🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <khjp22h9edrdhn6uo0unmu9ogukuls78j5@4ax.com>,
 / control / <control @remote.nul> wrote:

> On Thu, 30 Mar 2006 12:37:41 -0600, SteveR <tex_driver@comcast.net>
> wrote:
> 
> >In article <4dum22tvtf8639r0pfp0o97kfkusp2esdm@4ax.com>,
> > / control / <control @remote.nul> wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, 29 Mar 2006 10:55:12 -0600, SteveR <tex_driver@comcast.net>
> >> wrote:
> >> 
> >> >In article 
> >> ><jackzwick-AF2594.16432222032006@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com>,
> >> > Jack Zwick <jackzwick@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> In article <ydWdnbkD1s5lXLzZRVn-uA@forethought.net>,
> >> >>  Anonymous <anon@anonymous.com> wrote:
> >> >> 
> >> >> > "arminius" <richard norton@cybertrails.com>  wrote :
> >> >> > 
> >> >> > > Republicans must distance themselves from this worthless and
> >> >> > > failed President.
> >> >> > > 
> >> >> > 
> >> >> > Who Clinton?
> >> >> > 
> >> >> > Yeah we know he failed but it's over now.
> >> >> 
> >> >> Better get ready. January 20, 2009
> >> >> 
> >> >> President Hillary Clinton
> >> >
> >> >From what I see, the repub's are more eager to see her run for pres than 
> >> >most dem's. I wonder why?
> >> 
> >> That way they can blame the blacks for losing the presidency.
> >
> >I think it has more to do with her overall approval rating than it does 
> >with any racial issue.
> >
> >Her supporters are quite generous, though. Much more generous than they 
> >are to the Democrat party as a whole - they seem to have a fund-raising 
> >problem under Dean.
> >
> >So, she might get the nomination by default, 'cause she's the only one 
> >that can afford to run.
> >
> > 
> >> Bush's wife Uncle Condi will get the shit beat out of her in an
> >> election.
> >
> >If the R's decide to put her on the ticket, it would be as VP, not the 
> >top slot, in order to groom her to be the first woman president. She 
> >consistently polls in the top three among polled Repub voters, so 
> >perhaps the inherent racialism of the left ("Uncle Condi") would rally 
> >the liberal base to actually vote.
> >
> >> Like they say, I can't tell you who the first Black
> >> president will be, but I can tell you who the next president will be
> >> the day after.
> >
> >So, you're saying that the US is inherently too racist a society to 
> >tolerate a black president. I think perhaps you're projecting.
> >
> >A black Democrat would be less likely to be assissinated than a black 
> >Republican, and should the latter suffer that fate, it would likely be 
> >at the hands of a Democrat, most likely black. There's a lot of inherent 
> >anger in both those groups.
> >
> >
> >I know that assassination is a popular theme nowadays on the left, which 
> >is not unusual if you look at those who have assassinated or attempted 
> >to do so in the past - they share a certain mental instability, racism 
> >and/or leftism.
> >
> >And if you read Kos, Atrios, Democrat Underground et. al., you'll get a 
> >certain sense of desperation, anger, self-pity, rage, self-doubt and 
> >helplessness, all wrapped up in conspiracy theories galore, and the 
> >aforementioned tendency to entertain fantasies of assassination.
> 
> Better tell that Great Republican Xtian Pat Robertson to lay off all
> that naughty kind of talk because it makes the administration nervous.

Who wrote this:

"Assassination may be Clinton's best option, If we can kill Saddam, we 
should."

> Americans deserve to be governed by whatever they are foolish enough
> to be herded into electing.  After all, they don't teach the British
> version of the Revolution in the US public schools.

Knowing quite a few Brits and having lived in the UK, and now working 
for a company ownned by a UK conglomerate, I can assure you that our 
relative knowledge of history concerning the Revolution, and the 
teaching thereof, is quite consistent with ours.

 
> Don't be crushed just because the Bush Administration is impotent and
> produced no heir.  There will never be a Black president; the whole
> debate is purely academic.

Absolutist statements from someone with such a lopsided, ignorant and at 
times bizarre knowledge of geopolitics and history are throw-aways. If 
they have any value, it is to illustrate that exactly the opposite they 
predict will come about.


> Face it, with great Black "leaders" like
> Jackson, Farrakhan and Sharpton to skew the agenda, The West Wing
> scenario is much more likely: a Hispanic President.  Since Hispanics
> are streaming across the borders unchecked AND out breeding Whites and
> the slave boats have long since stopped pulling up to the East Coast,

The "black leaders" you mention are falling out of favor as the black 
middle class grows, and Bush actually increased black republican votes.

If the republicans can get another 3-4% of the black vote consistently, 
the democrat party is toast. This is why Hikllary wants ex-felon voting 
rights, and democrats are so resistant to any sort of voter ID, etc.

As for a Hispanic president, why not? I would have no problem with that, 
as long as he meets my standards as a moderate conservative. Hell, I 
even voted for Clinton, America's "first black president".

> Hispanics will always outnumber Blacks --- and they organize.  Their
> mantra is "opportunity" as opposed to the Black mantra of
> "entitlement."

Thats a rather sweeping generalization. Having lived in three areas 
heavily affected by illegal immigration, I've found that (sweeping 
generalization ahead) those in California are more entitlement-oriented 
than those in Texas or Florida.

And, in Florida, Mexicans are disliked by the Cubans -  a group that was 
tremendously conservative, educated and ambitious (The boatlift altered 
that demographic quality, though)


> This flag waving demonstration is just the tip of the
> iceberg.  I'll go so far as to say we will have a Hispanic president
> followed by an Asian President before we ever have a Black president.

Yu maight be right, but there is no Hispanic on the radar at present. 
R's have Rice, the D's have Barak, but there's no high-level Hispanic in 
the chute at present.

And I forgot J.C. Watts, another viable black candidate, should he 
choose to re-enter politics.
 
> As far as your conspiracy scenarios, a White President who has a VP in
> any other group won't sleep well for the entire four years because
> there are too many Farrakhans itchy.

Not part of the equation.

Look at Bush's greatest enemies, they make Farakhan look like a hippy 
peacenik, and he's pretty well known as an early-to-bed, no-sleep-lost 
kind of guy.