Letters to the Editor

Your views in 200 words or less

PITTS: Minorities do understand what GOP’s about

Letter by Paul J. Martin, Fox Island on Jan. 23, 2012 at 1:40 pm with 74 Comments »
January 23, 2012 1:46 pm

A recent letter to the editor (TNT, 1-21) led readers to believe how ungrateful black Americans have become to withdraw their support for the Republican Party, the party of the Great Emancipator. It must be a mystery, in his view, to see so few nonwhite faces in the recent debate audiences cheering on their potential presidential nominees.

Yes, Democratic Party leaders in the South from Reconstruction to the advent of the civil rights movement initiated poll taxes and supported racial segregation with even the tacit support of non-Southern members of the Democratic Party. Of course, any cursory understanding of history since the end of World War II easily supports black Americans’ overwhelming distrust of Republican policies.

I’m not surprised the letter writer fails to note that Southern Democrats bolted from their national party from 1948 to become a part of the GOP over their opposition to civil rights legislation. These white supremacists continued to support separate but hardly equal public facilities, school segregation and restrictions on voting.

While Republicans in more recent times have accepted the elimination of these discriminatory and demeaning practices, there continues to be strong resistance on the part of most minority groups to trust a party whose race- baiting presidential nominees and supporters continue to avow.

Another reason for diminishing minority support for the Republican Party is the recent batch of voter ID laws in red states. Justification for such laws should be based on solid evidence of voter fraud. None exists.

Leave a comment Comments → 74
  1. aislander says:

    The writer’s assertion that the behavior of the Republican party since 1948 has given reason for blacks to flee to the Dems is contradicted by the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

    A higher percentage of congressional Republicans than Democrats voted for the act, an it would not have passed without that Republican support, despite the fact that Democrats controlled Congress. Furthermore, the act was first proposed by the Eisenhower administration, but stymied by Democrats in Congress.

    The opposition to the act expressed by the Republican nominee for president gave the Republicans a black eye with minorities, and was terrible PR, but that opposition had nothing to do with a desire to suppress minorities. It was grounded in the principled belief that the act gave the Federal government power over individuals that it had never before had, and that was contrary to the letter and intent of the Constitution.

    The Civil Rights Act was a reaction to Jim Crow laws that suppressed voting and oppressed blacks in other ways, such as the infamous “separate but equal” doctrine and the barring blacks from certain accommodations, but that was GOVERNMENT doing the oppression, forcing private business to discriminate. Goldwater opposed that coercion, that’s all…

  2. sandblower says:

    Add this to the rest of what you don’t know: From Wiki..”The South, which had started to vote increasingly Republican beginning in the 1930s, continued that trend, becoming the stronghold of the Republican party by the 1990s.[28]
    Although majorities in both parties voted for the bill, there were notable exceptions. Republican senator Barry Goldwater of Arizona voted against the bill, remarking, “You can’t legislate morality.” Goldwater had supported previous attempts to pass Civil Rights legislation in 1957 and 1960 as well as the 24th Amendment outlawing the poll tax. The reason for his opposition to the 1964 bill was Title II, which he viewed as a violation of individual liberty. Most Democrats from the Southern states opposed the bill and led an unsuccessful 83-day filibuster, including Senators Albert Gore, Sr. (D-TN), J. William Fulbright (D-AR), and Robert Byrd (D-WV), who personally filibustered for 14 hours straight.”
    And it was the morphing of Southern Democrats into Southern Republicans that we have today. Shameful in both instances.

  3. aislander says:

    Votes on Civil Rights Act by party

    The original House version:[13]

    Democratic Party: 152-96 (61%-39%)
    Republican Party: 138-34 (80%-20%)

    Cloture in the Senate:[14]

    Democratic Party: 44-23 (66%–34%)
    Republican Party: 27-6 (82%–18%)

    The Senate version:[13]

    Democratic Party: 46-21 (69%–31%)
    Republican Party: 27-6 (82%–18%)

    The Senate version, voted on by the House:[13]

    Democratic Party: 153-91 (63%–37%)
    Republican Party: 136-35 (80%–20%)

  4. aislander says:

    Republican support was essential to break the filibuster…

  5. as long as Republoyalists keep insisting that Gingrich’s food stamp/NAACP remark isn’t race baiting/Southern Strategy, the Dems really have nothing to worry about.

    And….with Gingrich’s idiocy about Spanish being a ghetto language….it looks like the Hispanic vote will likewise be solid Dem.

  6. menopaws says:

    This is an area dear to my family. In the 1960’s a young divinity student who was registering black voters in Mississippi was shot to death in the act, with a black teenager of “robbing ” a local store. That young Divinity student was engaged to my sister-in-law……and he and the young man with him didn’t carry weapons, but, looked “menacing” according to the white store owner. Every time I hear some fat white Republican man talk about how they don’t have a problem with minorities–I think about that fat, white Sheriff and storeowner who gunned down two young men who were attempting to give black people the right to vote. Let’s be clear. Newt Gingrich uses racial code language to arouse that base of voters…………We have a black President who was hounded and hounded to prove his birthright by a bunch of these same whack jobs. Trust me–they don’t vote Democrat and they don’t want this black man in their White House. The night Obama was elected, I actually cried tears of joy. I foolishly believed this country had finally turned the corner on making America the dream of equality that we all are so proud of….Those feelings lasted for a very short time and then, the sniping about his birth certificate, his “angry” black wife—–we are still mired in the muck of disgrace and racism……..Our behavior towards this President has been shameful and some of the politicians who treat him so shabbily should be ashamed……And, so should every American who endorses that ignorance and hatred……..My husband and I are actually talking about retiring outside this country. Too mean-spirited and divisive—Barack Obama was elected fair and square…….Yet, even today, he is treated like he stole that office. Just disgusting behavior by seriously flawed human beings.

  7. Pacman33 says:

    “The welfare state is not really about the welfare of the masses. It is about the egos of the elites.”
    Thomas Sowell

    For a hundred and fifty years now the democrats have perpetuated a sham, namely that they have been responsible for and have been a friend to African Americans and their pursuit of equality. I conclude that the entire welfare system is a racist conspiracy designed by racist white liberals, north and south, to keep people “in their place”. They have taken the race card to a new low with this despicable, disgusting, and desperate attempt of inferring “race baiting”. But what other options do they have?

    Their positions?

    Obama’s record?

  8. “The writer’s assertion that the behavior of the Republican party since 1948 has given reason for blacks to flee to the Dems is contradicted by the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.”

    ROFL – that’s hysterical coming from the same person who recently accused another poster of brining up “old chestnuts.” thanks for such a great laugh!

  9. concernedtacoma7 says:

    They “distrust … republican policies” but face terrible unemoyment under progressive policies. They get jobs under republican policies (with no reciprocal expectation) and a small govt check under liberal policies in exchange for a vote.

    Democrats see them as a group that cannot get a free ID, republicans see them as Anericans and do not place anyone in a special class.

  10. aislander says:

    An “old chestnut” is a time-honored fallacy. An old truth is still the truth.

    Nice try at a cheap shot, though…

  11. ehill – Dictionary definition: “an old chestnut is a joke or story that has become tedious because of its age and constant repetition.”

    So, apparently it was meant as a joke! At least you got a laugh out of it. I just found it tedious.

  12. As Ronald Reagan might say, “Well, there you go again!”

    HEADLINE: “Newt Gingrich: Latinos, Blacks Don’t Understand ‘Key To Future Wealth,’ But Asians Do”

    (First Posted: 01/23/2012 6:41 pm Updated: 01/23/2012 7:28 pm)

    Newt says: “For poor minorities, entrepreneurship in small business is the key to future wealth,” Gingrich wrote by hand in a first draft. “This is understood thoroughly by most of the Asians, partially by Latinos, and to a tragically small degree by much of the American black community.”

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/23/newt-gingrich-latinos-blacks-weath-gop-2012_n_1224939.html

    Who would ever dare say that Newt Gingrich is a racist? Who!

    “Democrats see them as a group that cannot get a free ID, republicans see them as Anericans and do not place anyone in a special class.”

    Newt sees them as races!

  13. concernedtacoma7 says:

    But he is not asking society to treat them differently. Just the opposite, by dems treating them differently they have suffered.

    And the quote states he feels it is tragic. While other demographics achieve upward mobility through small business ownership, blacks do so less. Open and frank discussion of facts.

  14. bobcat1a says:

    aislander, if you don’t remember, I do; I was there. The Republican Party bragged about all the Democrats who were switching to the Republican Party after 1966; who were these switchers? Why, they were the Democrats from the south who voted against the Civil Rights Act. I was there when Nixon’s “Southern Strategy” depended on demonizing the Democrats for supporting equal rights. Black Americans remember too; that’s why they don’t support Republicans. Black Americans know exactly what Newt means when he refers to the “food stamp president.” He means exactly what Ronald Reagan meant when he referred to “welfare queens.” PURE DOG-WHISTLE POLITICS.

  15. alindasue says:

    concernedtacoma7 said, “Democrats see them as a group that cannot get a free ID…”

    I’ve lost track now how many threads you’ve brought up this “free ID” in, but despite my asking, you have yet to mention where this “free ID” can be found.

    Here in Washington state, it costs $20 – although the biggest hurdle to those over age 24 trying to get a government issued ID is that you pretty much need to have ID in order to get ID.

    http://www.dol.wa.gov/driverslicense/idproof.html

    However, that’s not a Republican/Democrat issue, nor is it a race issue. However, it is those who are lower income (and lack property related documentation) who have the most difficulty obtaining official government issued ID.

  16. menopaws says:

    Hey–I would never say Newt doesn’t represent a minority….Racist, toe counting, ignorant trash….He has made it clear that their voice reigns strong, proud and in desperate need of medication………Republicans always embrace those clear, strong, WHITE voices…..As my husband said, he has given a voice to Americans who used to be ashamed to express their racism and stupidity…….They rule supreme these days…….Such a proud face for America!!!!! Dumb, dumb, and just plain mean. Making fun of gay soldiers, those without health insurance—real cream of the crop–in each and every debate—the world sees how ignorant and ugly we are………..So, let’s be clear—being proud to be a Republican today identifies you—moderates like Huntsman and Romney don’t want to cater to this sick base of people—they live by a code of honor…….The rest of you should try going beyond name calling and low rent cat calls……..Brush your teeth and clean your nails—wear shoes and listen……and learn!!!!!!.You are a minority that must be defeated……..

  17. We are all different races… I thought celebrating diversity is what we are all supposed to be doing? Now by pointing out that these groups could do better through hard work and entrepreneurship is racist?

    I think that is good advice for us all.

  18. How does Paul J. Martin have special insight into the minds of minorities?

    Perfect example of revisionist history, Paul.

  19. alindasue says:

    menopaws said, “…wear shoes and listen…”

    As a certifiable barefoot flower-child, I take offense at your comment!

    (Just kidding… about the offense part, anyhow.)

  20. concernedtacoma7 says:

    Can one be proud of being a flower child?

  21. ct7, Apparently 45 Catholic leaders in Florida don’t agree with your assessment of Gingrich’s “Open and frank discussion of facts.”

    HEADLINE: Catholic leaders tell Gingrich, Santorum ‘to stop perpetuating ugly racial stereotypes’
    01/20/12 @ 11:52 am

    Catholic leaders issued a letter Friday to GOP presidential candidates Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum, themselves Catholics, urging them “to stop perpetuating ugly racial stereotypes on the campaign trail.”

    The letter, signed by 45 Catholic leaders says:
    Mr. Gingrich has frequently attacked President Obama as a “food stamp president” and claimed that African Americans are content to collect welfare benefits rather than pursue employment. Campaigning in Iowa, Mr. Santorum remarked: “I don’t want to make black people’s lives better by giving them somebody else’s money.”

    “At a time when nearly 1 in 6 Americans live in poverty, charities and the free market alone can’t address the urgent needs of our most vulnerable neighbors. And while jobseekers outnumber job openings 4-to-1, suggesting that the unemployed would rather collect benefits than work is misleading and insulting,” the letter adds.

    http://floridaindependent.com/65318/newt-gingrich-rick-santorum-catholics-to-stop-perpetuating-ugly-racial-stereotypes

  22. lovethemountains says:

    Minorities understand what the GOP’s about? Of course they do. Just like they understand what the Dems are about…..the “vote for us and we will give you stuff” party. Move on, nothing new to see here.

  23. ItalianSpring says:

    aislander- LOVE LOVE reading your posts. I sometimes feel guilty though because I should be helping as well but don’t have the time. Thanks for all your tireless efforts!

  24. ItalianSpring – keep doing what you are doing, you help immensely (just not in the direction you hope to).

  25. Pacman – if welfare was created to keep the black population down, how do you explain the fact that more whites are on welfare than blacks?

    And, perhaps more to the point, since Clinton pretty much removed welfare as a long-term situation for individuals in poverty, why do you still rail about it?

    Kinda like ct7’s obsession with hippies……

  26. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    … Southern Democrats bolted from their national party from 1948 to become a part of the GOP over their opposition to civil rights legislation.

    Pretty easy claim to make when it’s so tough to easily find data on state-by-state, historical congressional makeup – but nevertheless pure hogwash.

    Amazingly, all I could find is the link below. It shows the south did not become a solid Republican block until the 90’s… at least in the Senate.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z5hjF652izs

    Given the longer terms of the Senate compared to the House, it is possible the trend could have been slightly behind the House… just not by 40 years.

    Since the writer makes unsupported claims of historical knowledge, but offers no support or citations, I suspect they – along with the rest of his contribution – are the usual BS one would expect from a pitts apologist.

  27. redneckbuck says:

    Dependance on government $ is a form of slavery, regardless of race.

  28. ManuelMartini says:

    When will conservatives quit excuse making for the obvious point that Republicans have embraced those who still practice racism?

  29. vox – I’m thinking that a more detailed analysis would focus not on the US Senate or even the Congress – but on the State Legislatures and Governorships.

  30. SandHills says:

    A whole lot of divisive history being discussed, but nothing said about the final statement the letter writer made regarding the requirement for a valid ID to vote.

    Until someone can provide any rationale – other than statistics on voter fraud (and who would truly know how much fraud there really is without having any requirement to prove any voter is who they say they are?) – of what is wrong about having to prove identity/residence to vote, one has to assume they are willing to leave the door open for fraud, however little, to occur.

  31. ManuelMartini says:

    “but nothing said about the final statement the letter writer made regarding the requirement for a valid ID to vote.”

    OK. I’ll say something.

    The issue is “what is valid ID?” When you have a voter in her 80s that has never had a picture ID because she never needed one, and suddenly you force her to spend money to get said ID, you have created an incumbrance on this voter that they have never experienced in their adult life of 60 years of voting.

  32. Yet, a true blue racist was allowed to serve in the Senate from 1959 to 2010, and he was a democrat.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0FIBJt-c2o0 1:15 seconds

    “My mom said, Robert, you can’t go to heaven if you hate anybody”. He later became a grand Kleagle in the KKK.

    He filibustered against the 1964 Civil Rights Act

  33. Pacman33 says:

    beerBoy mumbles ~
    “how do you explain the fact that more whites are on welfare than blacks?”

    According to the last census, the population of whites is larger than the population of blacks. I double-checked just be sure.

    With that being pretty self-explanatory, are you sure you didn’t mean as a percentage? The US makes the access welfare the same for all races. We wouldn’t want to see a repeat of left’s Affirmative Action debacle.

    Leave it to the lefties. Only they could be so caught up in stroking their ego, fishing for votes and demonizing the right, they could come up with a law to combat racism that was horribly racist in itself. The left exposed themselves for the racists they are.

    Affirmative Action itself was racist at face value, suggesting minorities were inferior need a helping hand. A law advertised to promote diversity, in doing so, asserted there was not any diversity within the black community and other minority races. In fact denigrating minorities as being mere categories, sticky labels on a file folder. The left doesn’t understand that they are all individuals like anyone else, with unique gifts and talents that were being overlooked.

    Minorities who would have qualified for positions, if not for the left’s campaign of overt racism, were passed over with the hiring of another minority, for only the color of their skin, the only qualification that mattered under Affirmative Action. The incredible thing of it all, is most of the minority community never asked for the left’s ‘favor’.

    One example of many perverted schemes from the moral righteousness and sense of superiority of the oh so compassionate leftist elite.

  34. How an 80yo could have survived all those years with out an ID is amazing. Never cashing a check, never receiving government aid, never driving, never flying, not getting married, never opening a credit account, never having a bank account, never renting an apartment or purchasing a home, etc.

    If ACORN placed just a teeny tiny bit of effort toward helping these IDless people enter mainstream America by obtaining ID, everyone would be better off. Of course, that would be the opposite of ACORN’s m.o.

  35. http://www.ehow.com/about_5375741_states-require-photo-id-vote.html

    Interesting.

    Critics of these laws say they are designed to disenfranchise low-income voters who don’t have proper identification. Though many of these laws offer exemptions for people who can’t obtain identification, critics point out that the process of obtaining an ID is burdensome. Potential voters who lack ID might simply decide not to vote rather than deal with the hassle.

    Then apparently they don’t place much value on voting


    No ID?
    A voter who tries to cast a ballot without proper photo identification in Georgia will be given a provisional ballot. That voter then has two days to present proper identification at the county registrar’s office, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures, or the ballot will be tossed.

    Florida, Louisiana, Michigan and South Dakota allow voters to fill out an affidavit swearing to their identity. Hawaii asks voters with no identification to recite their date of birth and address of residence to verify information in the polling books. Indiana offers provisional ballots and gives voters until the following Monday to provide photo ID or fill out an affidavit swearing that the voter is indigent and unable to obtain photo ID.

  36. Pacman – really bizarre interpretation of yours about Affirmative Action (brought to us by that renowned “lefty” Richard M. Nixon)

    Affirmative Action was a recognition that the system is inherently racist but – true to form for you defenders of white privilege – you invert it and claim that the attempted solution to racism is racist on its face.

  37. menopaws says:

    I think we should all pitch in and buy some white sheets for Newt and company to wear at the convention……….Honesty, Newt, is always the best policy—-you pitch to this crowd……Let’s make sure the can identify you in a crowd!!!! Maybe you need to take a class in cross burning?

  38. Of course….I’m sure Pacman sees absolutely nothing inherently racist in the claim made by so many rightists that Blacks, as a voting bloc, are inherently stupid by consistently voting for the Dems, who as any red-blooded white man knows, is a racist party.

  39. ManuelMartini says:

    Provisional ballots?

    Define that as “won’t get counted if a GOP Secretary of State is in office”

    “How an 80yo could have survived all those years with out an ID is amazing.”

    When people survive without “big government”, conservatives don’t believe it. It’s what they claim they want, but when someone does it, they refuse to accept it.

    Why, in these days of “smaller government”, why are we creating bigger government agencies to manage challenges that have a history of being minimal? Voting machines are easily more fraudulent.

    ACORN? ACORN, until run out of business, was responsible for vetting themselves

  40. ManuelMartini says:

    Robert Byrd denounced the KKK in the 1950s and the Republicans keep spinning that story out over and over and over and over and over

  41. Pacman33 says:

    sandhills murmurs ~
    “A whole lot of divisive history being discussed, but nothing said about the final statement the letter writer made regarding the requirement for a valid ID to vote.”

    Here’s something.

    It is nothing but a despicable attempt of Democrats to provide cover for their desire of non-citizen vote tallies with the facade of their worn and well used crutch of Racist Labeling, and nothing more.

    To prove they are completely void of any principles, the same leftists then immediately turn around and have the nerve to accuse another on the right of using “Race Baiting Code Words”. A “Code” so clandestine a hapless twit like Sheila Jackson Lee can decipher it. I assume she would then decode the Dems covert ploy for non-citizen votes as “Race Trapping”?

    Shameless.

  42. I can’t help but laugh whenever I read a comment that starts out with:

    beerBoy mumbles ~

    When you read something like that, “beerBoy mumbles ~”, you can probably skip over that entire comment altogether. After all, how does one actually “mumble” with typewritten words?

    Iz almos impsbel innt it?

    But, I went ahead and read it anyway, and came upon this gem:

    “According to the last census, the population of whites is larger than the population of blacks. I double-checked just be sure.”

    Really! Someone had to actually “double-check” that to make sure. It’s been fairly common knowledge to almost everyone else in this country since the days of The Founders. Without looking anything up at all, if memory serves me correctly, the population of African-Americans is about 13% of the entire U.S. population. (Go ahead and correct me if I’m wrong on that.) Obviously there are more whites than blacks in America if blacks make up only 13% (or around that number) of the entire population of the U.S. Duh!

    So, if that is the case, if 13% is about the right number, or even close, why should the Republicans even care what the African-American minority voting populace thinks or how they vote. The Republicans can just write-them-off, like they have in years past, can’t they?

    Maybe not, because you know what? I think that in the political population statistics the Republicans are finally realizing that they are becoming a minority as well. Oh, as a group they have more money, but they have fewer votes. So, they are scrambling to find any votes they can, even votes they completely disregarded in the past, like African-Americans.

    And, if they can’t get African-Americans to join them and vote for their candidates, then maybe they, the Republicans that is, can find ways to keep those same people from being able to vote for the other guys. Hence, new voter registration laws that will prevent many African-Americans and other minorities from being able to vote at all.

    Pretty simple strategy really. Pretty obvious one too.

  43. aislander says:

    So…beerBoy’s (I think) post on another thread was both a “joke” AND tedious. Thanks for pointing that out!

  44. aislander says:

    …although that is a rather harsh way to treat your coreligionist.

  45. aislander says:

    beerBoy writes: “Of course….I’m sure Pacman sees absolutely nothing inherently racist in the claim made by so many rightists that Blacks, as a voting bloc, are inherently stupid by consistently voting for the Dems, who as any red-blooded white man knows, is a racist party.”

    So…is there anything “inherently racist” in the implied claim that blacks are too stupid to acquire picture IDs?

  46. No idea what the heck you are referring to aislander, and why you are bringing beerBoy into this at all. He and I disagree almost as much as we agree on various issues, and I have no idea what his religion is, or how that even applies to this topic.

    Your “old chestnut” is the only one I was commenting on aislander. And, it was, in my opinion, tedious. As you wrote it, this is the only old chestnut in question:

    “The writer’s assertion that the behavior of the Republican party since 1948 has given reason for blacks to flee to the Dems is contradicted by the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.”

    I still agree with ehill, it is an “old chestnut” of which the “Dictionary definition: “an old chestnut is a joke or story that has become tedious because of its age and constant repetition.” I really have no idea what other “old chestnut” either ehill or you were referring to, which you seem to have accused beerBoy of posting.

    As far as your “old chestnut” goes, did you mean that opening paragraph as well as the remainder of your first post as a joke? Because if you did, it wasn’t very funny in itself, just kind of funny that you seem to keep repeating the same old tedious stuff over and over again from thread to thread. You could use some new material. Recycling works for glass, paper and plastic. Not so much for blog comments.

    Do you have any new original thoughts to add to the discussion of this topic?

    (BTW: Seems like at least three people are living in your head rent-free these days.)

  47. aislander says:

    Try to keep up, mucky. ehill’s “old chestnut” reference was regarding a beerBoy post in another thread.

    Perhaps if you got your nose out of your dictionary, you’d have an easier time deciphering what people are talking about…

    Over and OUT!

  48. BlaineCGarver says:

    *rollingeyes* Y’all are worse than a bunch of old angry Black women….( a little race baiting lingo, there <{:-}~ )

  49. PumainTacoma says:

    “resistance on the part of most minority groups to trust a party whose race- baiting presidential nominees and supporters continue to avow.”

    You must be referring to Rev. Jerimiah Wright

  50. ehill, I will let you explain to aislander how your comment was about: aislander posting his “old chestnut,” and how by doing that aislander was being a hypocrite in posting that “old chestnut,” after aislander had criticized another person (who aislander claims was beerBoy in this case) of posting an “old chestnut” on another thread. That seems pretty easy to understand to me. But, if I am wring about that ehill, please correct me, okay?

    Here’s what you originally wrote, way upthread, ehill…

    “ROFL – that’s hysterical coming from the same person who recently accused another poster of brining up “old chestnuts.” thanks for such a great laugh!”

    .

    But, getting back to PITTS,

    I still don’t see what the voter ID fraud issue has to do with Washington state, since we have been forced to accept a vote-by-mail-only system.

    When you register to vote in Washington state now do you need to present one or more picture ID’s? I don’t know the answer to that, does anyone else?

    I can’t actually remember when I registered to vote, it was many many years ago. I just know the Auditor sends me a new voter card and ballots from time to time, and as long as I keep voting I don’t need to re-register.

    Has anyone had recent experience here in Washington state in registering to vote? What was needed?

  51. ehill,

    I meant to write “wrong” instead of “wring”

    and I know you meant to write “bringing” instead of “brining”

    Just wanted to note those typos so as not to confuse other readers.

  52. In his dictionary?

  53. ManuelMartini says:

    I used the term “old chestnut” about a week ago. Of course, in aislander’s alledged mind, I’m ehill or kardy or someone other than me.

  54. ManuelMartini says:

    “So…is there anything “inherently racist” in the implied claim that blacks are too stupid to acquire picture IDs?”

    Other than the above statement, I haven’t seen anyone say “blacks are too stupid”.

    The argument has been about the financial implications of a tax for voting.

    I suppose you can create a strawman, if you need….

  55. And, not just minorities understand the current Republican Party. The need for government intervention in housing, food stamps, Medicaid, public assistance is caused in part because inadequate wages are paid by ‘job creators.’ After all, the purpose of the ‘job creators’ is to maximize their profits for themselves or their shareholders.

    The true cost of those cheap imported goods and Happy Meals should include the cost of subsidized wages, i.e., the increased taxes to furnish the necessities of life by the government.

  56. aislander says:

    ehill writes: “that’s hysterical coming from the same person who recently accused another poster of brining up “old chestnuts.”

    So…ehill was referring to you, ManuelMartini? Not that I agree with its point…

  57. aislander says:

    I notice that ehill is staying out of this, but if he does support the idiocy of his coreligionists, I suppose I shall be forced to find the original beerBoy comment and my reply in which I referred to the “old chestnut,” but that is a hell of a lot of trouble, so why not drop this now?

  58. aislander says:

    ManuelMartini writes: “Other than the above statement, I haven’t seen anyone say ‘blacks are too stupid.'”

    Which is why the word “implied” is placed before those words. But what else can you infer from the assertion that minorities are particularly adversely affected by the photo ID requirement? Sounds to me as though the other side is saying they are too stupid to earn enough money to afford a free ID; too stupid to go through the steps to acquire the free ID; or too stupid to know there IS a free ID.

    Racist.

  59. 3:25 PM: “ehill writes: “that’s hysterical coming from the same person who recently accused another poster of brining up “old chestnuts.” So…ehill was referring to you, ManuelMartini? Not that I agree with its point…”

    Now it looks like aislander may have four people living in his head — rent-free.

    And aislander has created yet a new word he can use and his new “old chestnut.” And that new word is “coreligionists!”

    10:51 AM “…although that is a rather harsh way to treat your coreligionist.”

    3:28 PM  “I notice that ehill is staying out of this, but if he does support the idiocy of his coreligionists,”

    But aislander then writes,

    “I suppose I shall be forced to find the original beerBoy comment and my reply in which I referred to the “old chestnut,” but that is a hell of a lot of trouble, so why not drop this now?”

    Okay aislander, let’s “drop this now”! You can stop it right here. Just do NOT respond to this message then it’s dropped, right?

    And then we can all share thoughts and ideas as regard the PITT Perception of Minorities toward the GOP!

  60. aislander says:

    co·re·li·gion·ist
       [koh-ri-lij-uh-nist] Show IPA
    noun
    an adherent of the same religion as another.

    Origin:
    1835–45; co- + religionist

    …and there is no doubt liberalism IS a secular religion.

    Thanks for giving me the opportunity to make that point!

  61. aislander says:

    Jan 21 at 5:00 pm

    “beerBoy writes: ‘Even Ben Franklin realized that some services need to be socialized (specifically in the case of Franklin – the fire department)…’

    You’re dragging out THAT old chestnut!?! Nobody on our side is suggesting that such services are socialistic. Transfer payments from one citizen to another are socialistic.”

  62. aislander says:

    That’s okay: I LIKE digressions; especially if they allow me to make the points I want to make more than once!

  63. aislander, I just knew you couldn’t let it go. You’d rather rail over some silly nonsense than discuss the topic. You cry to others, “so why not drop this now?” But you just can’t man-up and do it yourself. Can you?

    Are you done now?

    Have you anything to comment on that actually relates to the original topic of this thread now? PITT: Minorities … GOP’s about?

  64. aislander says:

    You’ll be happy to note that I posted such a comment immediately before your comment that was intended–I guess–to “teach me a lesson.”

    You don’t really grasp the concept of someone’s living in one’s head rent-free, since that requires one to stalk that other person or to refer to him constantly even when there is no immediate reason to do so.

    Kind of like the voices in your head.

    But, I digress…

  65. Game, set, match to aislander. LMAO ;)

  66. took14theteam says:

    Has the “moniker Impostor” struck again?

    The time away without power makes me realize I need to stop reading this blog and stop wasting my time.

  67. aislander says:

    Ah, beerBoy…I think sozo still likes you. But, she’s very inclusive…

  68. aislander says:

    Hang in there, took1. Your contributions are invaluable…

  69. The truly sad thing is beerboy thought that was a really clever response.

    :) LOL

  70. with speters around I keep feeling a sense of deja vu all over again.

  71. You mean deja Larry don’t you?

  72. aislander says:

    And, look, beerBoy! It’s not just sozo! Apparently the topic god is smiling on you, too…

  73. aislander says:

    …but that last one seemed a digression, I gotta say.

  74. aislander says:

    I must apologize to sozo for dragging her into this. She may have changed her mind, anyway…

*
We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0