Ask Me Help Desk

Ask Me Help Desk (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/forum.php)
-   Current Events (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/forumdisplay.php?f=486)
-   -   The party of diversity (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/showthread.php?t=521152)

  • Oct 29, 2010, 03:46 AM
    tomder55
    The party of diversity
    It is reported that former President Bubba Clintoon(the proclaimed "first black President " by Toni Morrison) tried to get the African American Democrat candidate to drop out of the Florida Senatoral contest so the white RINO Republican Governor ,running as an independent candidate ,would have a shot at beating the Republican ,Hispanic- American candidate.

    It is reported that he had candidate Kendrick Meek convinced that he should drop out ,but that Meek renaged on the agreement . Now Clintoon is denying that it ever happened . But last night Guv. Charlie Crist confirmed that he had been in conversation with the White House over such a deal. The deal would've involved Meek getting a cushy appointment in return... possibly the Ambassador to Haiti?? (I think we already established that such an offer is a violation of the law) .Meek recently travelled to Haiti and has been involved in the relief effort.

    If Meek wants to inherit the Earth(Matthew 5:5 ) he must 1st not troubleth his own house ;lest he inherit the wind(Proverbs 11:29).

    This week President Obama told an Hispanic-American audience to go to the polls and (paraphrase )punish our enemies. But what message does this send to the Hispanic community that the Obots would do such back door maneuvers to defeat a Hispanic candidate ?
  • Oct 29, 2010, 05:08 AM
    speechlesstx
    You know Bush had a more diverse cabinet than Obama and Clinton both. The first black Secretary of State, the first black female Secretary of State, the first Hispanic AG and others... how were they treated by the party of diversity?

    This could be a banner year for conservative women in politics and the left is calling it a bad year for women. I guess it is a bad year for women when woman who is the epitome of NOW's original vision is being demonized as a whore by NOW itself.

    Fortunately it seems to be a year when the people are fed up and looking past the rhetoric from the left, so hopefully they can see through Clinton's duplicity.

    P.S. Since the latest narrative from the left is we're headed for 1930'2 Germany due to the violence by all those jackbooted thugs in the Tea Party, isn't it rather irresponsible for Clinton to be talking about punishing enemies?
  • Oct 29, 2010, 05:18 AM
    tomder55

    Quote:

    This could be a banner year for conservative women in politics and the left is calling it a bad year for women. I guess it is a bad year for women when woman who is the epitome of NOW's original vision is being demonized as a whore by NOW itself.
    The net site Gawker engineered a phony sex scandal involving Christine O'Donnell. The Democrat misogyny is rampant.
  • Oct 29, 2010, 06:10 AM
    excon

    G'morning, tom:

    Yeah, politics is shameful... The only problem with your post is the suggestion that hispanics, black people, and women should be supported by the left simply because they're hispanics, black people, and women. That's like saying Al Gore should be ignored because he doesn't WALK to his meetings... Oh, that's right. You DO say that...

    What you miss is the underlying reason WHY the left supports those groups...

    Take ME as an example... I LOVE the fact that Sarah Palin could DO what she's done, in this great country of ours. To be ABLE to have done it, is a testament to LIBERAL thought and LIBERAL policies... The left should be PROUD of what we've done for those minorities, and we are. Certainly, if left to the right wing, women would be pregnant and at home, and black people wouldn't be allowed on the bus...

    But, it's OK. You wingers take credit for lot's of stuff we did... Your pal Glenn Beck thinks HIS bunch supported Martin Luther King and the Civil Rights Act. If there weren't so many people who actually BELIEVED Beck, that would be funny.

    excon
  • Oct 29, 2010, 06:34 AM
    tomder55

    The left pays lip service to their various constituency groups . After the group becomes beholden to their nanny state handouts ,when push comes to shove ,they abandon their interests every time . The Dems do nothing to really liberate them or to empower them.
  • Oct 29, 2010, 06:48 AM
    excon
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by tomder55 View Post
    The Dems do nothing to really liberate them or to empower them.

    Hello again, tom:

    They do nothing, EXCEPT to have FREED them from the yolk of oppression, and then let America BE America. That's EXACTLY what's happened to Meg Whitman, Sarah Palin, Meeks, Obama, Fiorino, Rubio, and their likes. That's what FREEDOM does.

    Ain't this a great country, or what?

    excon
  • Oct 29, 2010, 07:23 AM
    tomder55

    With the exception of the President the ones you mentioned succeeded because they reject the liberalism that would leave them in the yolk.
    In the OP I identified the glass ceiling that the left would construct for Meek. He can succeed only as far as they allow him to succeed . When push comes to shove ,it was suggested that he go to the back of the bus.
  • Oct 29, 2010, 07:41 AM
    excon
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by tomder55 View Post
    With the exception of the President the ones you mentioned succeeded because they reject the liberalism that would leave them in the yolk.

    In the OP I identified the glass ceiling that the left would construct for Meek. He can succeed only as far as they allow him to succeed .

    Hello again, tom:

    Nahhh... They succeeded because they worked hard - NOT because they're righty's. That's what freedom does. Ain't this a great country or what? Besides, nobody told them that they were required to BE liberal simply because liberals FREED them. Lots of people vote AGAINST their own interests. Just look at the Republicans.

    I agree that Meek was discarded. But it has NOTHING to do with his color. It has NOTHING to do with a glass ceiling. It has NOTHING to do with diversity. It has NOTHING to do with what Bill Clinton (the white man) "allows". NONE of that is even close to what happened.. It's politics - ugly, dirty politics - but POLITICS, pure and simple. It certainly ISN'T about race.

    excon
  • Oct 29, 2010, 07:59 AM
    tomder55

    They succeeded because they worked hard ... and not because some politician gave them special favor or locked them into a system of government dependence.
    Quote:

    It certainly ISN'T about race.
    Yes it's only about race if a conservative is involved. Democrats and liberals never exhibit racism.
  • Oct 29, 2010, 08:23 AM
    excon
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by tomder55 View Post
    Yes it's only about race if a conservative is involved. Democrats and liberals never exhibit racism.

    Hello again, tom:

    Knowing politics as you do, you know that Crist will caucus with the Democrats. You know that Rubio won't. You also know, that Meek CAN'T win, and that Crist can, ONLY if Meek bows out. To ME, that's about winning, not about race. It's not even close.

    I don't know. For you to think it's about race instead of WINNING a CRUCIAL senate seat, says MORE about you, than it does about liberals.

    excon
  • Oct 29, 2010, 08:38 AM
    speechlesstx
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by excon View Post
    Hello again, tom:

    They do nothing, EXCEPT to have FREED them from the yolk of oppression, and then let America BE America. That's EXACTLY what's happened to Meg Whitman, Sarah Palin, Meeks, Obama, Fiorino, Rubio, and their likes. That's what FREEDOM does.

    Ain't this a great country, or what?

    Yeah, when a woman becomes everything that NOW was founded on and gets called a whore, I'd call that great country, too. Actually, just more of that lip service tom mentioned.

    And by the way, if your beholden to the nanny state, you're no longer free.
  • Oct 29, 2010, 08:47 AM
    tomder55
    Quote:

    that's about winning, not about race. It's not even close.
    Here is what Michael Steele ,chairman of the RNC had to say.

    Quote:

    If we have learned anything this election cycle, it’s that voters demand the right to choose candidates for themselves, not by a political establishment seeking to make those decisions from on high. President Clinton’s actions to have Kendrick Meek withdraw from the campaign sends a chilling signal to all voters, but especially African Americans. One can only imagine the response if Republican leadership tried to force out of the race – in the 11th hour – a qualified black candidate like Kendrick Meek.
    Steele Statement On President Clinton Asking Kendrick Meek To Drop Out Of The Florida Senate Race | RNC: Republican National Committee | GOP

    From a political standpoint this should be the nail in the coffin for Crist. Even if they convinced Meek to drop out do you really think the African-American population of Florida would rush to the polls to hang a chad for Crist ?
    I thought the Dems were better at October Suprises than that !
  • Oct 29, 2010, 09:14 AM
    excon
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by speechlesstx View Post
    And by the way, if your beholden to the nanny state, you're no longer free.

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by tomder55 View Post
    I thought the Dems were better at October Suprises than that !

    Hello fellows:

    It's true, tom. It was ham handed. What? You expect better from "Clintoon"?

    Steve, when you let the NSA listen to your phone calls and read your email, you're not free either. I don't hear you complaining about that.

    excon
  • Oct 29, 2010, 09:56 AM
    tomder55

    And I know this is pattern of behavior by the Dems here in NY . It has happened twice to black candidates for Governor here.
    In 2002 State Comptroller Carl McCall was asked by Clintoon to drop out of the Democrat primary for Governor in favor of an Andrew Cuomo run.
    This year they trumped up ethics charges against David Patterson for the same purpose.
  • Oct 29, 2010, 10:00 AM
    speechlesstx
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by excon View Post
    Steve, when you let the NSA listen to your phone calls and read your email, you're not free either. I don't hear you complaining about that.

    Still on that eh. I don't believe they're listening to me, but I know full well what goes out over the air waves is subject to interception by all manner of people, government or not, as is email and other forms of electronic communication. It ain't secure from any angle. I'm still free to talk or not talk and I'm not beholden as a slave to the government for it.

    Its like that ordeal about banning potatoes, if they're slaves to the feds to be able to eat they have to take what's given. If the feds say no taters then no taters, that may be stupid but it is a consequence of being a slave to the nanny state. I see no comparison to your point.
  • Oct 29, 2010, 10:25 AM
    excon
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by speechlesstx View Post
    Still on that eh. I don't believe they're listening to me,

    Hello again, Steve:

    If believing that allows you to sleep at night and criticize the nanny state for taking away your freedoms, knock yourself out.

    excon
  • Oct 29, 2010, 02:03 PM
    TUT317
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by speechlesstx View Post
    Still on that eh. I don't believe they're listening to me, but I know full well what goes out over the air waves is subject to interception by all manner of people, government or not, as is email and other forms of electronic communication. It ain't secure from any angle. I'm still free to talk or not talk and I'm not beholden as a slave to the government for it.

    Its like that ordeal about banning potatoes, if they're slaves to the feds to be able to eat they have to take what's given. If the feds say no taters then no taters, that may be stupid but it is a consequence of being a slave to the nanny state. I see no comparison to your point.

    Hi Speech,

    In an interesting way they are the same. Both are an example of negative rights balanced again positive rights. Your right to have private information transmitted without anyone listening is balanced against the rights of authorities to know in advance any danger to the public. In this case positive rights seems to be the winner.

    The negative rights of people to eat what ever they choose balanced against the positive rights of society. The taxpayer having to foot the bill for preventable diseases. Again it is a case of positive rights winning out( in Australia anyway).

    Both are an example of positive and negative rights.
  • Oct 30, 2010, 04:47 AM
    tomder55

    Back to the motive here. Perhaps there is a concession to be made that it wasn't about throwing Meek under the bus because he is black. But it is still about racial politics.

    Marco Rubio,a dynamic conservative Hispanic-American is a threat to their grand plans of locking up the Latino vote. It is exactly the same reason why they torpedoed the Miguel Estrada nomination to SCOTUS.

    I also want to revist the legality of this . Remember when we had this discussion when they sent Clintoon to Pa. to offer Sestak a job if he wouldn't primary Arlen Spector ? The law was clear in that case and in this one .USC 600 clearly prohibits this type of bribery.

    As for Charlie Crist... he's a pathetic wormtongue . As a Republican he did more than any other to undermine the party ,and he's attempting to do so again. I have no doubt that this move by Clintoon is payoff for Crist's treachery .

  • All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:36 AM.