[freedomtowernight_edited.jpg] 26th Parallel: He Said What?

Friday, April 04, 2008

He Said What?

If this is reflective of the mindset of intelligent liberals out there circa 2008 (someone please tell me it's not), then they deserve every poor candidate they get to represent their ideology and political party:

As commented by Rick on South Florida Daily Kos Blog:
The sad thing is, Senor (ed. Sr. Cohiba, a.k.a Cigar Mike), you actually subscribe to that garbage. You truly believe it. A hard core 19%'er like you only wishes they could be half inspired by a POS the likes of John McCain.

No, I think thing the real problem here is that whenever a Republican attempts to sincerely speak about race relations in America, people see right through the hypocrisy.
At least it's worth a chuckle or two. LOL!


Blogger Rick said...

You forgot to use ZOMG! in the post title, Robert. Now THAT would have been cool.

LOL! is way too 90's AOL, in my humble opinion.

As far as the comment itself, Robert, I'm kinda thinking that calling Obama a baby-killing Black Nationalist is a bit more extreme and is worth at least TWO LOL's!

Or at least a couple emoticons.

You make it so easy, Robert.


9:46 PM, April 04, 2008  
Blogger Rick said...

Oh, and let's not forget the Communist, Che-loving, Castroite characterizations either posted by your brother hardliners over at that other blog.

I'll be waiting patiently for your outrage.


9:50 PM, April 04, 2008  
Blogger Robert said...

No, Rick. No outrage. Just want to stay on topic to point out that the party you sympathize with (if not necessarily a member of), hasn't exactly had a sterling history with race relations.

Never mind the broad characterizations implied in your Republican race relations remark. Who supported Jim Crow laws? How about the KKK? Sen. Robert Byrd? George Wallace? Rev. Jeremiah Wright (had to throw an Obama-related reference there)? You can point to these examples as extreme or relics of the past, but it doesn't make them less true. History and the present have shown that racism doesn't follow party lines, although the Democrats have a pretty sad history to explain.

And calling John McCain a POS? I don't care if you don't personally like the man or his policies, but c'mon.

BTW, I'm more of an 80s guy myself. I'd grow a mullet if I had the hair. OMG!!

10:23 PM, April 04, 2008  
Blogger Rick said...

Here's your "on topic," Robert: McCain voted against MLK Day in 1983. In 1987 he agreed with Arizona's decision to rescind recognition of MLK Day. In 2000, McCain defended his South Carolina campaign strategist after he said that MLK Day is "vitriolic and profane."

Now, staying on topic, tell me why I shouldn't be pissed off when McCain finally gets around to apologizing for all this while he just happens to be running for President?

Tell me why I should agree with Cohiba and other 19%ers when they liken Obama's following to a cult?

Is it because Wallace was a Dem? Is it because Byrd was in the KKK 40 years ago?

Yes, lets stay on topic, Robert. For sure.


10:58 PM, April 04, 2008  
Blogger Srcohiba said...

No Rick, it's a cult of personality -- not a cult. Read the definition of the term.

"A cult of personality or personality cult arises when a country's leader uses mass media to create a heroic public image through unquestioning flattery and praise. Cults of personality are often found in dictatorships but can be found in some democracies as well.

A cult of personality is similar to general hero worship except that it is created specifically for political leaders."

7:54 AM, April 05, 2008  
Blogger Rick said...

You mean like, for instance, a politician who wears a cowboy hat and creates a faux manly image by, say, clearing brush and invites the media along with him to broadcast these images on the nightly news to which the public sees and responds.

Or maybe your referring to a scenario where a politician dresses up in an self-flattering flight suit and lands on board an aircraft carrier and then struts around in front of the cameras who are filming his every move.

I think I'm getting it, Senor.

Except I'm having a hard time understanding how this applies to Obama, a guy who has been accused in the media of being a militant Muslim and associating with racists, let alone his association with crooks back in Chicago. Doesn't seem to me to be anything flattering there.

Sounds to me like you expect your political leaders to be uncharismatic, dull, and vanilla [no pun intended].

And maybe that's why McCain is the nominee for your party.


9:48 AM, April 05, 2008  
Blogger Srcohiba said...

GWB was never a cult of personality. He's been despised by folks like you and the MSM since 11/00. And the reality is that more people voted for him because the real america could not stomach the alternative -- Gore and Kerry.

So a big negative on your poor analogy.

JFK was a cult of personality
Clinton has become a cult of personality but they've turned against him to an extent now since Obama is the new saviour.

In world politics, Chavez and Castro are cults of personality.

You want charisma and great speeches, then go hang out with Ted Kennedy.

I don't need a President to inspire me. I can inspire myself. Folks who need leaders to get inspired are insipid.

Dylan said it best: don't follow leaders, follow parking meters.

And I'll take grandpa over an upstart anyway.

11:47 AM, April 05, 2008  
Blogger Henry Gomez said...

I would say that Clinton was never a cult of personality. Obama certainly is.

Rick's labeling is neither surprising nor accurate. But what do you expect?

If you don't believe in the supremacy of the state then you are racist, don't you know Robert?

Charlton Heston died today. Imagine a gun rights conservative Republican that marched with Martin Luther King.

10:20 PM, April 06, 2008  

Post a Comment

<< Home