None of these issues are about Race, but about behavior and actions of individuals. However, discussion about this behavior can’t be discussed without the race card pooping all over everything. I don’t know how to get past it cleanly, but I do have some ideas.

SAIGA, I just don’t know what to think about what you write.
….keep comin’ back.

shooter on November 6, 2007 at 8:25 PM

The point is that Ronald Reagan wanted a colorblind society as do I. In today’s PC world, you can’t call an idiot an idiot if race comes into play. It’s like calling a baseball game where you can’t call strikes on some players because of race, but you are free to call what you want on others. Once race is injected into any debate about anything, the wheels come off and the discussion gets polarized between the good souls and the evil souls. I find it counter productive when trying to address problems honestly.

Race relations are a very complicated problem that runs deep into American history and culture. We need to figure out a way to move past all the race babble and elevate the dialog. Assimilation was a key point of the immigration debate. The US is not a melting pot but a tossed salad. How do we deal with getting everyone back on the same page when looking out for what’s best for America with such a disjointed public? We must get Race relations out in the sunshine and hammer out the injustice and speak truth to power.

It’s fallacious reasoning at best even if it were true, but it also bears the double disadvantage of being false. The very first poster who duplicated the TANG memos on Word and demonstrated that they matched perfectly factually debunked them. There was quite a detailed public factual debunking, which you apparently missed, which decisively demonstrated that the technology used to produce the fake memos was an anachronism in the TANG.

I’m going to Cutesy Land!

What’s it like being married to a rapist?
Why did you kill Kathleen Wiley’s husband and Vince Foster?
When will you lose weight?

Food for thought…

NewsBusters.org – Exposing Liberal Media Bias

Is it conceivable that Bill Clinton doesn’t want Hillary to win? Chris Matthews floated the possibility on this afternoon’s "Hardball."
View video here.
At the top of the show, Matthews played…

shooter on November 6, 2007 at 8:25 PM

Friend of Bills are ya? Oh ha the other Bill.

If your an ideot your an ideot no matter what color you are.
saiga on November 6, 2007 at 3:25 PM

SAIGA, I just don’t know what to think about what you write.
….keep comin’ back.

Clinton: Yes or no questions are “cutesy”.

Clinton: Well, that depends on what your definition of is is…

Yes or No answers are bad? But…But….but… I thought that was all they wanted from Mukasey on waterboarding?

JamesLee on November 6, 2007 at 1:08 PM

It depends on what the meaning of ‘yes’ or ‘no’ is.

This can be complex and never answered by ‘yes’ or ‘no’ unless we can discern what type of ‘yes’ or ‘no’ they are using

However we can determine what ‘yes’ or ‘no’ they mean with waterboarding.

A waterboarding ‘yes’ is a true ‘YES” and a waterboarding ‘NO’ is a true ‘no’. Any other ‘yes’ or ‘no’ could be false.

Plus waterboarding the candidates would be both fun, and fair, at least to the voters who have been toyed with for years by these slimeballs

Gawd almighty.

I’ll point out one more time that the Swifties were never factually debunked. They were smeared and mischaracterized, lied about and abused, but never debunked.

What Bryan wrote doesn’t seem like a “lame defense” of the Swifties. Kerry made himself out to be a war hero, and the Swifties came out with their side of the story. Kerry never debunked it – the burden was on him, not the Swifties. He was the one that put his military record out there in the first place – he was the one running for office.

As for Rather, he was supposed to be a credible and very well respected journalist, who reported on something that was not properly fact-checked, and he got called on it. Burden was on him because he was the journalist. He put it out there.

My point is that it appears you got it backwards, Splashman. Kerry is the one with the “lame Ratheresque defense”, not the Swifties.
Rick on November 6, 2007 at 3:53 PM

Waffles is a different subject, and I DID NOT CHALLENGE THE SWIFTIES, I CHALLENGED BRYAN’S LAME DEFENSE OF THE SWIFTIES! One more time, here’s what Bryan wrote:

I’ll point out one more time that the Swifties were never factually debunked. They were smeared and mischaracterized, lied about and abused, but never debunked.

Replace “Swifties” with “TANG memos”, and you’ve got a quote from Rather. Care to respond to that?

The Swifties can be defended adequately without resorting to this garbage. Sounds like the Kossacks.

“Do you favor the United States Army abolishing the affirmative-action program that produced Colin Powell? Yes or no?” – Bill Clinton to Abigail Thernstrom

And then he interrupted her when she tried for an answer more complicated than “yes” or “no” to bully her back to answering it his way…

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_n1_v50/ai_20221456

thanks to the Corner for the link.

“It’s fine for Hillary and all the other Democrats to discuss Governor Spitzer’s plan. But not in 30 seconds — yes, no, raise your hand,” he said.

Odd how when he was President he thought it was completely acceptable to treat someone else like that. And I’m going to have to say “Abigail” isn’t likely to be a guy… so treating a woman like that was acceptable too.

I wonder what has changed?

And no, I’m not a Waffles supporter.

Uh, you may want to go here before continuing down this road.
Rick on November 6, 2007 at 3:13 PM

What’s your point? All I did was call attention to Bryan’s lame Ratheresque defense; I didn’t defend the Swifties. And if your opinion on the subject has changed because Waffles opened his mouth, I’m not going to bother trying to persuade you. I’ll wait for more reputable analysis, if and when Kerry actually releases anything.

WASHINGTON — A top immigration official has apologized after awarding “most original costume” to a Homeland Security Department employee who dressed in prison stripes, dreadlocks and dark makeup for a Halloween gathering at the agency.

Im sick of the race card getting pushed into almost everything from healthcare to taxes to education. We can’t deal with these problems in straight jackets.

Don’t blame me for the race card, I’m just commenting on how it has expanded it’s realm here lately. I want a color blind society like Ronald Reagan wanted. If your an ideot your an ideot no matter what color you are.

At DickMorris.com, not exactly a deep analysis, but he channels his inner Maureen Dowd to slam her. Hillary Clinton, quintessential Alpha Female, is whining about the boys who share the presidential debate stage with her. She says that they’re picking…

Dan Rather called. He wants his lame defense back.

Seriously, Bryan — I’m on the Swifties’ side, but if you have to stoop that low to defend them, you’d be better off avoiding the topic.

Splashman on November 6, 2007 at 2:45 PM

Uh, you may want to go here before continuing down this road.

Do you write for the Clintons? Or someone in the amnesty crowd?

shooter on November 6, 2007 at 2:54 PM

I write for Ted Nugent,