely bigotry.Hello El:

Noticing the difference in people isn't bigotry. Unless Sarah Palin is a bigot when she visits a small town and applauds "real Americans".

Nahh. Neither of those remarks are bigoted. Of course, I expect you believe what Sarah Palin said is NOT at all the same as what Obama said...

Hmm. Based upon your definition, that means you're a bigot...

excon

Hello El:

Noticing the difference in people isn't bigotry.

Then I guess you have no problem with racial profiling as a method of controlling crime and preventing terrorism. Good, we agree on something.


Hmm. Based upon your definition, that means you're a bigot...

Excon

I prefer to think of myself as a discriminator. I discriminate between right and wrong, good and bad, correct and incorrect, moral and immoral, etc. I do NOT believe in moral equivalence, the equality of all "lifestyles" or that all choices are the same. So yes, I discriminate.

But I thought that liberals were above that sort of thing. Or so they claim... their actions seem to be otherwise.

Elliot

But I thought that liberals were above that sort of thing. Or so they claim... their actions seem to be otherwise.Hello again, El:

Even though we try, rednecks are very hard to ignore. It's the trying that makes us better than you.

excon

Hello again, El:

Even though we try, rednecks are very hard to ignore. It's the trying that makes us better than you.

excon


Trying to ignore the differences between right and wrong makes you better than us?

Uh huh. Keeps saying things like that and the 2012 election is in the bag for us. Y'see, MOST people in the USA still know the difference between right and wrong.

No, being against guns and [pro] abortion (I assume that's what you meant) is not racist. But talking about people who "get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations," is quite biggoted, don't you think?



Bigotted?? Maybe... Very truthful though!!

Trying to ignore the differences between right and wrong makes you better than us?

Uh huh. Keeps saying things like that and the 2012 election is in the bag for us. Y'see, MOST people in the USA still know the difference between right and wrong.

With people like rush running your party you can forget about 2012 or 3012, bring some decent people in and maybe then the republican party has a chance at winning.I personally like bobby jindall

With people like rush running your party you can forget about 2012 or 3012, bring some decent people in and maybe then the republican party has a chance at winning.I personally like bobby jindall

I don't want to get involved, you guys/gals are WAY above my head on this, but I CAN tell you this... RUSH DOES NOT RUN THE REPUBLICAN PARTY! Just saying... :D

The lefties like to set up straw men that they can easily knock down. They pick someone they think is an easy target for their smear machine.

Rush will do for now. Tomorrow it will likely be someone else, just so long as they can DEFINE their opposition to their liking.

In the primaries, they went out of their way to "help" us choose a "suitable" candidate, one that they perceived as weak.

I hope that next time, those of us West of the Eastern seaboard actually get a voice in choosing who will run!!

Gal ,great point. The Republicans would be better served if they did away with primaries open to all voters.

The lefties like to set up straw men that they can easily knock down. They pick someone they think is an easy target for their smear machine.

Rush will do for now. Tomorrow it will likely be someone else, just so long as they can DEFINE their opposition to their liking.

In the primaries, they went out of their way to "help" us choose a "suitable" candidate, one that they perceived as weak.

I hope that next time, those of us West of the Eastern seaboard actually get a voice in choosing who will run!!!

So your argument here is...
I thought mc cain was a strong candidate , and then he started aligning himself with the far right . If he would have picked a better down the middle republican as his VP I probably would have voted for him

Dare ;
McCain did not compete until he selected Palin. After that he was running a tight race with Obama until the September /October surprise (I still am not convinced that George Soros wasn't doing some currency manipulations like he has been known to do in the past) .

Dare ;
McCain did not compete until he selected Palin. After that he was running a tight race with Obama until the September /October suprise (I still am not convinced that George Soros wasn't doing some currency manipulations like he has been known to do in the past) .

Yes because the republican base got behind him after he chose palin but he turned off a lot of independents.

The fact is that the polling numbers through most of Sept. 2008 was a dead heat. It is undeniable that the reason McCain lost was the financial crisis. It is equally undeniable that Palin selection as VEEP was the factor until that point that made it a close race .

It is undeniable that the reason McCain lost was the financial crisis. Hello tom:

It CAN be denied, and I'm denying it. But, that's my job around here - cleaning up after you righty's.

excon

Poll Sept 12 .
NEWSWEEK Poll: McCain, Obama Dead Even | Newsweek Politics: Campaign 2008 | Newsweek.com (http://www.newsweek.com/id/158627)

Dead heat at 46% each.

Sept 14... Lehman Bro collapes.

September 18 McCain flip flops and reverses his previous position on the $85 billion AIG bailout .

Sept 24 McCain "suspends" his campaign and calls for cancelling debate .

The rest is history .

poll Sept 12 .
NEWSWEEK Poll: McCain, Obama Dead Even | Newsweek Politics: Campaign 2008 | Newsweek.com (http://www.newsweek.com/id/158627)

dead heat at 46% each.

Sept 14 ....Lehman Bro collapes.

September 18 McCain flip flops and reverses his previous position on the $85 billion AIG bailout .

Sept 24 McCain "suspends" his campaign and calls for cancelling debate .

The rest is history .

Here we go again

CBS News August 29-31, 2008 Barack Obama 48% John McCain 40%

On August 29, 2008, in Dayton, Ohio, Republican presidential candidate John McCain announced that he had chosen Palin as his running mate


Gallup Daily Tracking (among registered voters) August 23-25, 2008 Barack Obama 44% John McCain 46%

Thank you ;you just proved my point in # 54

Here we go again

CBS News August 29-31, 2008 Barack Obama 48% John McCain 40%

On August 29, 2008, in Dayton, Ohio, Republican presidential candidate John McCain announced that he had chosen Palin as his running mate


Gallup Daily Tracking (among registered voters) August 23-25, 2008 Barack Obama 44% John McCain 46%

That's right, Dare.

Prior to choosing Palin, Obama was ahead in the polls by 8-10 points. AFTER choosing Palin, he pulls into a dead heat with Obama. PALIN was the factor that put him into an even race with Obama. The economy is the factor that killed his campaign.

Can I make it any easier

Gallup Daily Tracking (among registered voters) August 23-25, 2008 Barack Obama 44% John McCain 46%

On August 29, 2008, in Dayton, Ohio, Republican presidential candidate John McCain announced that he had chosen Palin as his running mate

CBS News August 29-31, 2008 Barack Obama 48% John McCain 40%

After mccain picks palin, obama pulls ahead

The polls have too many variables in them... who cares what they say...

HAHAHAHAHA.Lol. If the polls support your theory its great but if they don't the polls have too many variables.You people are great.LOL

HAHAHAHAHA.Lol. If the polls support your theory its great but if they don't the polls have too many variables.You people are great.LOL

I think you misunderstood me Dare... I don't listen to the polls either way... and you really have no idea who I am or what I believe in or even who I voted for, so how can you classify me as one of the "You people" you refer to above?

I was merely stating a fact that the polls have a LOT of variables in them and they are really too inaccurate to use as a tool to judge ANYTHING... :D