PDA

View Full Version : Further News of Teabaggers Not At All Being Racist


bjkeefe
07-14-2010, 06:02 AM
Welp, we didn't think it would take very long for the YORE THE REEL RASIST!!!1! huffing to begin all over Greater Wingnuttia in reaction to news of the NAACP's planned resolution (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?p=169495#post169495). And maybe it's time to have a separate thread to keep an eye on this aspect of the teabaggers, as separate from all of their other (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?t=3773) antics (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?t=5284), due to there being something a little less funny about this.

Let's start with the news from Buffalo (http://wnymedia.net/wnymedia/buffalopundit/2010/07/all-about-taxes-and-spending-srsly/):

So to bring us around to my point today, Allen Coniglio, a self-appointed “leader” of the Ostrowski wing of the local tea party, sent this around to his small group:

If you do nothing else in your life, you must see this. It may be the funniest thing you ever see. Hurry. They have taken this down half a dozen times but thankfully, someone keeps putting it back up. [link removed]
Allen

I won’t embed the video, because it depicts Farina as Obama, makes jokes about Joe Lieberman and the Holocaust, and likens Nancy Pelosi to a whore (she is a powerful woman, after all).

Farina being the black kid from The Little Rascals. Before Buckwheat. So, like seventy years ago. You can imagine the portrayal, if you've never seen that show yourself. Or, you can guess from this screen grab:

http://a.imageshack.us/img571/9764/teabaggersdepictobamaas.jpg

(h/t: Hunger Tallest Palin (http://www.rumproast.com/index.php/site/comments/tea_shall_overcome/) and John Cole (http://www.balloon-juice.com/2010/07/13/fighting-for-the-constitution-pre-14th-amendment/))

TwinSwords
07-16-2010, 02:17 AM
I’d Recommend a Shitload of Scotch (http://www.balloon-juice.com/2010/07/15/id-recommend-a-shitload-of-scotch/)

The sad thing is that Mark Williams will win this debate: more Americans will side with the teabaggers and Williams' screed than with the NAACP. (Or so I suspect.)

bjkeefe
07-16-2010, 07:14 AM
I’d Recommend a Shitload of Scotch (http://www.balloon-juice.com/2010/07/15/id-recommend-a-shitload-of-scotch/)

The sad thing is that Mark Williams will win this debate: more Americans will side with the teabaggers and Williams' screed than with the NAACP. (Or so I suspect.)

What a disgrace.

Okay, place your bets:

1. After a few days, Markkk Williams speaks in the past exonerative in a windy non-apology apology -- "if feelings were hurt because some took an attempt at humor the wrong way ..." -- and takes no more heat from anyone who is not Shrill.

-- or --

2. He steps down, and teabaggers across the land turn their persecution complexes up to 11. After laying low for a month, he resumes his "work," with a slightly different title. Meanwhile, Davids Broder and Brooks lead a brigade of chin-strokers in Very Serious Contemplations about over-sensitivity among Limousine Liberals, and conclude it's mostly Obama's fault.

bjkeefe
07-16-2010, 09:52 AM
Occasional B'head and perennial wise man Ta-Nehisi Coates has a long blog post up (http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2010/07/the-case-against-the-naacp/59793/) (via (http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/07/the-correct-but-tactless-naacp.html)) about recent doings. Here's just a taste.

The NAACP's announcement initially struck me in much the same the way. But some hours of considering this have proven to me that my initial skepticism says more about the broad American narrative of race and racism, then it does about the justness of the NAACP's charge.

I think it's worth, first, considering the record of American racism, and then the record of the Tea Party and its allies. Racism tends to attract attention when it's flagrant and filled with invective. But like all bigotry, the most potent component of racism is frame-flipping--positioning the bigot as the actual victim. So the gay do not simply want to marry, they want to convert our children into sin. The Jews do not merely want to be left in peace, they actually are plotting world take-over. And the blacks are not actually victims of American power, but beneficiaries of the war against hard-working whites. This is a respectable, more sensible, bigotry, one that does not seek to name-call, preferring instead change the subject and strawman. Thus segregation wasn't necessary to keep the ******s in line, it was necessary to protect the honor of white women.

There's much more goodness (http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2010/07/the-case-against-the-naacp/59793/).

==========

NB: The stars above do not appear in TNC's original post, nor would I have put them in. Evidently, the Comment Nanny has enabled some mindless automatic filter. We can wag our collective finger at her for this, but really, all of us who wish to have adult discussions must ultimately be deeply grateful to Lyle.

[Added] Are we also to be denied the synonym for snicker, that rhymes with chigger? You know the word <-- that is an EX-hyperlink.

[Added2: ARGH! Not even in URLs? Here (http://img46.imageshack.us/img46/9466/defineabadword.png).] [Added3: Or here (http://is.gd/duBT3).]

Test: s******.

FUDGE!

What about that country in Africa (http://www.google.com/search?q=define%3A&q=niger), or the word for acting like a cheapskate (http://www.google.com/search?q=define%3A&q=niggardly)?

Test: Niger. Niggardly.

Thank the FSM for small mercies.

listener
07-16-2010, 11:27 AM
[QUOTE=bjkeefe;170075]Occasional B'head and perennial wise man Ta-Nehisi Coates has a long blog post up (http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2010/07/the-case-against-the-naacp/59793/) (via (http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/07/the-correct-but-tactless-naacp.html)) about recent doings. Here's just a taste.



There's much more goodness (http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2010/07/the-case-against-the-naacp/59793/).

Thanks. I've been very favorably impressed with the depth of Coates' thinking in the few other pieces of his that I've seen, and look forward to reading this one.

bjkeefe
07-16-2010, 05:48 PM
Also, Sheila Jackson-Lee. And just in case you thought those claims (http://alicublog.blogspot.com/2010_07_11_archive.html#686686502968633012) weren't wingnutty enough (even if you read the earlier ones (http://alicublog.blogspot.com/2010_07_11_archive.html#4749882500041835460)), dig this: Mel Gibson and Obama are exactly the same!!!1! (http://alicublog.blogspot.com/2010_07_11_archive.html#5706605641807778734), according to Commentary mag's most bestest writer evar.

(If you haven't heard Mel's recent charming telephone manner: here (http://gawker.com/5583622/), here (http://gawker.com/5584987/), here (http://gawker.com/5586812/ill-burn-the-goddamn-house-down-but-blow-me-first-mel-gibson-gets-creative-in-his-latest-rant), and here (http://gawker.com/5587828/unhinged-mel-gibson-phone-call-reveals-hes-run-out-of-money). Yep. Comes across just like President Cool, Calm, and Collected to me. (Of course, by being sarcastic about Jennifer Rubin, I am clearly anti-Semitic. Just ask her (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?p=169981&highlight=rubin#post169981).))

Whatfur
07-16-2010, 09:46 PM
"Yet the accusation says more about the accusers than the accused." (http://www.patheos.com/Resources/Additional-Resources/Is-the-Tea-Party-Racist.html)

bjkeefe
07-17-2010, 10:25 AM
Andrew Breitbart who obsesses over ACORN, Black Panthers, the NAACP and the black president doesn't believe the Tea Party is racist. Okay.

TBogg (http://twitter.com/tbogg/status/18642570432), natch.

bjkeefe
07-17-2010, 06:36 PM
You'll be unsurprised by some of it, but the beginning and the end are a bit eyebrow-raising (http://www.tnr.com/blog/john-mcwhorter/76313/tea-party-naacp-racism), considering the source.

Suck It Up, Tea Partiers— the NAACP's Right On This One

Much to my surprise, I’m with Benjamin Jealous of the NAACP on this Tea Party business this week.

Jealous has called on the Tea Partiers to officially disavow the racists, such as there are, in the movement. I am pleased to see that he has been on good behavior—no melodrama, no exaggeration, no pretending it’s 1962 (which I read as one more sign that that style of race discussion is on the ropes). Complementing his call for the Tea Partiers to be explicit, he has been explicit in saying—admitting! This really is something special, folks—that the Tea Partiers themselves are not a racist body.

If he’s going to actually admit that in public, then it’s a fair trade for the Tea Partiers to speak up about racism in their organization.

[...]

Once it was clear Obama would be elected, I knew that once the honeymoon was over, a hot new issue would be explorations as whether criticisms of Obama were “racial,” and here we are. First off was the Joe Wilson eruption ("You Lie!") (http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/09/10/obama.heckled.speech/index.html), and now the Tea Partiers.

So, Tea Partiers—if you’re really so concerned about the state of the country as a whole, take a time out and help us learn a lesson. Condemn racism and its expressions in your midst. Try this: likely there will be fewer of the T-shirts and envelope-pushing aspersions, which will render your message that much more effective with the media.

In the meantime, you will contribute to the nationwide sea change in the race discussion that has the NAACP approaching this issue so temperately in the first place. This is the most constructive, untheatrical statement that has come from the NAACP in eons—it’s worthy of what they were about a hundred years ago. Let’s go with it.

(h/t: @elonjames (http://twitter.com/elonjames/status/18710036950), RTing @AdamSerwer (http://twitter.com/AdamSerwer/status/18709954819))

bjkeefe
07-17-2010, 06:37 PM
Occasional B'head and perennial wise man Ta-Nehisi Coates has a long blog post up (http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2010/07/the-case-against-the-naacp/59793/) (via (http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/07/the-correct-but-tactless-naacp.html)) about recent doings. Here's just a taste.

[...]

Ta-Nehisi tweets (http://twitter.com/tanehisi/status/18710388168) (via @elonjames (http://twitter.com/elonjames/status/18710516023)):

An occasional reminder as to the precise nature of the motherfuckers you are dealing with.http://bit.ly/cdSevD

That URL leads to this (http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2010/07/a-final-thought/59924/):

A Final Thought

Here is former head and current spokesperson for the Tea Party Express Mark Williams (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Williams_%28radio_host%29) satirically responding [<-- link omitted, for reasons soon to be made obvious --bjk] to the NAACP:

[That really stupid, racist, and unfunny thing noted by Twin (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?p=170054&highlight=williams#post170054) earlier. Or, click through to TNC's post for a copy.]

Williams has since taken the original down and posted a half-hearted justification. Mark Williams is the same man who has denounced Barack Obama as "Indonesian Muslim" and a "welfare thug." If Mark Williams is not a racist, then there are no racists in American society--a position which many, some liberals among them, no doubt find plausible.

It's been asked in comments, a few times, what good has come of the NAACP's resolution. I would not endeavor to speak for anyone but myself when I say that I owe the NAACP a debt of gratitude. I have, in my writing, a tendency to become theoretically cute, and overly enamored with my own fair-mindedness. Such vanity has lately been manifested in the form of phrases like "it's worth saying" and "it strikes me that..." or "respectfully..."

When engaging your adversaries, that approach has its place. But it's worth saying that there are other approaches and other places. Among them--respectfully administering the occasional reminder as to the precise nature of the motherfuckers you are dealing with. It strikes me that this is a most appropriate role for the nation's oldest civil rights organization.

bjkeefe
07-17-2010, 07:09 PM
Ta-Nehisi tweets (http://twitter.com/tanehisi/status/18710388168) (via @elonjames (http://twitter.com/elonjames/status/18710516023)):

An occasional reminder as to the precise nature of the motherfuckers you are dealing with.http://bit.ly/cdSevD

That URL leads to this (http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2010/07/a-final-thought/59924/):

[...]

Sorry for going out of (TNC's) sequence here, but there are more posts too good not to call attention to. Here's one in particular: "Why Black Writers Tend Not to Shout (http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2010/07/why-black-people-tend-not-to-shout/59887/)."

(Aside: note diff betw URL and title.)

Excerpt:

In 2007 Barack Obama began campaigning for the presidency. Since that time, his reception by the American Right has included claims that he is--among other things--a covert Muslim, a welfare thug (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/15/tea-party-leader-melts-do_n_286933.html), a "racist...with a deep-seated hatred (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/07/28/fox-host-glenn-beck-obama_n_246310.html) of white people or the white culture," and as a president with a policy (http://blogs.desmoinesregister.com/dmr/index.php/2010/06/14/obama-favors-the-black-person-king-says/) of landing on the side that "favors the black person."

During the 2008 campaign, one GOP congressman called Obama "uppity" (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2008/09/georgia-gop-congressman-calls.html), while another referred to him as "that boy." (http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/04/gop-congressman.html) At the Values Voters summit, vendors showed up hawking Obama Waffles (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/13/conservative-political-fo_n_126243.html), while a California Republican group sent out (http://www.pe.com/localnews/inland/stories/PE_News_Local_S_buck16.3d67d4a.html) fake food stamps with Obama surrounded by ribs and chicken. By the end of the campaign, Palin-McCain supporters were repeatedly (http://www.theatlantic.com/culture/archive/2008/10/more-thug-life-chronicles/6044/) showing up at rallies (http://www.theatlantic.com/culture/archive/2008/10/mccain-thuggism-pt348484/6013/) publicly announcing that Obama was a Muslim, mocking him as a monkey (http://www.theatlantic.com/culture/archive/2008/10/thug-life-chronicles-continued/6028/) and openly flaunting the fact that they opposed him because he was black. The monkey jokes continued into Obama's presidency--with South Carolina GOP activist Rusty DePass noting that (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2009/06/14/2009-06-14_pol_gorilla_is_related_to_first_lady.html) an escaped gorilla was "probably just one of Michelle Obama's ancestors."

The racial nuttiness has not been limited to Obama. His first Supreme Court nominee, was dismissed (http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=32264) as "Miss Affirmative Action 2009." His second nominee has been dismissed for having been influenced by one of the architects of desegregation. Lindsey Graham, a supposedly sensible Republican, attacked (http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2009/12/there-are-no-poor-white-people/32500/) health care because it would hurt his state, which is "31 percent African-American population." (Presumably, all those people are poor, while all the white people in South Carolina are not.) When John Lewis walked to the House to vote for health care, he was called a ****** by the mob, and then called a liar for claiming as much. After Tom Tancredo opened the Tea Party convention by calling for literacy tests and asserted that, "people who could not even spell the word 'vote', or say it in English, put a committed socialist ideologue in the White House," the conventions convener lauded Tancredo for giving "a fantastic speech."

Perhaps you could argue that some of these instances aren't about race. Certainly, you could note that many of them are about race plus several other factors. But even granting those points as caveats, what you have is disturbing pattern among the GOP that sometimes floats up to the top. Black writers working in the mainstream, and even at liberal publications, are in a constant dialouge with white audiences. It is utterly useless, and to some extend brand-damaging, to repeatedly call on conservatives to repudiate racism in their midst. What many of us chose to do instead is to try to extend some sympathy, and get into the head of the offending party, in hopes of building a bridge.

I think, for those who are skeptical of the NAACP, something of a turn-about is in order. If you were black what would you think, faced with this pattern? If you were the NAACP what would you to say to this? The downside of the Obama approach, one that I still embrace, is that it tacitly supports Chait's notion that conservative opposition to Obama has "generally lacked much in the way of racial animus." I just don't think the facts bear that conclusion out--at all.

Shouting and resolutions are not my way. I firmly believe that racists, and those who work with the machinery of racism, must ultimately answer for themselves. But without someone shouting, we tend to forget and to elide uncomfortable realities that we have deemed unspeakable. I'm haunted by the words of a black Republican, who was a member of the group that sent out the Obama foodstamps. "This is what keeps African-Americans from joining the Republican Party," she said. "I'm really hurt. I cried for 45 minutes."

The leader of the group responded by asserting her support for Alan Keyes.

==========

NB: As before (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?p=170075&highlight=stars+above#post170075), neither nor TNC nor I put those stars in. That is evidently a "feature" of this site.

For the record: I sent a note about this to Bh.tv Central at around noon yesterday. So far, no response.

bjkeefe
07-19-2010, 01:07 PM
Ta-Nehisi tweets (http://twitter.com/tanehisi/status/18710388168) (via @elonjames (http://twitter.com/elonjames/status/18710516023)):

An occasional reminder as to the precise nature of the motherfuckers you are dealing with.http://bit.ly/cdSevD

That URL leads to this (http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2010/07/a-final-thought/59924/):

A Final Thought

Here is former head and current spokesperson for the Tea Party Express Mark Williams (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Williams_%28radio_host%29) ...

http://assets.nydailynews.com/img/2010/05/21/alg_mark_williams.jpg (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2010/07/18/2010-07-18_tea_party_express_leader_mark_williams_expelled _over_colored_people_letter.html)


And now for some updates:

NY Daily News (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2010/07/18/2010-07-18_tea_party_express_leader_mark_williams_expelled _over_colored_people_letter.html#ixzz0u8yrNi00) reported yesterday (Sunday 18 July 2010):

"We have expelled Tea Party Express and Mark Williams from the National Tea Party Federation because of the letter that he wrote," federation spokesman David Webb said on CBS's "Face the Nation."

[...]

In a press release, the National Tea Party Federation says it ordered the Tea Party Express to kick Williams out and say so "prominently" on their Website. They did not.

Williams' response: who's the National Tea Party Federation anyway?

"There are internal political dramas amongst the various self-anointed tea party 'leaders' and some of the minor players on the fringes see the Tea Party Express and Mark Williams as tickets to a booking on Face the Nation," he said.

"There is no tea party leadership; every tea partier is a tea party leader."

And everyone gets a trophy at the Special Olympics, which I believe is Central To His Point™.

==========

[Added] TPM has more news here (http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/07/after-racist-post-firestorm-mark-williams-demoted-on-tea-party-websites.php) and here (http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/07/second-tea-party-group-distancing-itself-from-mark-williams.php) of other teabagger groups scrambling to Distance Themselves.

Media Matters wonders why CNN is still allowing (http://mediamatters.org/blog/201007180010) him on their channel. My response: You're asking this of a station that hired Erick Erickson?

uncle ebeneezer
07-19-2010, 03:21 PM
This is pretty hillarious (http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/07/episode_lxxxii_is_this_the_thr.php).

listener
07-20-2010, 02:57 AM
Of course, by now all well-informed persons are aware of the controversy (http://thehill./blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/109429-tea-party-umbrella-group-expels-member-over-racially-charged-blog-post) over the attempted expulsion from the Tea Party Movement of Tea Party Express spokesperson Mark Willams. So, who exactly has the authority to expel a Tea Party member? One answer (libtards only need watch this, as it involves commentators whose views do not reflect those of RealAmericans™ ) :

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/vp/38317149#38317149

My own conclusion: Ling-Ling (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ling_Ling_(giant_panda)) must be expelled from his position by the appropriate authorities (http://www.pandaexpress.com/).

bjkeefe
07-20-2010, 01:11 PM
... or, as TS puts it (http://instaputz.blogspot.com/2010/07/and-dont-get-me-started-on-philantropy.html) ...

Ross Douthat's latest column (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/19/opinion/19douthat.html?partner=rss&emc=rss) of warmed-over Steve Sailerisms ...

... is something I was going to note in the Gossip about the 'heads thread, but in case it gets a lot of heated discussion, I'll do it here instead.

Also responding to Ross is Roy Edroso (http://alicublog.blogspot.com/2010_07_18_archive.html#4665364107487233762):

SHORTER ROSS DOUTHAT (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/19/opinion/19douthat.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss): It's time for white reparations.

UPDATE. Aw Jeez, Holy Rod Dreher (http://blog.beliefnet.com/roddreher/2010/07/stuff-blue-collar-white-people-worry-about.html):

One workplace of mine was proud of its diversity, but it had, as far as I could tell, not a single Pentecostal working as a reporter or editor.

That's because it's hard to take notes when you're snake-handling.

chiwhisoxx
07-20-2010, 02:38 PM
... or, as TS puts it (http://instaputz.blogspot.com/2010/07/and-dont-get-me-started-on-philantropy.html) ...



... is something I was going to note in the Gossip about the 'heads thread, but in case it gets a lot of heated discussion, I'll do it here instead.

Also responding to Ross is Roy Edroso (http://alicublog.blogspot.com/2010_07_18_archive.html#4665364107487233762):

Just wondering, and I promise this isn't intentionally hostile: Does everyone you read do the shorter thing? I don't see it anywhere else on the internet besides places you read...is it a left wing thing? I don't see in on the lefty blogs I read either. Just curious.

The excerpt is, obviously, taken out of context. And Ross was making a pretty decent non partisan point about the solidifcation of elites and elite culture. He wrote an entire book about this, so you may think it's bunk, but it's a subject he's thought a lot about. He wasn't pulling this out of his ass.

I enjoy the logic in the insta putz link as well. Here, I can do shorters too. Shorter insta putz: Because two people at National Review liked a bad movie, conservatives can't/won't/shouldn't enjoy the arts. Also, the bigoted remark about Pentacostals was a nice touch.

bjkeefe
07-20-2010, 06:41 PM
Just wondering, and I promise this isn't intentionally hostile: Does everyone you read do the shorter thing? I don't see it anywhere else on the internet besides places you read...is it a left wing thing? I don't see in on the lefty blogs I read either. Just curious.

As far as I can tell, it is overwhelmingly a left-blogger thing. Doing a good Shorter requires both a sense of humor and an ability to read for context. This may have something to do with why you don't see them on wingnut blogs.

It is also true that not all lefty bloggers are interested in snark -- or reading what wingnuts have to say, for that matter -- so it's not as though you should expect to see Shorters on every blog that you might call a lefty blog.

The excerpt is, obviously, taken out of context. And Ross was making a pretty decent non partisan point about the solidifcation of elites and elite culture. He wrote an entire book about this, so you may think it's bunk, but it's a subject he's thought a lot about. He wasn't pulling this out of his ass.

I dunno. That column did nothing for me, and I say this as someone who used to read Ross regularly when he blogged at the Atlantic. Doesn't matter to me how much time he spent thinking about it if the result was as it was.

I enjoy the logic in the insta putz link as well.

Glad to hear it.

Here, I can do shorters too. [...]

See paragraph 1.

bjkeefe
07-20-2010, 07:45 PM
Writes Ryan J. Murdough (http://www.concordmonitor.com/article/we-must-preserve-our-racial-identity) of Ashland, NH, who continues:

I am running as a candidate for state representative in Grafton County District 8. I am running as a Republican, but I have been endorsed by the American Third Position. I am also the American Third Position state chairman of New Hampshire. The American Third Position is a political party that stands for the interests of white Americans.

For far too long white Americans have been told that diversity is something beneficial to their existence. Statistics prove that the opposite is true. New Hampshire residents must seek to preserve their racial identity if we want future generations to have to possibility to live in such a great state. Affirmative action, illegal and legal non-white immigration, anti-white public school systems, and an anti-white media have done much damage to the United States of America and especially New Hampshire. It is time for white people in New Hampshire and across the country to take a stand. We are only 8 percent of the world's population and we need our own homeland, just like any other non-white group of people deserve their own homeland.

What will happen to New Hampshire once it is only 60, 50 or 40 percent white? Statistics show that areas with high non-white populations have higher rates of violent crime. New Hampshire has one of the lowest rates of violent crime in the country, but that will change as the white population percentage declines and the non-white population percentage increases. I urge New Hampshire residents to go to the American Third Position website and read for yourself what it is all about.

(To save you a Google (http://www.google.com/search?q=American+Third+Position), here is the website (http://american3p.org/), and here is the Wikipedia entry (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Third_Position_Party).)

Think Progress (http://thinkprogress.org/2010/07/19/racist-new-hampshire-candidate/), who called the above to my attention (via Blue Texan (http://instaputz.blogspot.com/2010/07/racist-republican-admires-totally-non.html)), observes:

Murdough is running as a Republican because it’s easier to get on the ballot (http://www.concordmonitor.com/article/candidate-is-worth-paying-attention-to), but the party immediately “disowned him (http://www.concordmonitor.com/print/208407) as a candidate on their ticket,” calling him a “despicable racist” and a “fraud.”

Hurrah!

But Murdough has no love lost for the GOP, complaining, “they’ve sold white people out.”

It’s unclear whether Murdough is a tea partier, but in the comments section of the Monitor’s website [same place the above letter to the editor was published --bjk], where Murdough is very active (http://www.concordmonitor.com/users/ryan-joseph-murdough), he wrote, “I think the Tea Party movement is doing great things (http://www.concordmonitor.com/users/ryan-joseph-murdough?page=28).” His rhetoric in the comments often reflects that of the movement, and he repeatedly (http://www.concordmonitor.com/users/ryan-joseph-murdough?page=15) advises (http://www.concordmonitor.com/users/ryan-joseph-murdough?page=12) the the tea party to “embrace the fact [that] there is a racial aspect (http://www.concordmonitor.com/users/ryan-joseph-murdough?page=12) to the movement.” “White people need to stop wasting time (http://www.concordmonitor.com/users/ryan-joseph-murdough?page=12) arguing about how they are not racist,” he said in one comment, adding in another (http://www.concordmonitor.com/users/ryan-joseph-murdough?page=15):

The Tea Party at its core is all about race but most of the Tea Partiers do not even realize it. They downplay the race issue every chance they get because they are afraid of being perceived as racist.

He also called on them to stop the “jewish appeasing (http://www.concordmonitor.com/users/ryan-joseph-murdough?page=22).” “If the Republicans continue to put out weak, israel first, zionist, anti white, neo cons, the tea party will be for nothing (http://www.concordmonitor.com/users/ryan-joseph-murdough?page=27),” Murdough warned.

In an interview, Murdough denied that he is a racist ...

... and you'll just have to read the rest (http://thinkprogress.org/2010/07/19/racist-new-hampshire-candidate/) for yourself, because you wouldn't believe me if I quoted it.

chiwhisoxx
07-20-2010, 11:29 PM
Sigh. Who knew Pat Buchanan had a slightly more racist doppelganger?

bjkeefe
07-21-2010, 03:18 PM
Good post (http://alicublog.blogspot.com/2010_07_18_archive.html#1088787343233932969) on the "rageaholic race-baiting techniques of Andrew Breitbart."

bjkeefe
07-21-2010, 03:29 PM
Good post (http://alicublog.blogspot.com/2010_07_18_archive.html#1088787343233932969) on the "rageaholic race-baiting techniques of Andrew Breitbart."

More on NotSoBreitbart and BowTiedTwerp Rage Manufacturing, LLC: two from TBogg: "John King Missing the Point (http://tbogg.firedoglake.com/2010/07/20/john-king-missing-the-point/)" and "Tucker Carlson is not a complete douchebag failure (http://tbogg.firedoglake.com/2010/07/20/tucker-carlson-is-not-a-complete-douchebag-failure/)."

[Added] No, wait. Three: "Jonah Goldberg Presents: A Teachable Moment (http://tbogg.firedoglake.com/2010/07/21/jonah-goldberg-presents-a-teachable-moment/)."

Chi's Holy Trinity, in other words.

chiwhisoxx
07-21-2010, 03:46 PM
More on NotSoBreitbart and BowTiedTwerp Rage Manufacturing, LLC: two from TBogg: "John King Missing the Point (http://tbogg.firedoglake.com/2010/07/20/john-king-missing-the-point/)" and "Tucker Carlson is not a complete douchebag failure (http://tbogg.firedoglake.com/2010/07/20/tucker-carlson-is-not-a-complete-douchebag-failure/)."

[Added] No, wait. Three: "Jonah Goldberg Presents: A Teachable Moment (http://tbogg.firedoglake.com/2010/07/21/jonah-goldberg-presents-a-teachable-moment/)."

Chi's Holy Trinity, in other words.

Well, I appreciate a guy using presumptions about a person to make bad jokes as much as the next guy, but maybe you could do a bit better in your last sentence than random strawmans. I'm not going to get into much depth responding to your random assumptions, but I'm pretty indifferent to Tucker Carlson (I actually thought the jokes about his bow tie were funny, but only the first 8234 times) and I like Andrew Breitbart, but have no obsessive love for him. Don't read either of their websites. But yeah, clearly they're part of my holy trinity.

And oh, by the way, I'm sure Jonah says plenty of things to get you sweating up an incoherent mad rage, so why do you need to then use statements where he's mostly agreeing with your side in order to slander him? Save it for the good stuff, otherwise you start to look obsessive.

bjkeefe
07-21-2010, 03:47 PM
But yeah, clearly they're part of my holy trinity.

See? Admitting it is the first step, and it makes you feel better, too, doesn't it?

chiwhisoxx
07-21-2010, 03:53 PM
See? Admitting it is the first step, and it makes you feel better, too, doesn't it?

Weren't you whining the other day about using quotes to take people out of context as agains the forum rules?

AemJeff
07-21-2010, 03:55 PM
Well, I appreciate a guy using presumptions about a person to make bad jokes as much as the next guy, but maybe you could do a bit better in your last sentence than random strawmans. I'm not going to get into much depth responding to your random assumptions, but I'm pretty indifferent to Tucker Carlson (I actually thought the jokes about his bow tie were funny, but only the first 8234 times) and I like Andrew Breitbart, but have no obsessive love for him. Don't read either of their websites. But yeah, clearly they're part of my holy trinity.

What do you like about Breitbart? His intellectual dishonesty? His support for racism (see James O'Keefe)? His personal dishonesty (also see James O'Keefe, e.g.)? His explicit Republican ratfucking operation? That he's generating copycats like Carlson? You say a lot of things that make you seem like you at least want to deal in a fair-minded way. So, what about Breitbart makes you think any part of what he's about serves that laudable goal?

chiwhisoxx
07-21-2010, 04:08 PM
What do you like about Breitbart? His intellectual dishonesty? His support for racism (see James O'Keefe)? His personal dishonesty (also see James O'Keefe, e.g.)? His explicit Republican ratfucking operation? That he's generating copycats like Carlson? You say a lot of things that make you seem like you at least want to deal in a fair-minded way. So, what about Breitbart makes you think any part of what he's about serves that laudable goal?

I do want to deal in a fair minded way! And I have no problem with you asking questions like this. That's how it's supposed to work. I appreciate you at least asking the question instead of making a bad joke, like others.

So yeah, I generally appreciate the muckraking Andrew does. I think that exposing despicable corruption in places like ACORN is a laudable thing, and no one else is going to do it. Investigative journalism tends (emphasize on the choice of tends instead of is) to be left leaning, so if Andrew doesn't do this work, no one else will. It's the rights way of punching back.

As for O'Keefe...I don't think he knew of O'Keefe and that picture. I doubt he did deep background checks on the people he asked to do these stings. I don't remember, but I'm guessing he defend O'Keefe after the picture came out? That's not great, but I think we're all guilty at times of defending bad actions from those we consider our friends, or at least to be on our side. I don't really know what you mean by explicit Republican ratfucking operation. I don't really buy the personal dishonesty thing either.

In terms of Andrew serving the goal of dealing with things in a fair minded way: He doesn't serve that goal. He's in a dirty business, and people in dirty businesses get their hands dirty. He's not elevating the discourse, and I'm sure he would admit as much. But he's punching back. And we needed someone like that. It's not pretty, and not always laudable. But also keep in mind Breitbart is...kind of a rodeo clown. That's certainly true, and that has all the negatives associated with that line of business. So I dunno. I'll try and punctuate my thoughts about Breitbart while promoting The Hold Steady at the same time: "Some nights, it's just entertainment and some other nights it's work"

AemJeff
07-21-2010, 04:19 PM
I do want to deal in a fair minded way! And I have no problem with you asking questions like this. That's how it's supposed to work. I appreciate you at least asking the question instead of making a bad joke, like others.

So yeah, I generally appreciate the muckraking Andrew does. I think that exposing despicable corruption in places like ACORN is a laudable thing, and no one else is going to do it. Investigative journalism tends (emphasize on the choice of tends instead of is) to be left leaning, so if Andrew doesn't do this work, no one else will. It's the rights way of punching back.

As for O'Keefe...I don't think he knew of O'Keefe and that picture. I doubt he did deep background checks on the people he asked to do these stings. I don't remember, but I'm guessing he defend O'Keefe after the picture came out? That's not great, but I think we're all guilty at times of defending bad actions from those we consider our friends, or at least to be on our side. I don't really know what you mean by explicit Republican ratfucking operation. I don't really buy the personal dishonesty thing either.

In terms of Andrew serving the goal of dealing with things in a fair minded way: He doesn't serve that goal. He's in a dirty business, and people in dirty businesses get their hands dirty. He's not elevating the discourse, and I'm sure he would admit as much. But he's punching back. And we needed someone like that. It's not pretty, and not always laudable. But also keep in mind Breitbart is...kind of a rodeo clown. That's certainly true, and that has all the negatives associated with that line of business. So I dunno. I'll try and punctuate my thoughts about Breitbart while promoting The Hold Steady at the same time: "Some nights, it's just entertainment and some other nights it's work"

Defending O'Keefe in edited videos that don't show how entire conversations transpired is simply, inarguably dishonest. I see no defense at all. Defending O'Keefe in a pimp suit(!) putting on a ridiculous show while haranguing black people is at best ignoring the appearance of racism. Twice now going after black organizations with dishonestly edited records and making lying claims about the people those videos purport to expose is a pattern that suggests either racism or the intent to use racism to further political ends - which I take to be morally indistinguishable from actual racism.

This is not just "entertainment." People lives are ruined by Breitbart's antics.

And please show evidence of "despicable corruption in places like ACORN." Street level contractors scamming ACORN on voter registrations doesn't seem to apply here. Either you have an argument for why it should, or you need another claim, in my opinion.

chiwhisoxx
07-21-2010, 04:33 PM
Defending O'Keefe in edited videos that don't show how entire conversations transpired is simply, inarguably dishonest. I see no defense at all. Defending O'Keefe in a pimp suit(!) putting on a ridiculous show while haranguing black people is at best ignoring the appearance of racism. Twice now going after black organizations with dishonestly edited records and making lying claims about the people those videos purport to expose is a pattern that suggests either racism or the intent to use racism to further political ends - which I take to be morally indistinguishable from actual racism.

This is not just "entertainment." People lives are ruined by Breitbart's antics.

And please show evidence of "despicable corruption in places like ACORN." Street level contractors scamming ACORN on voter registrations doesn't seem to apply here. Either you have an argument for why it should, or you need another claim, in my opinion.

I think you get more mileage out of the dishonesty claim. For the record, neither one of will ever acquire dispositive evidence about the video editing, as Breitbart claims he simply posted the video that he received without cutting it. I'm sure you don't believe him, but it's certainly within the realm of possiblitiy that he's telling the truth (I'm not saying I necessarily believe him, I'm kind of agnostic on it). The sentence about O'Keefe "haranguing" black people strikes me as odd. Why does it have to be about their race? He could have just been haranguing people running a pretty awful operation, regardless of their race. And when you're in the business that Breitbar is in, I'm not sure you get picky about race. I think he's looking for low hanging fruit, things that he knows will make a splash. I realize making a splash isn't mutually exclusive with racially tinged intentions, but I'm pretty sure he's just looking to make some noise and knock some heads around.

AemJeff
07-21-2010, 05:25 PM
I think you get more mileage out of the dishonesty claim. For the record, neither one of will ever acquire dispositive evidence about the video editing, as Breitbart claims he simply posted the video that he received without cutting it. I'm sure you don't believe him, but it's certainly within the realm of possiblitiy that he's telling the truth (I'm not saying I necessarily believe him, I'm kind of agnostic on it). The sentence about O'Keefe "haranguing" black people strikes me as odd. Why does it have to be about their race? He could have just been haranguing people running a pretty awful operation, regardless of their race. And when you're in the business that Breitbar is in, I'm not sure you get picky about race. I think he's looking for low hanging fruit, things that he knows will make a splash. I realize making a splash isn't mutually exclusive with racially tinged intentions, but I'm pretty sure he's just looking to make some noise and knock some heads around.

I think O'Keefe has already made it about race, himself. Blumenthal seems to have him dead to rights:

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2010/02/03/james_okeefe_white_nationalists
http://maxblumenthal.com/2010/02/okeefe-contradicts-breitbart-a-source-details-okeefes-role-in-white-supremacist-confab/

And dressing up in an ugly, stereotypical pimp outfit and talking like a character out of Baretta in order to pull a trick on black folks (and what about conservative problems with ACORN seems isn't about people being black and having a loyalty to the Democratic party?) doesn't betray to me a sense of proportion or understanding in regard to racial issues.

One problem with Breitbart, (and Rush, and Beck, and ad nauseaum,) is the explicit use of racial resentment to fire people up. It's clear that that's what they're doing, and it's clear that it works. (Which is why Hillary Clinton's campaign stooped to it during the last round of Presidential primaries. It isn't just Republicans.)

And we still haven't established the "awfulness" of ACORN - the purpose of which was to mitigate the disenfranchisement of people of color in this country. There have been no good arguments put on the table for why ACORN itself represents a problem, except insofar as it's successful at getting blacks to vote - and blacks often vote for Democrats.

Breitbart's claims about editing are undermined by his failure to produce complete source video during the O'Keefe debacle despite clearly having it to offer.

bjkeefe
07-21-2010, 05:41 PM
Weren't you whining the other day about using quotes to take people out of context as agains the forum rules?

No. First of all, I never whine. I leave that to ref-working wingnuts, such as yourself.

Second, if I was remarking on anything to do with quotes, it was probably in response to Whatfur once again putting words that were not actually said by someone in a linked-blockquote labeled with that person's username. This, as every employee of Bh.tv and member of the community knows, is explicitly frowned upon by this site's Comment guidelines for the Bloggingheads Community (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/faq.php?faq=vb3_board_faq#faq_guidelines).

chiwhisoxx
07-21-2010, 05:45 PM
No. First of all, I never whine. I leave that to ref-working wingnuts, such as yourself.

Second, if I was remarking on anything to do with quotes, it was probably in response to Whatfur once again putting words that were not actually said by someone in a linked-blockquote labeled with that person's username. This, as every employee of Bh.tv and member of the community knows, is explicitly frowned upon by this site's Comment guidelines for the Bloggingheads Community (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/faq.php?faq=vb3_board_faq#faq_guidelines).

Well, you whine constantly, but that's not the point. Any statement that involves a person saying "I never" then followed by a common human action is rarely true. And you may want to re-examine the "ref working" meme, as I'm guessing most people have no idea what the hell you're talking about it, and even if they do, it's not at all compelling. To the point, you don't think intentionally quoting out of context to make a bad joke might be frowned upon as well?

bjkeefe
07-21-2010, 05:54 PM
I think O'Keefe has already made it about race, himself. Blumenthal seems to have him dead to rights:

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2010/02/03/james_okeefe_white_nationalists
http://maxblumenthal.com/2010/02/okeefe-contradicts-breitbart-a-source-details-okeefes-role-in-white-supremacist-confab/

And dressing up in an ugly, stereotypical pimp outfit and talking like a character out of Baretta in order to pull a trick on black folks (and what about conservative problems with ACORN seems isn't about people being black and having a loyalty to the Democratic party?) doesn't betray to me a sense of proportion or understanding in regard to racial issues.

[...]

Breitbart's claims about editing are undermined by his failure to produce complete source video during the O'Keefe debacle despite clearly having it to offer.

It should be emphasized, since all too many people are unaware of it, that James O'Keefe's costume was never worn into any meetings with ACORN people (http://www.google.com/search?q=o%27keefe+pimp+outfit+never+worn) when he was doing his so-called "stings." The videotape was edited to make it look like he did, but once the raw stuff was pried out of his and Breitbart's grubby little paws by subpoena (http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/joe_conason/2010/07/14/acorn/index.html), the truth finally came out. (Pretty sure the same goes for Hannah Giles, although it's less clear what it might mean for her to "dress like a prostitute," compared to JO'K's Wal-Mart Vanilla Ice get-up.)

Too late, of course, for millions of poor people who were getting some useful help from ACORN. But hey, "if Andrew doesn't do this work, no one else will. [...] And we needed someone like that. (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?p=170965#post170965)"

"We," of course, being conservatives who like nothing finer than having their fears of Teh Blaxx "validated," no matter how dishonestly it's done.

bjkeefe
07-21-2010, 05:58 PM
Shorter chi-guy (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?p=170982#post170982):

I know you are but what am I? [And then more ref-working. Of course.]

Here's five cents, kid. Go buy yourself some debating skills.

chiwhisoxx
07-21-2010, 06:07 PM
It should be emphasized, since all too many people are unaware of it, that James O'Keefe's costume was never worn into any meetings with ACORN people (http://www.google.com/search?q=o%27keefe+pimp+outfit+never+worn) when he was doing his so-called "stings." The videotape was edited to make it look like he did, but once the raw stuff was pried out of his and Breitbart's grubby little paws by subpoena (http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/joe_conason/2010/07/14/acorn/index.html), the truth finally came out. (Pretty sure the same goes for Hannah Giles, although it's less clear what it might mean for her to "dress like a prostitute," compared to JO'K's Wal-Mart Vanilla Ice get-up.)

Too late, of course, for millions of poor people who were getting some useful help from ACORN. But hey, "if Andrew doesn't do this work, no one else will. [...] And we needed someone like that. (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?p=170965#post170965)"

"We," of course, being conservatives who like nothing finer than having their fears of Teh Blaxx "validated," no matter how dishonestly it's done.

Well, I'll try and avoid the pedantic punditry about liberal epistemic closure in Jeff not realizing that the outfit was never worn. Just keep in mind that smart people like Jeff get things like this mixed up, and it's not necessarily an indicment of media cocoons when it happens on either side. So, let's just keep that in mind.

For the record, despite your moaning about an evil man destroying a good organization like ACORN, large chunks of the organization were already going bankrupt, independent of Andrew Breitbart. There are also accusations of fraud and embezzlement that started well before the videos. Also, it wasn't just one video; these were in multiple cities with different people. Try and also keep in mind that the resolution Congress passed to kill federal funding for ACORN was later overturned. At the end of the day, ACORN may have been helping people. But I don't think that means that you shouldn't release this kind of information if you have it, and it wasn't Breitbart alone that sunk this ship.

bjkeefe
07-21-2010, 06:25 PM
Well, I'll try and avoid ...

Use try to. You're introducing an infinitive.

The rest of your wingnut regurgitation has been ignored, due to its staleness.

AemJeff
07-21-2010, 07:44 PM
Well, I'll try and avoid the pedantic punditry about liberal epistemic closure in Jeff not realizing that the outfit was never worn. Just keep in mind that smart people like Jeff get things like this mixed up, and it's not necessarily an indicment of media cocoons when it happens on either side. So, let's just keep that in mind.

For the record, despite your moaning about an evil man destroying a good organization like ACORN, large chunks of the organization were already going bankrupt, independent of Andrew Breitbart. There are also accusations of fraud and embezzlement that started well before the videos. Also, it wasn't just one video; these were in multiple cities with different people. Try and also keep in mind that the resolution Congress passed to kill federal funding for ACORN was later overturned. At the end of the day, ACORN may have been helping people. But I don't think that means that you shouldn't release this kind of information if you have it, and it wasn't Breitbart alone that sunk this ship.

Let's be clear, O'keefe did wear the pimp outfit. Brendan was right to point out that he didn't use it when he in the midst of the videoed confrontations - but that doesn't detract from the apparent racism charge. I doubt that the state of my knowledge about that particular fact is a strong indication of "epistemic closure" on my part, or on the part of left more generally. (For the record: I'd forgotten and I should have looked it up before I posted. Mea culpa.)

I'm still arguing that your assertions about ACORN are just tendentious. There are no charges of fraud or embezzlement, that I can find, that both implicate the organization and have a basis in fact - there's been plenty of buzz in the right-o-sphere on those points, but that's evidence of what, exactly?

bjkeefe
07-22-2010, 02:21 PM
Meanwhile, even after everyone has seen the full video and knows that Andrew Breitbart’s out of context clip was promoting a lie, Breitbart is still trying to destroy Shirley Sherrod’s reputation. Last night he posted another out of context clip at Breitbart TV, with the lurid title: Shirley Sherrod Laments Land Being Sold to White Man (http://www.breitbart.tv/shirley-sherrod-laments-land-being-sold-to-white-man/).

As I predicted, these cretins won’t back down — they’re redoubling their efforts to smear Sherrod.

(source (http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/36808_Breitbart_Posts_Another_Partial_Clip_with_An other_Race-Baiting_Title) | via (http://twitter.com/SandiBehrns/status/19269828035) (rt via (http://twitter.com/siouxeeq)))

bjkeefe
07-23-2010, 05:17 PM
It's also important to understand that Andrew Breitbart's timing of the release of the grossly distorted video of Sherrod, which he admits having had for weeks, may not be entirely random. Congress will soon vote on whether to fund part of a settlement between the USDA and African-American farmers who faced acknowledged discrimination -- farmers like Sherrod and her husband used to be. It's a tiny piece of the upcoming war supplemental bill.

The USDA settlements with African-American farmers are a longtime bête noire of the right, which they deem a giveaway to a core Democratic constituency. It's not clear whether Brietbart's release of the video was specifically intended to hurt the chances of other African-America farmers to receive recompense from decades of discrimination that caused them to lose their farms, but conservatives immediately used the video to attack the settlement. The discrimination claims, known globally as the Pigford settlement, is the elephant in the room, so here's the background.

The rest (http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/07/shirley_sherrod_and_the_discrimination_of_black_fa .php).

And a follow-up here (http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/07/breitbart_i_was_targeting_the_naacp_honest.php?ref =mblt).

bjkeefe
07-23-2010, 05:50 PM
Writes Ryan J. Murdough (http://www.concordmonitor.com/article/we-must-preserve-our-racial-identity) of Ashland, NH, who continues: [...]

Second verse, same as the first. Except a different lead singer (http://blogs.miaminewtimes.com/riptide/2010/07/white_pride_group_urges_tea_pa.php).

White Pride Group Urges Tea Party to Flaunt Its Bigotry

Is the Tea Party racist? The NAACP thinks so. And the Council of Conservative Citizens, a white pride group, agrees.

Of course the Tea Party is racist, crowed a blog post on the Council's website yesterday -- and it would be proud of its racism if it weren't wussy.

The post was written by James Edwards, a radio show host and author of Racism Schmacism. His website, the Political Cesspool, declares as its motto: "Conservatism is dead. Liberalism has no answers. What comes next? The rise of ethnopolitics."

After the NAACP passed a recent resolution condemning the Tea Party as a bunch of bigots, the ragtag band of would-be American revolutionaries launched into denials. That's because they're week-kneed, lily-livered racists whose instinct is to "bend over and grab their ankles", wrote Edwards, who ...

Spends too much time listening (http://www.balloon-juice.com/2009/01/28/speaking-of-bending-over-and-grabbing-your-ankles/) to Rush Limbaugh (http://fromtheleft.wordpress.com/2009/01/23/rush-limbaugh-bend-over-grab-the-ankles-and-say-%E2%80%98have-your-way-with-me/)?

Pardon me. Please continue.

... wrote Edwards, who suggested they connect with their inner-cackling villains:

"Instead of replying with a loud BWAHAHAHA! or a 'Yeah? What's your point?' or 'So what?' or 'Of course we're racists - we're white people. That's what "racist" means' or 'Can any of you race hustlers even spell "racist"?' The Tea Party predictably went into their usual bend over and grab their ankles mode. They protested that oh no, we're not racists at all, we don't tolerate racists at our rallies which are really huge rainbow coalitions."

Edwards is right. The Tea Party is hiding the truth about itself: Racist groups are quietly welcomed at its starchy street fairs, even right here in Florida.


Last January, a state chapter of the Council of Conservative Citizens (CCC) set up shop at a Tea Party rally in Invernness, Citrus County. Senate candidate and Tea-Party darling Marco Rubio headlined the event, while the CCC handed out pamphlets and swag.

Emph. added.

The Council of Conservative Citizens used to go by a different name, as Josh Marshall (http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2010/07/not_that_theres_anything_wrong_with_that.php) reminds us:

... a neo-segregationist group called the "Council of Conservative Citizens", the successor group to the White Citizens Councils from the Civil Rights Era.

You remember hearing about them, right? See here (http://mlk-kpp01.stanford.edu/index.php/encyclopedia/encyclopedia/enc_white_citizens_councils_wcc/), here (http://www.adl.org/learn/ext_us/CCCitizens.asp), here (http://www.google.com/search?q=%22White+Citizens+Councils%22&hl=en&safe=off&tbs=tl:1&tbo=u&ei=Fv5JTIeFEcTSnAfT6aGCDw&sa=X&oi=timeline_result&ct=title&resnum=11&ved=0CEcQ5wIwCg), and here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Citizens%27_Council) to start, if not.

bjkeefe
07-26-2010, 05:15 PM
Two excerpts ...

On the Tea Party side, I’ve decided it isn’t even necessary to have the debate over whether or not the Tea Partiers are racists. It’s enough to point out that the Tea Party and its sympathizers contain too many people like Andrew Breitbart (the idiot blogger from the Big Government website who originally posted the Sherrod video), Bill O’Reilly, and Glenn Beck, all of whom popped huge public woodies the moment the Sherrod video surfaced.

It’s just not necessary to say whether or not these people are racists. All that needs to be pointed out is that when they get a chance to gape at a video purporting to show a black Obama official confessing to having mistreated a white farmer (it turned out to be the opposite of that, of course), or a tape of Black Panther King Shamir talking about “killing cracker babies,” the word that best describes the emotions they display at these times is glee.

They enjoy these morbid stories about offenses to white dignity way too much.

At every Tea Party event I’ve gone to, the scene always devolves in one of two directions: either everybody trades stories about the corruption of Charlie Rangel or ACORN or Jeremiah Wright or some other notable nonwhite villain, or else a group therapy session breaks out in which everybody shares their harrowing experiences of being unjustly accused of racism. Once they reach one of those two destinations, they camp out there, conversationally, not just for minutes but hours.

... from here (http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/matt-taibbi/blogs/TaibbiData_May2010/184697/83512).

bjkeefe
07-27-2010, 02:12 PM
Oh, wait. Not really. Because Islam is not really a religion!!!1!

You could even argue whether being a Muslim is actually a religion or is it a nationality, way of life or cult, whatever you want to call it.

So says ...

... Tennessee’s lieutenant governor, Ron Ramsey ... who hopes to win the Republican nomination for governor in a primary next month with support from Tea Party activists ...

On a related note, from the same article (http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/07/27/tennessee-official-says-islam-may-be-a-cult/): A Florida church has ...

... announced plans to commemorate the ninth anniversary of the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 with an “International Burn a Koran Day,” ...

Their pastor has written a book titled Islam is of the Devil, and signs saying the same thing are posted on the church's front lawn, according to (http://pewforum.org/Religion-News/Fla-church-plans-to-burn-Qurans-on-9-11-anniversary.aspx) the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life.

Paying attention, Mr. Orwell? Good. Here is the name of the church: The Dove World Outreach Center.

Whatfur
07-30-2010, 11:59 AM
I wonder how many will actually read this. (http://www.nypress.com/article-21457-tea-party-jitters.html)

graz
07-30-2010, 12:19 PM
I wonder how many will actually read this. (http://www.nypress.com/article-21457-tea-party-jitters.html)
Excerpt from the source:
The Color of the Tea Party
Six weeks before the tax day rally, David Webb is sitting across a lunch table in Midtown having a discussion he’s had for most of his life. He launches easily into an explanation for his political choices as a black man...

...When Webb visits New Orleans for Jazz Fest, he hangs out with the Crescent City’s treasured Neville family, sometimes sitting shotgun in one of Aaron Neville’s famous Corvettes speeding down Claiborne Avenue.

Finding a Republican with these soul credentials isn’t overly shocking—take Lee Atwater, the famous Republican campaign strategist who, in a previous life, was an accomplished blues guitarist (even recording an album with B.B. King)—but it’s still not the first thing people think of when they conjure up the image of a Tea Party leader.

In other news... white people are not literally the color white.

bjkeefe
08-04-2010, 12:27 AM
Roy Edroso is starting to think they're not racist (http://alicublog.blogspot.com/2010_08_01_archive.html#6356983292419468117).

listener
08-04-2010, 01:31 AM
Roy Edroso is starting to think they're not racist (http://alicublog.blogspot.com/2010_08_01_archive.html#6356983292419468117).

That Mr. Edroso is one sharp cookie. Too funny!

And heads up, Bokonon:

Counting the cars on the New Jersey turnpike, they've all come to look for America -- and Israel! (about 2/3 of the way in to the blog post)

uncle ebeneezer
08-04-2010, 02:12 AM
Brilliant. This was my favorite:

The left continues to feign confusion (it is hard to believe its pundits are really this muddled) as to the reasons why conservatives (and a majority of fellow citizens) oppose the Ground Zero mosque. No, it’s not about “religious freedom” — we’re talking about the location of the mosque on the ash-strewn site of 3,000 dead Americans.

Nice italics! Also, bullshit. The proposed site's a block over and a block up from Ground Zero. I've trod that turf many times, as do thousands of people every day, and they're not marching somberly and crying "Never Forget" but going to work. There's a Cohen's Optical there, and a Starbucks. Shall we smite them for making lattes and eyeglasses on the ash-strewn site of 3,000 dead Americans?

listener
08-04-2010, 02:42 AM
Shall we smite them for making lattes and eyeglasses on the ash-strewn site of 3,000 dead Americans?


Smiting: one of today's most underrated activities. And for the weight-conscious, it burns calories like you wouldn't believe!

Florian
08-04-2010, 03:03 PM
Smiting: one of today's most underrated activities. And for the weight-conscious, it burns calories like you wouldn't believe!

:D This, and uncle ebeneezer's post, really made me laugh.

bjkeefe
08-05-2010, 12:53 AM
Roy Edroso tweets (http://twitter.com/edroso/status/20321509375):

Latest wingnut meme: Obama using lines from Malcolm X to rile blacks! http://bit.ly/9z5rhB

(Link expanded here (http://alicublog.blogspot.com/2010_08_01_archive.html#8695648415429432458).)

bjkeefe
08-05-2010, 01:44 AM
John Grooms (http://blogs.creativeloafing.com/theclog/2010/08/03/racist-comix-roil-tea-party-waters/) via @ronaldjackson (http://twitter.com/ronaldjackson/status/20361075588):

In case you’ve missed it, a lot of people are madder than a snakes with a migraine about some unbelievably racist comics that have made the rounds in Tea Party World. Called Tea Party Comix, the black and white pages show Pres. Obama, in stereotypical blackface and in various guises, including evil superhero. He’s shown deliberately destroying all that’s good and holy about ‘Mer-ca, while the comic spews the usual litany of Tea Party gripes: death panels, too much spending, liberal judges, et al.

[...]

The creator of the comics has responded (http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/08/tea_party_comix_creator_speaks_theyre_not_racist_t .php) to Ethan Persoff, of Comics With Problems, who first alerted the non-Tea Party world about them. The artist, who remains unnamed, said he created the comics out of anger at Obama, but denies that the comics are racist. [...] As we’ve said before, we don’t think the Tea Partiers are inherently racist, but they sure do attract racists, and, in any case, the views expressed in Tea Party Comix, at the very least, show the mindset of a sizeable cross-section of that movement.

From here (http://www.ep.tc/tea-party-comix/), where disgustingly many more live (and see also (http://www.ep.tc/intro.html), and see also (http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/07/the_strange_case_of_the_mysterious_uber-racist_tea.php), and see also (http://www.tcdailyplanet.net/blog/jeff-fecke/theres-no-racism-tea-party)):

http://a.imageshack.us/img824/4536/teapartycomix.jpg

All together now! "Just a few bad apples ... this doesn't mean all teabaggers are racist ..."

The Denialism Will Continue.

bjkeefe
08-07-2010, 08:52 PM
Headline (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/06/rush-limbaugh-media-givin_n_674071.html):

Rush Limbaugh: Media Giving Michelle Obama Vacation Pass Because Of 'Slave Past'

Audio here (http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/201008060033), if you must.

(h/t: Ken Layne (http://wonkette.com/417243/world-ending-michelle-obama-rocks-the-costa-del-sol))

BTW, apparently the notion that the First Lady of the United States has taken a vacation has attracted hysteria and lies from others besides El Rushbo. A few of them are debunked here (http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2010/08/michelle_obama_spain_trip_what.html).

Whatfur
08-07-2010, 09:08 PM
Headline (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/06/rush-limbaugh-media-givin_n_674071.html):



Audio here (http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/201008060033), if you must.

(h/t: Ken Layne (http://wonkette.com/417243/world-ending-michelle-obama-rocks-the-costa-del-sol))

BTW, apparently the notion that the First Lady of the United States has taken a vacation has attracted hysteria and lies from others besides El Rushbo. A few of them are debunked here (http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2010/08/michelle_obama_spain_trip_what.html).

I don't have to go listen to it, I only had to see how you "quoted" the headline to know that you and the smucks at mediamutters are playing with the words.

bjkeefe
08-07-2010, 11:57 PM
I don't have to go listen to it, I only had to see how you "quoted" the headline to know that you and the smucks at mediamutters are playing with the words.

Priceless.

[Added] If anyone ever asks "What did Julian Sanchez mean by epistemic closure?," this is where to point.

Whatfur
08-08-2010, 06:44 PM
More racists... (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GizNwzKo3n8)

bjkeefe
08-08-2010, 07:14 PM
More racists... (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GizNwzKo3n8)

Guess you missed the paragraph beginning with "Besides (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?p=174195&highlight=Besides,#post174195)," huh?

bjkeefe
08-08-2010, 07:36 PM
http://a.imageshack.us/img830/507/obamahatesaspirin.png

No they're there either, evidently. I guess we should be happy the racists are so often so demonstrably ignorant in other ways, as well.

(Pic posted by DebErupts (http://twitpic.com/2cnkb8) | h/t: @sonjablair (http://twitter.com/sonjablair/status/20658787742))

Whatfur
08-08-2010, 09:53 PM
Guess you missed the paragraph beginning with "Besides (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?p=174195&highlight=Besides,#post174195)," huh?

If you wrote it...its very possible.

bjkeefe
08-08-2010, 10:02 PM
Guess you missed the paragraph beginning with "Besides (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?p=174195&highlight=Besides,#post174195)," huh?

If you wrote it...its very possible.

As I said (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?p=174142&highlight=epistemic+closure#post174142).

Whatfur
08-08-2010, 10:07 PM
As I said (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?p=174142&highlight=epistemic+closure#post174142).

And your one (planted?) sign is the kind of epistemic closure you endorse? Duh.

bjkeefe
08-08-2010, 10:11 PM
... (planted?) sign ...

The comedy never stops.

... epistemic closure ...

Nor do the inadvertent admissions.

bjkeefe
08-10-2010, 10:55 PM
Oh, hey look (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EDpuYFmgzpc)! Throw baseballs at that black guy. Yeah, the one next to Obama! HAHA I meant next to Osama!!!1!

http://a.imageshack.us/img440/3523/obamatargetgame2.png

http://a.imageshack.us/img828/820/obamatargetgame3.png



Or, you know, maybe just shoot your gun at him instead! All in good fun!

http://a.imageshack.us/img830/3517/obamatargetgame.png

And ... this guy voted for him, just like Althouse says she did, so it's All Good (http://www.mcall.com/news/breaking/mc-president-obama-target-game-20100804,0,5344153.story)! And you know what? You weren't even supposed to think it was the President, so if you did, YOUR THE REEL RASSIST!!!1!

Irvin Good Jr., president of Goodtime Amusements, said Wednesday he didn't imean to offend anyone by offering "Alien Attack" at the Our Lady of Mount Carmel Big Time fair in Roseto. But the game sparked a complaint.

"I guess we made an error in judgment, and we apologize for that," said Good, who has had the game for about six weeks. "I voted for the man. It wasn't meant to be him. If they took it that way, we apologize."

The game's target is a painting of a black man in a suit who is holding a scroll labeled "Health Bill." He sports a belt buckle fashioned after the presidential seal, antennae and a troll doll on his shoulder.

(h/t: Jim Newell (http://gawker.com/5608228/terrible-obama+smashing-carnival-game-wows-jersey-shore-patrons))

bjkeefe
08-12-2010, 08:48 PM
Or, as Roy (http://alicublog.blogspot.com/2010_07_25_archive.html#8801542817819781478) might put it: How Come They Can Say It And We Can't? Part Infinity+1:

On August 10, Dr. Laura Schlessinger launched into a racially charged rant, during which Schlessinger -- in her own words (http://www.drlaurablog.com/2010/08/11/my-apology) -- "articulated the 'n' word all the way out -- more than one time." Among other things, Schlessinger also told an African-American caller that she had a "chip on [her] shoulder." Schlessinger has since apologized (http://www.drlaurablog.com/2010/08/11/my-apology) for her remarks, but audio from the discussion appears to have been excised from the recording (http://www.drlaura.com/listen/) of that day's show that appears on Schlessinger's website. Media Matters has obtained full audio of Schlessinger's comments:

Audio and transcript here (http://mediamatters.org/blog/201008120045).

(h/t: @daveweigel (http://twitter.com/daveweigel/status/21014200944))

Whatfur
08-15-2010, 09:50 AM
"You see the problem. It's not that Conason is wrong exactly, but that his level of righteous outrage is so wildly disproportionate to the trifling offenses he is describing. Had we ever seen evidence that he has a sense of humor, we would assume that this column is satire. But we haven't, and it's not." (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703960004575427381953777918.html?m od=WSJ_Opinion_MIDDLETopOpinion)


Hmmm...I guess we can relate to that here.

look
08-15-2010, 01:10 PM
"You see the problem. It's not that Conason is wrong exactly, but that his level of righteous outrage is so wildly disproportionate to the trifling offenses he is describing. Had we ever seen evidence that he has a sense of humor, we would assume that this column is satire. But we haven't, and it's not." (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703960004575427381953777918.html?m od=WSJ_Opinion_MIDDLETopOpinion)


Hmmm...I guess we can relate to that here.

The Colbert clip...lolol...he dings Ingraham good: http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/343110/august-03-2010/laura-ingraham

Remember when Palin was hung in effigy by a gay couple in California? The effigy stayed up for at least two days before it was taken down.

bjkeefe
08-18-2010, 04:27 AM
"You see the problem. It's not that Conason is wrong exactly, but that his level of righteous outrage is so wildly disproportionate to the trifling offenses ...

...lolol...

"Trifling offenses." Yeah. That's it.

I don't have time* to post links to the hundred or so stories I've seen in just the past couple of days, but let's have one, to remind those not suffering from complete epistemic closure what life is like when you're not, say, some fat-dumb-and-happy white guy from Minnesota:

Nathan Bedford Forrest High School (http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/2010/08/nathan-bedford-forrest-high-school/)

... i.e.,

Florida High School Keeps KKK Founder's Name (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,448684,00.html)

(h/t: Riley Waggaman (http://wonkette.com/417478/you-know-who-else-increased-taxes-on-private-equity-firms-hitler))

To dismiss this ongoing problem with the standard "b-b-b-but Al Gore has a big house!!!1!" type of "defense" is to be a central part of the problem. Whatfur I have given up hope on, but "look?" You should be ashamed of yourself for patting a clown like this on the back, with your eyes closed just as tightly as you can get them.

==========

[Added] "Old news!!!1!" you claim? Very well. Although I am unaware of any name change for this school (http://www.google.com/search?q=Nathan+Bedford+Forrest+High+School), here are some more recent examples of the bigotry from the damp underbasement of America (http://bjkeefe.blogspot.com/search/label/What%20Michelle%20Malkin%20says%20it%27s%20not).

==========

* [Added2] Nor do I have much inclination, since on this site, it appears that lately, rebutting wingnut hate with facts (oh, and a mean tone of voice!!!1!) is cause for banishment. So be it. Enjoy your Whatfur-look echo chamber, Bob. No one can say you haven't earned (http://bjkeefe.blogspot.com/2010/08/mother-of-all-clickbait-fails.html) what you've sought.

Whatfur
08-18-2010, 09:05 AM
"Trifling offenses." Yeah. That's it.

....
some fat-dumb-and-happy white guy from Minnesota:
...
.

You left out "old", Queefy.

handle
08-18-2010, 05:04 PM
You left out "old", Queefy.

This information is moot.
All anyone needs to know about the hillbillycolloquialism, is when he speaks of all things right wing, bestows only the highest praise, and defends to the bitter, pointless end.

When it comes to all things left of the extreme right wing view, he attacks every aspect, even when he has no grounds whatsoever, in which case he will resort to bad mouthing it to the bitter pointless end.

He is, as Rush once described himself, a one dimensional character.

Whatfur
08-18-2010, 05:33 PM
...a one dimensional character.

I thawed I thaw a puddy cat.

handle
08-18-2010, 07:03 PM
Suffering succotash.

Oh yea, When he is completely befuddled he riffs on his nursery school tactics. (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?p=174652#post174652)

handle
08-18-2010, 07:08 PM
Oh yea, When he is completely befuddled he riffs on his nursery school tactics. (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?p=174652#post174652)

Or... he will go back and completely change a previous post! (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?p=173915#post173915)

Added: Check out the proof of the above assertion, read his previous two posts, and note the edit times, and compare my quotes.

Hey dumbass... Sylvester had the lisp, and Tweety pronounced esses as tees.
If you are going to be an asshole at least quote your references correctly.
It's puddy tat, moron!
Now go back and fix it again!

Whatfur
08-18-2010, 07:17 PM
Or... he will go back and completely change a previous post! (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?p=173915#post173915)

See previous.

handle
08-18-2010, 07:26 PM
See previous.

See previous addition.

handle
08-18-2010, 07:27 PM
I thawed I thaw a puddy cat.

copied!

handle
08-18-2010, 07:55 PM
See previous addition.

b'dee b'dee b'dee that's all folks! (the bitter end)

Does anyone want to defend decietfulfurs creepy post editing and quoting of other posters out of context?
Does anyone think this is remotely acceptable? Anyone?

Whatfur
08-19-2010, 02:42 AM
b'dee b'dee b'dee that's all folks! (the bitter end)

Does anyone want to defend decietfulfurs creepy post editing and quoting of other posters out of context?
Does anyone think this is remotely acceptable? Anyone?

Check yourself back in.

handle
08-19-2010, 03:16 PM
Check yourself back in.

Anyone else? c'mon, I thought wingnuts were brave! Defend your buddy! Or is his behavior an embarrassment?

look
08-19-2010, 03:38 PM
Anyone else? c'mon, I thought wingnuts were brave! Defend your buddy! Or is his behavior an embarrassment?Do you think it should be forbidden in all forums?

Originally Posted by look (almost!)
Stay classy, badhat.

There. Fixt.

http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showpost.php?p=173766&postcount=101

Whatfur
08-19-2010, 03:39 PM
... his behavior an embarrassment?

Doh!

handle
08-19-2010, 03:42 PM
Doh!

This is what I'm talking about, anyone think this is clever?

Added: clarification: One of the things I'm talking about.

handle
08-19-2010, 03:44 PM
Do you think it should be forbidden in all forums?



http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showpost.php?p=173766&postcount=101

I just think it's deceitful. Forbidden? I ain't no nanny, and unlike he who commits these stupidities, I don't try to tell them what to do. You think it's just fine?

look
08-19-2010, 03:55 PM
This is what I'm talking about, anyone think this is clever?

Added: clarification: One of the things I'm talking about.It's against the site rules, but it's not being enforced in certain forums.

It's not rocket science. If you ignore people who annoy you, you take away their (perceived) power. It's obvious that a certain group, including you and Fur, enjoy the hell out of this sort of rapport. If this is not true, then I suggest you drop your end of the rope and begin engaging thoughtfully in the Diavlog Comments thread.

handle
08-19-2010, 04:19 PM
It's against the site rules, but it's not being enforced in certain forums.

It's not rocket science. If you ignore people who annoy you, you take away their (perceived) power. It's obvious that a certain group, including you and Fur, enjoy the hell out of this sort of rapport. If this is not true, then I suggest you drop your end of the rope and begin engaging thoughtfully in the Diavlog Comments thread.

That's good to know about the rules. And while I appreciate the advice,
I must disagree to a certain extent that ignoring some posters reduces their power. Unchecked, and unanswered, they will literally fill this site with the noise of partisan propaganda, and there is plenty of this shit all over the web. This creep likes to feign thoughtfulness while pasting the most banal crap here.
You are right that I like to make fun of him, and he just can't leave it at that. I also like the way he knee jerks into infantile behavior, and then accuses everyone else of it. I myself am quite juvenile, and find the paradox of his projection vs. his behavior, nothing short of hysterical.

If he really was as thoughtful as he tries to project, he would follow your advice, Me? I'm just a troll, like he says... but at least I am aware of it.

Whatfur
08-19-2010, 04:21 PM
...I'm just a troll, like he says... but at least I am aware of it.

Nothing "fabricated".

handle
08-19-2010, 04:29 PM
Nothing "fabricated".

It is edited, though. Why do you do this stupid shit? I'm just pointing out it ain't clever, and it ain't honest, which is you in a nutshell.

handle
08-19-2010, 04:57 PM
Befuddled? Please, allow me:


...ain't clever...ain't honest...in a nutshell.

Now I get it! it really is fast and easy.. maybe he's just getting lazy.

Added: I forgot the best part! It doesn't take any thought whatsoever!

look
08-19-2010, 04:57 PM
That's good to know about the rules. And while I appreciate the advice,
I must disagree to a certain extent that ignoring some posters reduces their power. Unchecked, and unanswered, they will literally fill this site with the noise of partisan propaganda, and there is plenty of this shit all over the web. This creep likes to feign thoughtfulness while pasting the most banal crap here.
You are right that I like to make fun of him, and he just can't leave it at that. I also like the way he knee jerks into infantile behavior, and then accuses everyone else of it. I myself am quite juvenile, and find the paradox of his projection vs. his behavior, nothing short of hysterical.

If he really was as thoughtful as he tries to project, he would follow your advice, Me? I'm just a troll, like he says... but at least I am aware of it.
"Beware the Jabberwock, my son!
The jaws that bite, the claws that catch!
Beware the Jubjub bird, and shun
The frumious Bandersnatch!"


He took his vorpal sword in hand:
Long time the manxome foe he sought --
So rested he by the Tumtum tree,
And stood awhile in thought.


And, as in uffish thought he stood,
The Jabberwock, with eyes of flame,
Came whiffling through the tulgey wood,
And burbled as it came!


One, two! One, two! And through and through
The vorpal blade went snicker-snack!
He left it dead, and with its head
He went galumphing back.


"And, has thou slain the Jabberwock?
Come to my arms, my beamish boy!
O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!'
He chortled in his joy.

handle
08-19-2010, 05:04 PM
...chortled in his joy.
I'm gonna start doing this too, It requires near zero mental ability.

Whatfur
08-19-2010, 05:07 PM
...near zero mental ability.

Right up your alley then.

handle
08-19-2010, 05:10 PM
Right up your alley then.
What a comeback. And not at all predictable... who started this stupid shit again?

Whatfur
08-19-2010, 05:11 PM
"Beware the Jabberwock, my son!
...!
O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!'
He chortled in his joy.


Callooh! Callay! Huzzah!, Hooray!

I like it.

handle
08-19-2010, 05:11 PM
What a comeback. And not at all predictable... who started this stupid shit again?

At least someone finally came to your defense, sort of.

handle
08-19-2010, 05:13 PM
Callooh! Callay! Huzzah!, Hooray!

I like it.

Right up your alley....

You would.

Whatfur
08-19-2010, 05:16 PM
You would.

"Your"s? Nope...that's a low road too often travelled.

handle
08-19-2010, 05:21 PM
"Your"s? Nope...that's a low road too often travelled.

Ya know ya got 'im when he goes there folks!! And you had help this time! shame on you.... this is tooo easy.

Whatfur
08-19-2010, 05:24 PM
Ya know ya got 'im when he goes there folks!! And you had help this time! shame on you.... this is tooo easy.

Yep, ya got me handle, can we take look's advice and call it a century?

handle
08-19-2010, 05:28 PM
Yep, ya got me handle, can we take look's advice and call it a century?

Like you aren't gonna go back and change this.

handle
08-19-2010, 05:29 PM
Like you aren't gonna go back and change this.

Besides, looks advice was in the event a poster was annoyed... I am amused.