<p>
</p>
<p>It was in direct relation to this statement. I’m not suggesting it is true…exactly the opposite. Just because you don’t vote for someone doesn’t mean you are a racist or whatever.</p>
<p>Oh … I am a person of very little brain (to paraphrase Winnie-the-Pooh). I thought you were responding to my post. :o</p>
<p>Hindoo:
</p>
<p>I’ve always though of McCain as one of you liberal folks, not one of us. I know so many people who feel the same way. To a lot of Republicans, he is just like a Democrat, and almost interchangeable with one of the Clintons. Obama seems far more to the left in my perspective.</p>
<p>I know that in the heat of the campaign, Obama is courting moderates, and McCain has tried to make amends with the conservative base of the GOP. But just very recently, before the brainwashing onslaught we all have endured from the media and the campaigns, things looked very different.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Add me to that list. The only reason I can come up with for making the trip to the polls is to make sure that there’s someone to put a check on Reid and Pelosi.</p>
<p>Interesting observation, spidey. … By the same token, I’m observing in horror as Mr. Darcy promenades to the right these days! It’s undoubtedly a political move, and one that I’ll have to put up with, since most Americans aren’t as I tend to be. To get elected these days, I suspect a would-be president has to make some ideological concessions. … Am I making any sense at all, or just stringing together a bunch of gibberish words? … I’m tired. :(</p>
<p>^I am with you zoosermom, but I’ll add international concerns to my list of reasons to vote. What a painful election for conservatives. Ouch.</p>
<p>Zoosermom, I also appreciate the checks and balances of our two-party system. I’d like it even better if we had a strong third party!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Don’t let bz hear you talking like that. She’ll have to educate you properly on the virtues and excellence of JSM!</p>
<p>^She probably won’t waste her time on me, as he gets my vote by default. Better to spend time convincing Obama voters to move to McCain (which is what I do, as much as I’d rather not).</p>
<p>The question has, to me, never concerned which people, liberals or conservatives, were more racist. That is because there is no partition between the groups. Both groups lie on a continuum, and most of us fall somewhere in between the extremes of some arbitrarily determined poles of that continuum. What concerns me most is the implication of those poles.</p>
<p>What do we find, racially speaking, as we drift continually leftward on this continuum? We find Political Correctness, increasing ever leftward until it eventually goes on steroids. Here, even words like “niggardly” and terms like “black hole” can provoke claims of “racism” and possible job loss. Some resources (not opportunities) are taken directly from whites and given directly to blacks because of the nation’s past sins against blacks. In America, that is as bad as it gets. It is rare, and even this is changing rightward with each passing day.</p>
<p>What do we find, racially speaking, as we drift continually rightward on this continuum? Now you see what is really important here. I would much rather be a black conservative amongst white liberals anywhere on the continuum, than a black liberal amongst white conservatives on most places on the continuum.</p>
<p>What in the world makes McCain a “liberal”? Campaign finance reform? Fiscal responsibility? Supporting pro-business immigration reform that would work extremely well for the state he represents?</p>
<p>Calling McCain a liberal is as nutty as calling Clinton a conservative (which many on the left did).</p>
<p>“You supported Clinton and now you don’t support The One because you are white racist.”</p>
<p>I wrote my conclusion based on what the author of the article wrote. To quote him:</p>
<p>First the title ,“Your Whiteness is showing”</p>
<p>“Voting against Senator Obama is not about gender solidarity. It is an act of white racial bonding, and it is grotesque.”</p>
<p>“If it were gender solidarity you sought, you would by definition join with your black and brown sisters come November, and do what you know good and well they are going to do, in overwhelming numbers, which is vote for Barack Obama. But no. You are threatening to vote not like other women–you know, the ones who aren’t white like you and most of your friends–but rather, like white men! Needless to say it is high irony, bordering on the outright farcical, to believe that electorally bonding with white men, so as to elect McCain, is a rational strategy for promoting feminism and challenging patriarchy. You are not thinking and acting as women, but as white people. So here’s the first question: What the hell is that about?”</p>
<p>"Your threats are not about standing up for women. They are only about standing up for the feelings of white women, and more to the point, the aspirations of one white woman. So don’t kid yourself. If you wanted to make a statement about the importance of supporting a woman, you wouldn’t need to vote for John McCain, or stay home, thereby producing the same likely result–a defeat for Obama. You could always have said you were going to go out and vote for Cynthia McKinney. After all, she is a woman, running with the Green Party, and she’s progressive, and she’s a feminist. But that isn’t your threat is it? No. You’re not threatening to vote for the woman, or even the feminist woman. Rather, you are threatening to vote for the white man, and to reject not only the black man who you feel stole Clinton’s birthright, but even the black woman in the race. And I wonder why? Could it be…?</p>
<p>See, I told you your whiteness was showing. "</p>
<p>"And how are we to understand that refusal–this sudden line in the proverbial sand–other than as a racist slap at a black man? You will vote for white men year after year after year–and are threatening to vote for another one just to make a point–but can’t bring yourself to vote for a black man, "</p>
<p>Why is it hard to understand that many of us don’t like to fly in a plane whose Pilot has only two lessons? We don’t like the people who shaped his views radical (Ayers), ultra leftist (Kennedy, Kerry), and man full of hatred (Wright). We like to cling to our beliefs. We also don’t understand where The One stands, and some of us don’t like his idea of raising Taxes (Capital Gain+general Tax).</p>
<p>And I personally don’t like the fact that the incompetent democratic congress and him would be of same party.</p>
<p>To a Republican,
there is only about three inches of solid conservative ground to the left of Senator McCain in the Republican Party (a party it should be remember in a representative democracy that is on-again/off-again as representative of the wishes of the people of this country as the Democrats are). Meaning in the middle, or temperate zone of American politics.</p>
<p>Therefore, as a Republican, he is about as liberal as you could hope…if you are a liberal…while remaining a Republican. About three steps away from the conservative end of the Democrat’s party.</p>
<p>It’s just true. Like it or not.
.</p>
<p>Dorsselmeier - your post fascinates me but I don’t get it.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You give your reasoning for where going leftward on the scale goes but you don’t really address anything about the right…except to condem the right. I feel like I missed something. Can you clarify please?</p>
<p>It’s obvious, really. Consider Obama, for example-- widely disliked and rejected by the right because he is liberal. But when we look far to the right, [we</a> find people who dislike Obama so much](<a href=“http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/washington/AP-Obama-White-Supremacists.html]we”>http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/washington/AP-Obama-White-Supremacists.html), indeed who dislike blacks so much as a principle, that they want Obama to win so that he becomes a visible indicator to whites of a need to revolt against blacks. In short, they want to see a hateful backlash from the right against the left.</p>
<p>While the left has its racism, the right’s racism is so immense and execrable that it makes the left’s racism appear as brotherhood by comparison.</p>
<p>Dross’ post would be way above my head if I hadn’t seen a whackjob on the far right saying today that Obama should get elected because white people need to see that they have to take back America. Don’t ask me who it was because I was too grossed out to get into it.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>One could just as easily assert the opposite.</p>
<p>I don’t recall hearing anyone on the Right call on God to da** our country.</p>
<p>These are people who don’t like anyone if they aren’t exactly the same as them. Bible thumping fundamentalists. They aren’t conservatives. They are just like the far, far left. They are extremists. They have so much in common with one another they should have their own political party.</p>
<p>No. They are certainly on the right. Ideologically, they reflect rightist thinking (which is why we have seen many so-called mainstream conservatives fraternizing with them). Trent Lott, Bob Barr, Strom Thurmond, Jesse Helms, very many others have kow-towed to these wicked elements for years. There is quite a difference in their working for a direct revolt by whites against the left, and against blacks (and Asians, and hispanics, and Indians) in particular, and declaring that God should damn America. The first presents a direct threat to civilization. The latter simply leaves the final decision to God.</p>
<p>The right is most definitely the locus of the most atrocious racism in the world.</p>