Blacks Not Allowed to be Conservative?

[classy]

Originally posted by: zendari
Alan Keyes, Clarence Thomas, Condi Rice, you name it, if they are conservative they aren't "really black" and are public enemy number 1.

Can you find me any story that shows a poll where a majority of blacks disagree with these people because of their race? Better yet lets see you make a fool of yourself, you give 10 reasons, based on facts, that blacks should support the republican party and its candidates?

 

[classy]

Originally posted by: Bumrush99
This is disgraceful behavior that undermines black cultural identity and the ability to move forward. If blacks truly want to be fully integrated economically and socially, they MUST ACCEPT other members of their race that have different viewpoints. Funny how many of these same people have no problem defending Luis Farrakahan and Al Sharpton, yet reject educated blacks that have chosen to decry the standard party BS.

"These" people huh..............
Well show me where "these" people defend all of the actions of these individuals? You got some polls or news paper articles to show "these" people doing the things you say? Only educated blacks are republican?

 

[classy]

Originally posted by: Mursilis

Originally posted by: Todd33
GOP is the big tent party. Blacks, gays, poor, etc. The damned Democrats hate everyone, bumch of racist, bigot, homophobes.

Maybe when you reincarnate as a black person and deal with oppression and racism you can them empathize with a group when one of their own joins "The Man" and sells out. I'm not saying the Democrats fully represent minorities, but the Republicans are so far from the interest of most minorities it's sad.

You people sure get ugly when a black wanders off the Democratic plantation.

Its funny............your choice of words, "plantation".

 

[Jadow]

which one stole the bike?

 

[RightIsWrong]

Can someone help me please? I have been through the first 120 hits on Google for "Lt. Gov. Maryland oreos" and then the first 50 for "Steele oreos" and have not found a single source of confirmation of this "oreo attack". All I get are right wing blogs (and the WaTimes piece which could be considered a right wing blog) stating that he (Steele) claims that the attack happened but not a single confirming source.

You would think that a man that is campaigning for the #2 spot in the state would have at least a small core group of reporters so that there would be confirmation. At least I do. I still have yet to find one.

Please help.

 

[ShadesOfGrey]

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
Can someone help me please? I have been through the first 120 hits on Google for "Lt. Gov. Maryland oreos" and then the first 50 for "Steele oreos" and have not found a single source of confirmation of this "oreo attack". All I get are right wing blogs (and the WaTimes piece which could be considered a right wing blog) stating that he (Steele) claims that the attack happened but not a single confirming source.

You would think that a man that is campaigning for the #2 spot in the state would have at least a small core group of reporters so that there would be confirmation. At least I do. I still have yet to find one.

Please help.

You suck at teh google.
Lt. Gov. Maryland oreos

Steele oreos

 

[Jhhnn]

Yeh, Shades, and your representations suck even more.

The CBS piece alleges that oreos were distributed at a debate in 2002, not thrown recently, and the National Ledger merely parrots the piece from Moon's rag...

But you probably thought the purple heart bandaids distributed at the Repub national convention were cute, right?

 

[ShadesOfGrey]

Originally posted by: Jhhnn
Yeh, Shades, and your representations suck even more.

The CBS piece alleges that oreos were distributed at a debate in 2002, not thrown recently, and the National Ledger merely parrots the piece from Moon's rag...

But you probably thought the purple heart bandaids distributed at the Repub national convention were cute, right?

Seems you suck at teh google too

This is what you get when you click on "all 133 related"

 

[Jhhnn]

Uh-huh, Shades- and which of those actually back up the claim that oreos were thrown at Steele, particularly first-hand accounts?

 

[ShadesOfGrey]

Originally posted by: Jhhnn
Uh-huh, Shades- and which of those actually back up the claim that oreos were thrown at Steele, particularly first-hand accounts?

RightIsWrong made the claim that he couldn't find a single source confirming the oreo throwing. I gave him the correct google searches.

Your claims, as I now read them(I possibly misread your post the first time) is that they weren't ever thrown at him. My response to that is - who cares. The point isn't that they were thrown, but rather that they were used in a racist stunt. Put another way, if they weren't thrown does that erase the fact that they were used?

Seems to me that the left here is trying to play apologist for these sorts of racist tactics. So much for "tolerance" from the left.

 

[Jhhnn]

No, Shades, it seems to me that the Right is attempting to make false attributions in an attempt to sensationalize the facts... to make it appear worse than it is... They've developed this slick method of portraying their tokens as victims, when they're nothing of the kind.

I haven't claimed that the oreo throwing didn't occur, merely that the claimants haven't shown that it actually did.

As always, the burden of proof lies with the accuser... and reasonable people can agree that burden hasn't been met...

 

[ShadesOfGrey]

Originally posted by: Jhhnn
No, Shades, it seems to me that the Right is attempting to make false attributions in an attempt to sensationalize the facts... to make it appear worse than it is... They've developed this slick method of portraying their tokens as victims, when they're nothing of the kind.

I haven't claimed that the oreo throwing didn't occur, merely that the claimants haven't shown that it actually did.

As always, the burden of proof lies with the accuser... and reasonable people can agree that burden hasn't been met...

OK, so like I said, drop the "throwing" - does it make it all OK now? No, no it doesn't. You can try to dismiss it because of one point that has little bearing on the overall, but to those of us in reality know it can't be dismissed because of that.

"Seems to me that the left here is trying to play apologist for these sorts of racist tactics. So much for "tolerance" from the left."

 

[umbrella39]

I would rather have someone toss nutter butters at me. Oh look, the feigned anger thread is still going! As stated, you neocrabs make better windows than you do doors, you are see through.

 

[RightIsWrong]

Originally posted by: ShadesOfGrey

Originally posted by: Jhhnn
No, Shades, it seems to me that the Right is attempting to make false attributions in an attempt to sensationalize the facts... to make it appear worse than it is... They've developed this slick method of portraying their tokens as victims, when they're nothing of the kind.

I haven't claimed that the oreo throwing didn't occur, merely that the claimants haven't shown that it actually did.

As always, the burden of proof lies with the accuser... and reasonable people can agree that burden hasn't been met...

OK, so like I said, drop the "throwing" - does it make it all OK now? No, no it doesn't. You can try to dismiss it because of one point that has little bearing on the overall, but to those of us in reality know it can't be dismissed because of that.

"Seems to me that the left here is trying to play apologist for these sorts of racist tactics. So much for "tolerance" from the left."

Actually, it makes all the difference in the world. The "fine gentleman" from Maryland and his backers are claiming battery. That has yet to be confirmed by a single source. It goes to prove that the MD GOP and/or Steele are about as credible as well....the GOP in the sensationalizing of this story. Why has he not set the record straight or had the story confirmed to quiet dissenters like me that require more than his, the GOP's and Newsmax's word that it happened?

The fact that oreos were passed out in and of itself, isn't any worse than if it were a flyer (just a lot tastier). Do I agree with the name-calling, no. But the fact of the matter is that the blacks in his own state perceive him to be such. They have that right to voice those opinions.

 

[ciba]

Originally posted by: Genx87
Oh I get it, if somebody pisses you off enough then calling them racial slurs is ok?

Only if you're a democrat.

 

[Agnostos Insania]

You ever notice how white people drive like this, and black people drive like this?

 

[ShadesOfGrey]

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong

Originally posted by: ShadesOfGrey

Originally posted by: Jhhnn
No, Shades, it seems to me that the Right is attempting to make false attributions in an attempt to sensationalize the facts... to make it appear worse than it is... They've developed this slick method of portraying their tokens as victims, when they're nothing of the kind.

I haven't claimed that the oreo throwing didn't occur, merely that the claimants haven't shown that it actually did.

As always, the burden of proof lies with the accuser... and reasonable people can agree that burden hasn't been met...

OK, so like I said, drop the "throwing" - does it make it all OK now? No, no it doesn't. You can try to dismiss it because of one point that has little bearing on the overall, but to those of us in reality know it can't be dismissed because of that.

"Seems to me that the left here is trying to play apologist for these sorts of racist tactics. So much for "tolerance" from the left."

Actually, it makes all the difference in the world. The "fine gentleman" from Maryland and his backers are claiming battery. That has yet to be confirmed by a single source. It goes to prove that the MD GOP and/or Steele are about as credible as well....the GOP in the sensationalizing of this story. Why has he not set the record straight or had the story confirmed to quiet dissenters like me that require more than his, the GOP's and Newsmax's word that it happened?

The fact that oreos were passed out in and of itself, isn't any worse than if it were a flyer (just a lot tastier). Do I agree with the name-calling, no. But the fact of the matter is that the blacks in his own state perceive him to be such. They have that right to voice those opinions.

Yeah, racial slurs and attacks are ok as long as you are the same race, right? :roll:

 

[Proletariat]

Originally posted by: ciba

Originally posted by: Genx87
Oh I get it, if somebody pisses you off enough then calling them racial slurs is ok?

Only if you're a democrat.

Look the thing is minorities don't like Republicans. If you guys want to gain their trust back go ahead. No one really cares.

Its up to you. If you show yourself to be a party of tolerance that would be great. We would have two parties of tolerance in America.

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: Proletariat

Originally posted by: ciba

Originally posted by: Genx87
Oh I get it, if somebody pisses you off enough then calling them racial slurs is ok?

Only if you're a democrat.

Look the thing is minorities don't like Republicans. If you guys want to gain their trust back go ahead. No one really cares.

Its up to you. If you show yourself to be a party of tolerance that would be great. We would have two parties of tolerance in America.

No, if Republicans became more tolerant, we'd have one tolerant party.