Tuesday, September 23, 2008

Doin' The Race Based Politickin' Shuffle


We all knew it was forming beneath the skin of the campaign and we've even caught a glimpse of it now and then , but it finally has erupted and popped its horrid pus ridden head into plain sight - the race card.

As is usual with this particular joker in the deck, it's being brought into the game as a weapon by the very people that are benefiting most by racism in this campaign as a weapon....Barack Obama and his surrogates in the dinosaur media.

It's essentially an attempt to stem Obama's drop in the polls, a reminder that anybody voting against the Chosen One is of course a de facto racist.

The latest eruption started with one of CNN's resident leftards, Jack Cafferty, who wrote a nice little hit piece stating that the only reason the polls were even close had to be because of white racism.

That seems to have been the starting gun for a whole slew of similar remarks an articles around the including statements by Kansas governor Kathleen Sebelius,, lefty pundit David Gergen, The Atlantic of course, the View, Air America, NBC, ABC, the New York Times, heck, even Michael Dukakis...and finally this week's topper, a poll out of Stanford University published and promulgated by the AP that (*gasp!*) white racist Democrats could cost the Chosen One the election:


More than a third of all white Democrats and independents — voters Obama can’t win the White House without — agreed with at least one negative adjective about blacks, according to the survey, and they are significantly less likely to vote for Obama than those who don’t have such views…

Lots of Republicans harbor prejudices, too, but the survey found they weren’t voting against Obama because of his race. Most Republicans wouldn’t vote for any Democrat for president — white, black or brown.

Not all whites are prejudiced. Indeed, more whites say good things about blacks than say bad things, the poll shows. And many whites who see blacks in a negative light are still willing or even eager to vote for Obama.

On the other side of the racial question, the Illinois Democrat is drawing almost unanimous support from blacks, the poll shows, though that probably wouldn’t be enough to counter the negative effect of some whites’ views.

Race is not the biggest factor driving Democrats and independents away from Obama. Doubts about his competency loom even larger, the poll indicates. More than a quarter of all Democrats expressed doubt that Obama can bring about the change they want, and they are likely to vote against him because of that…


Still, the effects of whites’ racial views are apparent in the polling.
Statistical models derived from the poll suggest that Obama’s support would be as much as 6 percentage points higher if there were no white racial prejudice.


This is absolutely farcical.

For one thing, the pollsters state that while the Chosen One has near unanimous black support, it's not enough to counteract `the negative effect of some white's views.'

Just how would they know that? Did they also figure into the equation how many guilty white leftists are voting for Obama simply because of his color, regardless of how incompetent and inexperienced he is? Or how many Muslims of all races in America are voting for Obama because they perceive him to be a Muslim? And what about that almost monolithic black support? How about this for a headline? "Black racism could cost McCain support in urban cities."


Or here's another way to put it, something else nobody dares talk about: if it's not racist for the vast majority of black people to vote for Obama out of tribal loyalty , why is it considered 'racist' for some white people to vote against him for the same reason?

Think you'll see anyone putting out that little morsel anytime soon on CNN or in the New York Times? Or in the AP for that matter?

And I loved this bit, way down deep in the story where people skimming the article are unlikely to see it:


Statistical models derived from the poll suggest that Obama’s support would be as much as 6 percentage points higher if there were no white racial prejudice.

But in an election without precedent, it’s hard to know if such models take into account all the possible factors at play.
.



Translation? We don't really know what we're talking about, but we got hired by Obama's supporters over at the AP to come up with something they could use to help his campaign...so we delivered.

The entire story is carefully hedged like that....some whites may harbor racist feelings towards blacks but will still vote for Obama, others are more concerned about his competency, many more whites say positive things then negative things about blacks..on and on it goes, one huge circle jerk, except for that screaming headline, repeated ad nauseum in the dinosaur media:

AP poll: Racism among white Democrats could cost Obama the election

And trust me on this one. Given the close ties between the Obama campaign and its shills in the dinosaur media the timing on this is no accident.

Y'see, race is a factor in this campaign, but not in the way the dinosaur media would ever admit, let alone the Democrat party...because Barack Hussein Obama is the official Sooper Dooper Affirmative Action candidate.

And it's about time someone said it.

In Barack Obama, we have someone with no discernible qualifications for the office of president, a machine party hack with a razor thin resume who's chief skill seems to be the ability to read a teleprompter in a sonorous baritone while saying absolutely nothing of substance better than anyone since William Jennings Bryan.

He's the nominee in spite of serial gaffes that would have sunk a white candidate like the Titanic a long time ago. He's the nominee in spite of losing the popular vote and in spite of losing the primaries in virtually every large blue state the Democrats need to carry to win in November.

The reason's simple. Thanks to backing from George Soros and a few other well heeled Leftards plus some expertise provided by the Chicago Daley machine, Obama became the first serious black presidential candidate. The superdelegates, the party shield carriers who's position was designed to thwart any nasty problems with the rank and file simply decided that given a choice between a monolithic black vote, the nutroots and George Soros' money versus the Clinton wing of the party, they'd go with Obama.

Call it a race based quota carried to its ultimate level of absurdity. Geraldine Ferraro had it exactly right..take away Obama's approximately one third African heritage and you essentially have Dennis Kucinich or John Edwards. Or maybe Chuckles the Clown without the fright wig.

And this goes beyond mere race, although that's a factor. By making this a major tactic in their scheme to get the Chosen One into the White House, the Obama campaign and their shills in the dinosaur media reveal something else about the way they feel deep down about this country and its people.

Not only do they see us as a bunch of redneck racists, but they actually think we're so stupid as to buy their crap and allow them to guilt us into voting for one of the most unqualified, far left candidates in history.

It remains to be seen whether the American people are going to drink this putrid Kool-Ade, but I don't think that's who we are as a country. And as for the people who would characterize an Obama defeat as due to 'racism', I can do without their approval very well, thank you.




No comments: