Thursday, October 06, 2011

Still Bored

I am still quite amazed at the support for the Democratic Party by the majority of the black community. How big that majority is these days I have no idea, but it is still regarded as common knowledge that such a majority exists. The question is still, "Why?".

It is said, by some, that the GOP doesn't care about minorities. This is a blatant misconception, if not an outright lie. But as Andrew Klavan suggests in a recent discussion with Bill Whittle on PJTV, the right-wing is at a disadvantage. With the difference between the two ideologies being that one promises to do everything (the wacky left), and the other doesn't (the righteous right), it isn't hard to understand why one might be tempted to support the party making all the promises to do everything. After all, it's so much easier when someone else will do all the heavy lifting.

But the truth, as any honest person can plainly see, is that the right does not suggest it will do nothing, per se. It merely suggests that it will not interfere with each individual's attempts to find success. For those who are "self-starters", this is ideal and in fact, it is an ideal by which this country rose to greatness in the world.

But if one is raised to believe no effort is required, or that there is no possibility of success without the help or intervention of others, then it is easy to see why so many who are in need might be swayed by the promises made by those who are not in a position to keep them. But the promises are not kept yet the support continues.

As I did in the last post on this topic, I draw on black speakers for insights into this phenomena. I offer Thomas Sowell and Star Parker. These two are among the voices to whom black community should be listening. Best of all, the message they send is equally valid to all people regardless of race, as is true of the basic conservative philosophy, where dividing people along racial lines has never been common or even desired.

31 comments:

Dan Trabue said...

Marshall...

With the difference between the two ideologies being that one promises to do everything (the wacky left), and the other doesn't (the righteous right), it isn't hard to understand why one might be tempted to support the party making all the promises to do everything...

[The Right] merely suggests that it will not interfere with each individual's attempts to find success. For those who are "self-starters", this is ideal and in fact, it is an ideal by which this country rose to greatness in the world.

But if one is raised to believe no effort is required, or that there is no possibility of success without the help or intervention of others, then it is easy to see why so many who are in need might be swayed by the promises


Do you see how this sounds patronizing to black folk and as if you're suggesting that the majority of black folk are merely voting democratic because they've offered to do the most for black folk?

Do you see how it appears that you're suggesting that ideals and issues don't matter to the vast majority of black folk, because they'll do whatever makes them work the least?

Do you see how it appears that you're suggesting that the vast majority of black folk aren't smart enough to recognize when someone is delivering on promises to "take care of them..."

Do you see how patronizing and demeaning it sounds?

It's comments like this that are at least partially at fault for keeping our black brothers and sisters away from the GOP.

Take that for what it's worth.

Marshall Art said...

Do you see how bad the reality sounds to you, even though you believe it indicts those of us who are seeing things as they are? The fact is that most, if indeed not all, who support the leftist ideology do so because of the promises made, just as we on the right do with our own candidates. The difference is as I've said. The promises of the left is to hand out goodies, by and large, and the promises of the right is to get the hell out of our way so we can produce our own goodies. If you don't like the sound of that, then you'll at least need to show what other promises made by the left are not of this sort. I doubt you can.

But even more important is how even some blacks, like those to whom I've been linking, are equally aware as I (actually, even more than I) of how black support for the leftist ideals make no sense, especially when the failures are so stark. To what do you attribute such loyalty to that which deserves none?

4simpsons said...

Hey Marshall -- good points. Hope you are doing well!

Too many blacks have misplaced their trust in Liberals. I treat the race card as a concession speech, once I point out how the Left is not only pro-legalized abortion, which kills blacks at a rate 3x that of whites, but they are pro-taxpayer funded abortion, which they know will increase that rate. Apparently 300% higher isn't enough for them.

Oh, but there is an area where they are anti-choice: Schools. They love the teachers' unions more than blacks so they fight charter schools tooth and nail. And while being for open borders with Mexico they try to jail parents who sneak their kids across school district borders.

And on and on.

I really hope Cain wins, for many reasons (mainly because I'm a racist, of course -- at least that's what sweet, tolerant Janeane says). I think it will open the eyes of many blacks and give them hope in something that will work.

Liberals have had virtual monopolies in inner city politics and schools for 50 years. How's that working out for the residents there?

Edwin Drood said...

the black vote belongs to the Democrat party. Thats why no one (including the Democrats) go out their way to help just the black people.

Dan Trabue said...

"ya, those stupid black people are really, you know, stupid and greedy and lazy, otherwise, they'd vote the way I like to vote..."

Is that really your position?

John B said...

http://www.factcheck.org/2008/04/blacks-and-the-democratic-party/

The above is the rate at which Blacks register and vote democrat. They vote (D) at mid to high 80%'s and are registered (D) at mid to high 70%'s.

For the life of me I can't see why. For all the promises Democrats have made, poverty is highest in cities that Democrats have held for decades. For all the programs they have enacted to "protect" Blacks, the ultimate result has been overwhelming harm to the Black community. This has been going on for decades...DECADES.

it is no wonder that political Blacks with integrity Mayor of Philadelphia, Thomas Sowell, Herman Cain hold the positions they do. They have stepped back from the promises and have seen where they have lead.

Dan Trabue said...

"And them dang uppity blacks that ain't got no integrity, them's the ones that vote Democrat and dare to disagree with me..."

Do you all STILL not see why you come across to folk as just one step above the KKK?

Marshall Art said...

""ya, those stupid black people are really, you know, stupid and greedy and lazy, otherwise, they'd vote the way I like to vote..."

Is that really your position?"


This is just the type of crap that gets your panties in a bunch at YOUR blog, Dan, with the exception that none of us actually say something so far removed from the truth as this. But in reality, ANY who vote for the Dems, regardless of race, are doing the same thing in terms of hoping for something to be done for them. That is the power of the Dem message that attracts those who think they are entitled regardless of their own ability to achieve success.

It just so happens that this post focuses on the black segment of the Democrat constituency. As John points out, a high percentage of them registers and votes for Democrats. But as MY links, in this and the previous post shows (do you want more?), they have not gotten their money's worth at all.

So the question is legitimate: why do they continue to vote Democratic? It makes no sense.

""And them dang uppity blacks that ain't got no integrity, them's the ones that vote Democrat and dare to disagree with me..."

Do you all STILL not see why you come across to folk as just one step above the KKK?"


Perhaps, if we actually spoke that way or said anything like that. John wasn't speaking of the black population in general when he referenced "integrity". His selection of black figures can only be taken as holding them up against the Jesse Jacksons, Maxine Waters, Cornell Wests, and Michael Eric Dysons. Where's the integrity of such "leaders" in espousing the same old rhetoric and proposing the same old policies that have consistently gone nowhere? These people who lack integrity look for scapegoats to blame for the ills of the black community and the failures of their remedies.

If ideals and issues matter to those who support the leftist leaders, then what could those ideals and issues be that so leaves them wanting time and time again? Frankly, I am not impressed by such defenses you raise as I recall how little Obama brought to the table in ANY of his campaigns for public office and how he got support anyway. To this day I have yet to see any legitimate reason why anyone could have willingly cast a vote for the guy.

Feodor said...

I’m sure you’re on the right path, Marshall: asking your blogosphere audience what’s with the crazy thinking of all those, in your words, “in need” [read: black] and living in, the Simp’s words, “the inner city” [read: black] for so blindly supporting Democratic politicians.

Surely you shouldn’t expect yourself to have the balls to make real relationships with people of color and get to know and talk intimately with, say, 8 or 10 people who are “in need” or from “the inner city.” While this would surely give you the hard-won line of thinking that has passed from family to family, it’s too hard to do for a privileged white man in the exurbs of Illinois. Can’t you find one middle class Negro nearby?

Easier to “link” to “even some blacks” who agree with you. A virtual relationship; much cleaner, safer. And, yet, even that gives you up as lost. You think because you can link to similar opinions by people in black skin you must be legitimate. Isn’t this what you accuse Democrats [but in your mental picture, read: “white Democrats”] of? Clothing themselves in meaningless connections?

That there are a few people of color who share your arcane and anarchist viewpoint only demonstrates that color of skin is no determiner of ideology. Stupid comes in a rainbow of representation. Though, here at Fartshall’s, the dominant one is blindingly white.

God, Marshall, get a black friend. One who thinks. A really brave one who will risk telling you what black folks know. Don’t ask us. How can we know? But you don’t have the balls do you to seek out the real stuff, do you?

Jim said...

"But in reality, ANY who vote for the Dems, regardless of race, are doing the same thing in terms of hoping for something to be done for them."

That's horse s**t.

I'm sure Buffet, Jobs, and I vote Democratic because we are SO NEEDY.

What an idiotic assertion!

"To this day I have yet to see any legitimate reason why anyone could have willingly cast a vote for the guy."

For one thing, because it was better than the alternative. By far!

Edwin Drood said...

Well there is a bunch of Democrats on Wall Street right now wanting handouts

Jim said...

"Well there is a bunch of Democrats on Wall Street right now wanting handouts"

You must be listening to Fox News. They aren't asking for handouts. They are asking that the people who caused and profited from the financial collapse are held responsible. Why did all of them come out whole and many of the 99% have lost their homes and their pensions and their jobs.

Tough luck, huh?

Marshall Art said...

Feodor,

Truly amazing, that no one but you can make me prefer Parklife. His responses filled with baseless accusations are far more succinct. He doesn't bother with substance or worse, as with you, multiple sentences of drivel hoping to pass as substance. Amazing indeed.

But you are right about one thing: I am likely barking up the wrong tree hoping to have my basic question answered by any of my usual lefty opponents. This is especially true considering none of you can give a straight answer as to why YOU support the left. As I stated before, supporters of the Dems hope to get something for their support. It is true of all of you, whether it be direct assistance or indirect by virtue of taxing the crap out of other people to fund what the feds shouldn't doing in the first place.

So for those "in need", as the term applies to most every (if not all) Democratic supporter, this post, as was the last on the subject, focused on one segment of that wacky constituency and their support for their black "leaders" of the same party.

For starters, you have no idea who comprises my friends. You have no idea of their race, gender, religion or heritage. But in order for you to position yourself as superior (an extremely humorous and impossible task), you need to believe I am not acquainted with minorities of any kind. Nor do you have any idea of whether or not I am a privileged person, white or otherwise. Worse, you can't understand how little difference my own economic situation makes regarding truth or fiction. What kind of idiot believes that in this country, one MUST be born of privilege to attain a life of privilege? I mean, aside from you. The history of this country is one of many stories of people of all kinds of backgrounds rising above the station of their birth. There is literally no excuse that does not arise from within.

"Easier to “link” to “even some blacks” who agree with you."

Well, easier than marrying into a black family (provided this isn't just some jungle-fever fantasy of yours) and pretending you are now qualified to speak for the entire race.

"You think because you can link to similar opinions by people in black skin you must be legitimate."

No, buffoon. You've got it backwards. My beliefs and understandings have always been legitimate. They are held by many intelligent people (not psuedo-intellectual, like you) and I chose to use black people to eliminate any racist comments you would surely have had they all been white people. Apparently that hasn't worked. So no, there is no "meaningless" connection here. Only people, who happen to be black, speaking the truth about the failures of the Democratic party (and black leftist "leaders") to better the lives of all black people. A charge to which neither you, Dan or Jim have spent one keystroke trying to rebut.

more...

Marshall Art said...

feodope goes on to use THIS catchy prhase:

"arcane and anarchist viewpoint"

To increase my amusement, false priest, try defending THIS charge for a few paragraphs. Laughter is good for the soul.

"..., Marshall, get a black friend. One who thinks. A really brave one who will risk telling you what black folks know. Don’t ask us. How can we know? But you don’t have the balls do you to seek out the real stuff, do you?"

First, I eliminated your false priest use of God's name in vein. But clearly, by "a black friend who thinks", you hope I will find someone who thinks like you. Why would I do something like that? You provide me with all the stupid I need (with Parkie's help). That, to you, is "the real stuff". Kind of insulting to any black person who does not hold your victim-hood mentality. You are such a fraud.

Marshall Art said...

Jim,

""But in reality, ANY who vote for the Dems, regardless of race, are doing the same thing in terms of hoping for something to be done for them."

That's horse s**t.

I'm sure Buffet, Jobs, and I vote Democratic because we are SO NEEDY."


If you are pushing for universal health care, progressive taxation and the like, you are looking for things to be done for you. But you make a good point. Buffet, Jobs and, I'm assuming because you place yourself among them, YOU, have less excuse for supporting the Democratic party.

""To this day I have yet to see any legitimate reason why anyone could have willingly cast a vote for the guy."

For one thing, because it was better than the alternative. By far!"


Do you mean the alternative Dem candidates, like Hillary and Edwards? Don't see how that could be true since they are all cut from the same cloth (except that Hillary has the biggest balls). And you'd need to make a case that Barry wouldn't now be crying for attention if McCain had won. I didn't like McCain. But he was liberal enough for anyone on the left. Too bad he wasn't black or a woman.

"They are asking that the people who caused and profited from the financial collapse are held responsible."

Would that include all the Democratic politicians that stuck their fat asses into the private sector since the Carter administration? Your next question shows that you DO expect handouts:

"Why did all of them come out whole and many of the 99% have lost their homes and their pensions and their jobs."

The answer lies in the personal lives of each of those who lost. They apparently lived their lives as if their jobs would last forever and their employers would take care of them, as if that was part of the deal when they were hired. It never has been and never will be. It isn't "tough luck". It's what happens when one doesn't provide for their own selves properly. Maybe you've heard this phrase before: "Shit happens!" Many people say this, but they don't live it. People like you look to blame someone else for their misfortunes.

Dan Trabue said...

why do they continue to vote Democratic? It makes no sense..

Asked and answered:

1. Many reasons.
2. Because the Democrats TEND to have values that coincide with the values of many black folk.
3. Because the Dems TEND to not be so blatantly racist as the GOP (like these repeated assertions that black folk vote for people to take care of them.

For instance.

Jim said...

"If you are pushing for universal health care..."

I have health care. I want universal health care not for me personally, but because I think the nation is better if all of its people have health care. I also think that our country will be financially stronger in the future because of the financial advantages of universal health care.

"progressive taxation"

Since my marginal tax rate is in the higher brackets, how does progressive taxation equate to something "for" me?

Nonsense.

"YOU, have less excuse for supporting the Democratic party."

Of course, if we accept your looney assumption. But we don't.

"Do you mean the alternative Dem candidates"

No, I mean McCain, and Palin.

"And you'd need to make a case that Barry wouldn't now be crying for attention if McCain had won."

WTF? I wouldn't have to make that case at all. There is no evidence that he would.

"But he was liberal enough for anyone on the left."

Damn you are delusional! You must be so right that the Tea Party is liberal to you. McCain would not have been acceptable to anyone on the left as evidenced by the election results. (Not to mention common sense.)

"People like you look to blame someone else for their misfortunes."

I have no misfortunes to blame anyone for. I am pissed off that my 401(k) is a lot lower due to the financial collapse and yet all the people who made millions off of it got away whole. That doesn't mean that I'm asking for the money back.

Marshall Art said...

"why do they continue to vote Democratic? It makes no sense..

Asked and answered:"


"Asked and answered? When? Let's look at your list:

"1. Many reasons."

If you'd actually looked at any of the links in either this or the previous post on the subject, you'll find reason given, but results the provide better reasons to flee the Dems. But "many reasons" is a dodge. What follows are not examples of ANY reasons.

"2. Because the Democrats TEND to have values that coincide with the values of many black folk."

Really? Such as... Oh! You must mean the values that led to the fantastic prosperity and growth of Detroit! Or maybe the values that leads to the opening of Planned Parenthood clinics in depressed areas! Or maybe the draconian gun laws in states like mine that leave law abiding citizens at the mercy of gang-bangers in those same depressed areas!

"3. Because the Dems TEND to not be so blatantly racist as the GOP (like these repeated assertions that black folk vote for people to take care of them."

Yet the opposite is true as evidenced by the failures of Dem party proposals to alleviate the plight of the black citizen and the poor in general. And before you level the lie once more, you bearer of false witness, no one here (except you) claimed that ALL blacks vote for people to take care of them. I clearly stated that those black folks (as well as other Dem supporters), do so. To be clear, I also never said it was the only reason, but in the case of Barry Obumble, racism was a factor and continues to be, as evidenced by the likes of Sam Jackson and Morgan Freeman. Not to mention the black luminaries depicted in the video in the last post.

Marshall Art said...

"I have health care. I want universal health care not for me personally, but because I think the nation is better if all of its people have health care."

Universal health care will squeeze out whatever plan you now have. But the question is not about all people having health care. It is about who pays for it. The nation is better off if all its people act responsibly and take care of their own health care needs. It's also better off if the federal gov't stays within it's constitutional mandates and keeps their nose out of personal health care business. If a state, like Massachusetts wants Romneycare, that affects only Massachusetts. But by supporting universal health care, you are asking others to pay for your health care, even though you might be capable to cover it by yourself, because it will result in all people being a part of the system. It WILL squeeze out other companies by the artificial impact on pricing that Dan claims to abhor in the market place.

"Since my marginal tax rate is in the higher brackets, how does progressive taxation equate to something "for" me?

Nonsense."


No. Progressive taxation is nonsense. As long as you are in the high bracket, you can pretend you aren't as covetous as the rest who support progressive taxation. But as long as it is in place, you "get something" should your financial situation go south. You won't have to be taxed at the higher rates, thereby paying a lesser and less fair share of the tax burden. Progressive taxation, as well as other high rates burdening the entrepreneurial, reduces competition as those seeking to make it big are slowed in their progress by the burdensome rates they must pay. As one of the ultimately richest dudes, I think Buffet has this in mind when he stupidly calls for higher rates. What's more, people like you can pretend the wealthier among you should pay more while never offering to send in more of your own to cover the expenses of the gov't for which you believe the wealthy should be tapped.

""YOU, have less excuse for supporting the Democratic party."

Of course, if we accept your looney assumption. But we don't."


First of all, they are not "assumptions", but facts. And your inability to understand them does not make the looney. Kinda makes YOU looney, though.

"WTF? I wouldn't have to make that case at all. There is no evidence that he would."

Barry was a nobody until that big convention speech. Had he lost the presidency to McCain, he would have slipped back into obscurity. He accomplished nothing and there's no reason to assume he'd have accomplished anything were he relegated back to his Senate seat.

Marshall Art said...

"Damn you are delusional!"

You wish. But a review of the American Conservative Union stats does not show McCain as all that conservative, especially within the last couple of decades. He only scores in the 80's for lifetime, but a year by year look shows ratings down around 50. By contrast, Barry scored lower than that socialist Sanders.

But clearly, Obama wasn't vetted by anybody who supported him, so enamored as they were with his ability to read a teleprompter and the fact that he would become the first black president. That and his gaudy promises, which were nothing more than campaign rhetoric with no solid plan of action, were all you fools needed. I doubt that since none of you looked at his past and his political record that you would have had any idea of just how much to the left McCain had drifted. For Pete's sake he stood up a debate in order to vote for a bailout. I guess it just wasn't big enough for lefties.

"I have no misfortunes to blame anyone for. I am pissed off that my 401(k) is a lot lower due to the financial collapse and yet all the people who made millions off of it got away whole."

This is funny. First you claim to have no misfortunes for which to place blame on anyone else, and then you state that your 401 is lower and blame people you think made millions off the collapse. On top of it, you reek with envy for those who made millions for having "got away whole".

Feodor said...

I see all the white people are still answering for black folks.

Seriously, Marshall, go get yourself a black conversation partner. At least Sepia. Surely there’s a Latino busboy in your neighborhood.

Heh!? Why aren’t you curious about Hispanics?

I think you have a love/hate jealosy thing going on with ebony. But no balls to act.

Marshall Art said...

Is there a point somewhere in your last comment, feodork? You are still assuming I have no relations with people of other races or ethnic backgrounds. Why is that?

Yet while you fail in your attempt to make yourself clear, you also do nothing to answer the underlying question of the post. Now this should quite simple for one who knows all about the black community after supposedly marrying into a black family.

Nor have you responded in any manner the points raised by the several links I've offered at this and the previous post on the topic. I'm most interested in the question as it relates to these facts. It seems that you have no more intelligence than Joy Behar who thinks the GOP hasn't done anything for the black community in many centuries.

Feodor said...

"You are still assuming I have no relations with people of other races or ethnic backgrounds. Why is that?”

Because you keep saying I’m assuming something. You can’t disprove the statement. Or you would have by now.

"you also do nothing to answer the underlying question of the post.”

Because the question is not mine to answer. Your question is “why do all those fool inner city, poor people [read black] support the Democrats Party?”

I will point out that the way you phrase your question shows a little at how bad you are with diversity. The Democratic Party is largely staffed and run and volunteer-driven by African Americans and Caribbean Americans. So, black voters are simply supporting a Party which includes themselves.

A fact which makes the answer to you question self-evident, which makes the question itself stupid.

Your real question is how, historically, did it happen that the Democratic Party was able to be composed of such a broad diversity of people, not just black and white folks. In national elections historically, Hispanics of all kinds vote predominantly for Democrats. While Bush Sr. got the majority Asian American vote (Asian Americans being largely refugees from communist countries), John Kerry got the majority and Obama increased that majority to over 60%.

So your fixation on blackness -- oops, sorry -- inner city in need people is a short sighted question.

It seems that if one has any color at all, one votes most often for Democrats. The brainwashing is a vast left-wing conspiracy.

Chew on that in whatever racist tendencies aid your digestion.

Marshall Art said...

I asked the psuedo-intellectual,

"You are still assuming I have no relations with people of other races or ethnic backgrounds. Why is that?”

And he responded:

"Because you keep saying I’m assuming something."

What? As in "WTF?" Is that supposed to be an intelligent response? "Why are you assuming..?" "Because you keep saying I'm assuming." My gosh what a towering intellect! And exactly what is that you think I need to disprove? That you are making an assumption regarding my relations with other people, or that I don't have any such relations? If it's the latter, are you hoping for film, photos, affidavits from black people? Maybe a video showing us singing "We Are The World" together?

I ask

"you also do nothing to answer the underlying question of the post.”

And your cowardly response is...

"Because the question is not mine to answer."

Oh really. This is hard to take seriously considering how easily you accuse me of racism without any shred of proof, and now you back off from answering according to your personal understandings? Coward.

Then you lie and say this:

"Your question is “why do all those fool inner city, poor people [read black] support the Democrats Party?”"

Typical for a false priest to bear false witness. The real question alone indicts the supporters of the Democratic party without you having to pretend there's anything racist about the question. Yet indicts all supporters of the Democratic Party. YOU support them, and that makes YOU an idiot (not that you needed to provide any more evidence).

But the question here and at the previous post on the topic was spurred in part by the words of the alleged black leaders, as the video of Alphonzo Rachel shows. There is simply no evidence that the Democratic Party is improving the lives of black people. The question is legitimate.

"The Democratic Party is largely staffed and run and volunteer-driven by African Americans and Caribbean Americans. So, black voters are simply supporting a Party which includes themselves."

So, if you let a black person clean your garage, but they derive no benefit from doing so, I suppose you are more "inclusive" for doing so? Get real. This statement presupposes that blacks are denied the ability to volunteer for the GOP. You have any proof of this? And are you suggesting that blacks are so retarded as to support a party that lets them volunteer to work for the party? I thought I was the racist here.

continuing...

Marshall Art said...

"Your real question is how...etc"

No. My real question is what I stated it was:

Why do blacks support a party that clearly does not deliver? You don't possess the psychological skill to suppose you could divine some hidden meaning of my clearly stated question. Don't embarrass yourself trying. I have no fixation on blackness, unless you're talking Halle Barry. My fixation is getting jokers like you to answer a simple question. If you have no answer, step off like a man keep your drooling mouth shut.

"It seems that if one has any color at all, one votes most often for Democrats."

Duh. The question is why is that? Who's dealing with the highest rate of unemployment now that Barry has been been in charge? It ain't whites. Which race is aborted most often since libs forced Roe v Wade? It ain't whites. Which segment of society has suffered the highest percentage of broken homes, single parents and kids with kids with the push of liberal policy? It ain't the whites. It has to be brainwashing for anyone to believe that being kicked in the ass over and over again is a good thing to support.

But thanks for playing, feodope. I especially loved that "we let them volunteer" bit. That explains everything.

Feodor said...

"So, if you let a black person clean your garage, but they derive no benefit from doing so."

Again, Marshall, you only see through white dominant eyes. It’s not my garage. It’s ours - we being a rainbow people.

And as for “no benefit,” don’t look now, Marshall, but the Massa of the house what who owns that there garage is a blackie.

Feodor said...

BTW, you and the Simp going to vote for a Mormon?

Are the Latter Day Saints truly Christians, Marshall?

(you know who goes to church with his wife and two daughters, don’t you?)

Or are you going to go with a “competent heretic” over an “incompetent Christian”?

Marshall Art said...

"Again, Marshall, you only see through white dominant eyes."

What a typically racist comment! I see the obvious here. Blacks have derived no tangible benefit from supporting Democrats. Being allowed to volunteer for their own suffering is no benefit. Once again, for the benefit of your own stupidity, I wonder the same for all who support the Dems. But the black community supports them in such a high percentage, one would expect to see some tangible benefits. "Volunteering" is not one of them.

Regarding the prez, his election was a poor indication of our nation's position on race relations. So eager were we to elect a black man or a woman, that we were ready to elect ANY black man or ANY woman regardless of the quality of that man or woman. Indeed, considering his incredible lack of qualifications for every position he attained, his color was indeed the driving factor. That does not speak well for this nation at all. It is not an indication of judging a man by the quality of his character. It is not an indication of the quality of the electorate.

Your last comment is woefully off-topic. As I constantly remind Parkie, you don't get to choose my topics, especially after failing to respond to the topic at hand. Your...

"Because the question is not mine to answer."

...response is just a cowardly dodge. Not surprising. So is trying to change the subject.

Marshall Art said...

I've changed my mind. I am going to respond to feo's last off-topic comments.

1. The only simps I know are you and Parkie, and I don't know if you schmucks even vote.

2. I would prefer not to vote for a mormon, but if a mormon is the best candidate, based on past performance and stated platform, then I would definitely vote for one over the current incompetent boob that now farts in the Big Chair of the Oval Office, should that mormon be the last man standing after the primaries are over. The stated religious beliefs of said boob, regardless of the sincerity of the claim, has no bearing in the face of his blatant and continually demonstrated incompetence.

As to whom I will cast my vote once the primary election date arrives, I have yet to decide.

3. No. Mormons are not true Christians. We've been through this before, false priest. What's your problem? Wait, never mind. Spell that out at your own blog.

4. Barry hasn't been a regular church goer since throwing Wright under the bus. However, regular attendance is not necessarily common with any president these days.

5. Once again, the religious belief of a candidate is very important to me. I prefer mine to have real faith, not the "I hope people notice I'm here" type of faith that political animals too often have. A competent non-Christian would be difficult to tell from a competent Christian without his own statement of non-belief. His actions and past performance would suggest a Christian regardless of his beliefs. They would definitely suggest a solid conservative, which no person of faith would, should or could fear.

This country can simply not afford another four years of Obama or anyone remotely like him. That pretty much covers the entire left wing, as I can't think of any Dem that wouldn't keep us moving in the same direction, even if not as quickly.

Feodor said...

“Our blacks are better than their blacks.” Ann Coulter

Your horsy-faced women aren’t as smart as our horsy-faced women.

Bad black evangelism by white members surely is one answer to your white dominant question.

Marshall Art said...

feodor,

What the hell is that comment supposed to mean? I certainly understand and agree with Coulter's statement, though I fully doubt that you do.

If you're referring to Coulter as "horsey-faced", then I'd like to see the horse you have in mind to which you are comparing her. One thing for sure, I doubt any lib horse faced woman is nearly as smart as a conservative one.

But the last sentence is most perplexing. Did it simply sound intelligent to you when it floated through your brain-free skull? What the hell is it supposed to mean? What does "Bad black evangelism by white members" mean? What is a "white dominant" question? By that nonsense, would my wider question, "why do lefties support the Democratic party?" be considered a conservative dominant question? Would the question, "why do idiots support leftist ideology?" be an average American dominant question?