Pennsylvania governor: My state may be too racist to elect Obama
posted at 3:35 pm on February 12, 2008 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | regular view
Reminiscent of Billy Shaheen bringing up Obama’s drug use before New Hampshire and then claiming he had to do it because the evil GOP would assuredly do it during the general. Rendell’s variation: Democrats must act now to neutralize racists in the general — by voting white in the primary. The last gasp of Hillary’s supposed electability advantage:
“You’ve got conservative whites here, and I think there are some whites who are probably not ready to vote for an African-American candidate,” he said bluntly. Our eyes only met briefly, perhaps because the governor wanted to spare the only black guy in the room from feeling self-conscious for backing an obvious loser. “I believe, looking at the returns in my election, that had Lynn Swann [2006 Republican gubernatorial candidate] been the identical candidate that he was –well-spoken [note: Mr. Rendell did not call the brother "articulate"], charismatic, good-looking — but white instead of black, instead of winning by 22 points, I would have won by 17 or so.”
I know I have a habit of sometimes zoning out in these meetings, but it sounded to me like Mr. Rendell had unilaterally declared Pennsylvania to be Alabama circa 1963. Was he suggesting that Pennsylvanians are uniquely racist in ways that folks in the states Mr. Obama has won so far aren’t? By the way, Mr. Obama won Alabama on Super Tuesday, thank you very much!
Estrich, another Hillary supporter (I assume), made the same point yesterday so I’d say we have ourselves a full-blown meme. If the “Bradley effect” is going to torpedo him in the general, how come it hasn’t torpedoed him yet in the primary? Or is this just laying the groundwork for later, in case McCain beats him in the battlegrounds, to chalk the whole thing up to racism and delegitimize the Republican victor that way?
Update: Not to pile on our last best hope, but take five minutes to read the new Atlantic piece about Hillary’s disastrous crony ex-campaign manager and how she managed to blow through stacks of money to no great end. Here’s what the Glacier means when she talks about “experience”:
Rather than punish Solis Doyle or raise questions about her fitness to lead, Clinton chose her to manage the presidential campaign for reasons that should now be obvious: above all, Clinton prizes loyalty and discipline, and Solis Doyle demonstrated both traits, if little else. This suggests to me that for all the emphasis Clinton has placed on executive leadership in this campaign, her own approach is a lot closer to the current president’s than her supporters might like to admit.
Update: Ace makes a good point. To the extent that race explains why Obama’s exit polls don’t match his ballot totals, it doesn’t necessarily follow that he’s losing votes because of it. It may simply be that he’s gaining exit poll points. That is to say, people may prefer Hillary on the merits when they go in the booth but when approached by an exit pollster they may want to show their progressive bona fides by claiming they voted for the minority candidate.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
Maybe they are just too smart and dont like his BS.
TroubledMonkey on February 12, 2008 at 3:38 PM
How about we need to be blind about the color of the candidate and keep our ears open about what they are actually saying (or not saying). I’m pretty sure that is what MLK was shooting for ya maroons.
bbz123 on February 12, 2008 at 3:39 PM
And to think that some people were naive enough to believe that his color wasn’t an issue.
Ugly business.
LimeyGeek on February 12, 2008 at 3:39 PM
Well, one important factor is the youth vote. They vote in the primary, but they’re far from dependable in the general. Obama takes a majority of that vote.
amerpundit on February 12, 2008 at 3:41 PM
Hey at least Barack isn’t a Mormon seeking evangelical votes.
He’d really be screwed.
Mike Honcho on February 12, 2008 at 3:42 PM
McCain wins against Obama – we’re raaaaacist. McCain wins against Hillary -we’re sexxxxxxist.
We can’t win no matter what.
pullingmyhairout on February 12, 2008 at 3:42 PM
Not that I agree but I guess if some can vote for him, simply because he’s black, then I suppose some can not vote for him, simply because he’s black.
kcd on February 12, 2008 at 3:43 PM
Maybe they just don’t like Oprama.
bloggless on February 12, 2008 at 3:43 PM
For the record, I’m not a racist, I just tell it like it is, and I refer back to something I said on another thread where I pointed out that John McCain ought not to pick a female or minority as a running mate, one because it will make him look like Johnny-come-lately, but also because humans are creatures of habit, and John McCain ought to give Americans the chance to vote for the two white males. And I maintain that there’s some truth to that. Then again, even in his home state, John Kennedy had to overcome people prejudiced against voting for a “mick.” So there’s no telling where racial lines are drawn, and McCain will be the first person running with a name that has a decidedly ethnic tone (unless he runs against Obama, of course.)
Spc Steve on February 12, 2008 at 3:44 PM
I’m going to vote for
ObamaHillary to prove I’m not aracistsexist.subbottomfeeder on February 12, 2008 at 3:44 PM
1963:
-Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
2008:
“Let’s vote for Obama because he’s black!”
-Obama supporters
amerpundit on February 12, 2008 at 3:44 PM
We are talking about dimocrats here.
kcd on February 12, 2008 at 3:45 PM
I live in PA.
It’s utterly amazing that he’s basically saying if you don’t vote for Obama, you’re racist. Is it not possible to not vote for him because he’s not a good candidate? That he has absolutely no accomplishments to hang his hat on?
Darksean on February 12, 2008 at 3:45 PM
Really? The youth that get out to vote in the primary would stay out in the general?
I’m youngish. Until this year I’d never considered voting in a primary. This year, it doesn’t seem to matter anymore since everyone I would have voted for is already out. However, I voted in the general as soon as I was eligible to do so. I always assumed my experience was more the norm.
Esthier on February 12, 2008 at 3:45 PM
Because Hillary has run a really, really bad campaign so far. As I have mentioned in other threads, there is a “Bradley effect” with Obama and we are seeing it, but it only accounts for about 10% or so (give or take).
bnelson44 on February 12, 2008 at 3:46 PM
Susan Estrich keeps bringing up the “Bradley factor”. She is referring to Bradley’s first run for mayor of LA. That was around 1969 and has little relevance today. If LA voters were so reluctant to vote for an African-American candidate for mayor, how does Estrich explain why Bradley won his second try for mayor or why he was reelected repeatedly. It was not as if voters of LA suddenly had a pang of conscience.
Lynn Swann was a great split end but not a very good candidate. He was far too conservative for eastern Pa. and this is what torpedoed him.
If Obama loses, it will because of his ultra liberal views, which his media sycophants won’t mention. McCain can point out that Obama is against the death penalty, favors drivers licenses for illegal aliens, favors massive tax increases and is the most liberal member of the Senate. The press will cry racism at any criticism of Obama by a Republican but it might be effective.
I can ilustrate how silly Rendell is by pointing out that had Colin Powell run for president in 2000, he would have trounced Bush in the Republican primary and then obliterated Gore in the general election.
Larraby on February 12, 2008 at 3:47 PM
To be brutally honest, his race is an issue for me. Not because I am racist, but because I have no faith in his integrity. Having him in the OO would, I strongly suspect, be an irresistable crack in the door; every race-baiting, grievance-mongering freak out there would be clamouring for presidential attention. Attention I suspect they would get, via plentiful executive orders.
I’m not one to celebrate “Firsts”, but those who do must surely want “First Black President” to not be such a fustercluck that he is simultaneously the “Last Black President”?
LimeyGeek on February 12, 2008 at 3:50 PM
You’re also on a political blog. You obviously have a deep interest in the future of your nation and want to help guide it. If there’s a new Halo game, many youth will skip the voting to say they got it on the first day. Just like the people on here have a better understanding of the stances of candidates and don’t vote simply because someone’s a woman or black.
IIRC, the youth turned out in the 2004 primaries, only for blogs to post “The Youth let down again” in November.
amerpundit on February 12, 2008 at 3:50 PM
That is true if Obama isn’t the nominee. I don’t think Hillary can depend on the youth vote. However, if Obama is the nominee, he could take young moderate Republicans to him. It all depends on what McCain does.
Again, Obama is stronger of an oponent than Hillary, but he is a one trick poney. So far, he has only proven that he can give brilliant speeches when a teleprompter is present. He hasn’t shown any achievements or executive ability. McCain can play him like a fiddle, if he so chooses.
bnelson44 on February 12, 2008 at 3:50 PM
Larraby on February 12, 2008 at 3:47 PM
McCain most certainly should do that. Then when they ask McCain about Obama’s blackness, he can say “Obama’s black?!!
kcd on February 12, 2008 at 3:51 PM
If Obama wins the election, it’s because America has temporarily overcome its inherent racism [it won't have been completely overcome, lest the race pimps lose their jobs - and affirmative action and skin color become non-issues].
If Obama doesn’t win the election, it’s because America hasn’t overcome its inherent racism.
Either way, America is inherently racist.
OhEssYouCowboys on February 12, 2008 at 3:51 PM
The real racism is to acknowledge his pigment, while not addressing the fact he was not raised in an African-American environment.
geckomon on February 12, 2008 at 3:53 PM
I like this New Republic peice on CBS.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/02/12/opinion/main3820894.shtml
Obama’s Foreign Policy Too Homeopathic ?
William Amos on February 12, 2008 at 3:54 PM
The dims are masters at playing the race card. Their only reason for being elected to any office is the 90% black vote that is played every election. This time it is played to destroy the Clintons. Who cares? The dumbing of America advanced by the dimocratic controlled NEA is starting to bear fruits. If you don’t vote for Obama, you’re a racist. What a pack of bull.
volsense on February 12, 2008 at 3:56 PM
I have listened to Obama several times (to see what all the hype is about) but I can’t for the life of me, figure out what he has in mind to bring about this “change”. All I hear is platitudes. Makes me wonder if he goes home each night to Michelle and asks, “Did I sound more like MLK tonight dear”? “I’ve got some really good one-liners I’ll use tomorrow”.
kcd on February 12, 2008 at 3:56 PM
Maybe I’m missing it but I don’t really find the governor’s comments to be untrue.
What’s so objectionable and unbelievable about that statement? To win by 17 instead of 22 only requires 2.5% to move from one candidate to another. Is it really hard to believe that 2.5% of the voting population of PA couldn’t stomach voting for a black candidate?
12thman on February 12, 2008 at 3:57 PM
This is such a great insult to Swann I have to give Rendell credit, even though he’s a schmuck.
Attila (Pillage Idiot) on February 12, 2008 at 3:58 PM
AMERICA IS RACIST! That’s the lib/demo/euro rally cry. Should Obama become President (all but assured at this point), what would that do for their creed?
I find it curious that the MSM has not pointed out the anomalies of California, New York, and Massachusetts? How is it that the most liberal, ie. least racist states didn’t vote for the black guy? BECAUSE LIBERALS ARE RACISTS!
So this is the “Pig Latin” liberal code message to the masses. We can’t elect this black guy, because it will kill the creed. It may also do the one thing (we promise) do not want – improve our image in the world. Can’t have that.
What to do? Say anything. That always works.
Agrippa2k on February 12, 2008 at 3:59 PM
All my folks are from up there, and let me tell you, Rendell would have won by a LOT less than even 17. Racism is more alive and well in non-urban PA then down here in the South.
RW Wacko on February 12, 2008 at 4:00 PM
That’s why I like Hill’s chances up there. Rural white voters and lots of old folks.
RW Wacko on February 12, 2008 at 4:00 PM
You mean you don’t cry when you hear Obamassiah speak?
amerpundit on February 12, 2008 at 4:01 PM
I don’t think so, as long as we have some candidates that think in terms of their color first, America second.
Is a person an natural advocate for their race and religion first? As well as religions they have participated in?
Have you researched the church Obama is a member of? They are intensely racist. Obama has not repudiated the church or their message.
dogsoldier on February 12, 2008 at 4:01 PM
Re: Women “falling for Obama” – they also fell for Hitler.
indythinker on February 12, 2008 at 4:01 PM
Good ol’ fast eddy. The reason Lynn Swann didn’t win was because all the democrats in Philly (and the majority in Pittsburgh) would never vote for anyone with an R beside their name.
Rendell never fails to dissapoint me, and by dissapoint I mean constantly reaffirm my belief that he is a train wreck as a governor (however, your average PA resident has no idea of this since the PA media gives him a free pass on everything). I am so glad to be be able to say I have never pulled the lever for that man.
drmanyee on February 12, 2008 at 4:02 PM
Are you saying we should vote based on the content of one’s character and not the color of his skin? Someone should give a speech about that!!
ihasurnominashun on February 12, 2008 at 4:03 PM
Good point. I see what you mean. If were going to have a “First Black President”, let it be a good “First Black President”.
kcd on February 12, 2008 at 4:03 PM
Another thing. The Clinton “race baiting strategy” after Obama’s North Carolina win worked. Some thought it was intended to rally racists in the south. That’s not it.
The intention was to confuse white liberals into second guessing their vote. “Am I voting for the black guy, because he is black?”
What a bunch of clowns.
Agrippa2k on February 12, 2008 at 4:03 PM
I’m sure they also fell for Jesus too. Let’s cut the Hitler crap.
LimeyGeek on February 12, 2008 at 4:04 PM
To RW Wacko. Having lived in Pittsburgh, Philadelphia and State College I can tell you the place where racism is most alive and well is Philly. It is the most divided place I have ever lived in the US.
drmanyee on February 12, 2008 at 4:04 PM
Maybe even in Washington.
amerpundit on February 12, 2008 at 4:04 PM
Sure enough, Obama won the Alabama primary — without a very significant endorsement.
Bonus points for the Nostradamus-Rendell quote by the group’s leader.
Cuffy Meigs on February 12, 2008 at 4:05 PM
Yeah, I do but for a very different reason..
kcd on February 12, 2008 at 4:06 PM
Ditto ‘First Female President’ vis-a-vis Hillary
I don’t care about pigmentation or chromosomes. Just give me a candidate that doesn’t treat the constitution like a sheet of poo-paper.
I’m still waiting.
LimeyGeek on February 12, 2008 at 4:06 PM
lol, what qualifies as an African-American environment? If I wasn’t raised in one does that mean I am not black?
That would have been a great response the time I was walking home from class at PennState and some jerk yelled “go home n*****!”
“Hey I wasn’t raised in an African-American environment!”
12thman on February 12, 2008 at 4:07 PM
Those darned Amish.
/sarc off
Kowboy on February 12, 2008 at 4:08 PM
And I bet you listened to Prairie Home Companion instead of 50-cent ;)
LimeyGeek on February 12, 2008 at 4:08 PM
Boy we really needed that little boost, huh?
kcd on February 12, 2008 at 4:10 PM
Huh? He’s saying that Pennsylvanians are too racist to vote for Obama… so voters should prove him right by voting Hillary?
Somehow I don’t think that strategy is Rendell’s strong suit.
Hollowpoint on February 12, 2008 at 4:10 PM
LimeyGeek – Obama is an avowed enemy of freedom, and he intends to fight against freedom in the public arena for decades. A comparison to the youthful Hitler of the beer hall putsch days is appropriate.
If you want to carry Obama’s water, that is your call. I have other plans.
indythinker on February 12, 2008 at 4:11 PM
Voting for a candidate just because they are a certain race, gender, species, etc. is the ultimate in identity politics. It’s also intolerant bigotry. It’s fine to be a rabid Clinton supporter or Obamamaniac or part of the retirement home crowd supporting McCain but it should be for their nearly identical stands on the issues and not because of demographics.
I bring this up for two reasons. First, Romney was driven out of the race, in part, by intolerant bigots who couldn’t get beyond his faith (from the far right because of his LDS affiliation and from the intolerant elitists on the GOP left who hate any Christian tinge to the candidates. Huckabee capitalized on his Baptist roots to sway the votes among a certain segment of voters. It would be a far more encouraging primary if the bigots of the GOP could have seen beyond faith in selecting candidates exclusively because of one issue.
Secondly, can you imagine the firestorm if a Republican had said what Rendell did? It may even be true but that doesn’t matter. Let’s see if the black community gives the Clinton machine its usual pass on such things this time around.
highhopes on February 12, 2008 at 4:11 PM
Never knew anyone who lived right in Philly, but is interesting to hear. Sounds like it is from both (or many) sides (the racial animosity)?
Father’s side is from Pottstown, 30 miles NW of Philly or so, rest little towns scattered farther NW, Shamokin, Elysburg, Daville, etc. I’ve heard the N word once inmy life in Georgia, where I grew up. Have heard it multiple times during maybe 3 months of visits up there. Maybe it’s just my family (very distant thank God) and their friends, who knows?
RW Wacko on February 12, 2008 at 4:11 PM
Apparently Rendell has spent to much time in hi governor’s mansion in seclusion. Visited family in the Philadelphia suburbs over the weekend and I couldn’t find any church, and county rep, any business, or any person (well a few) who were NOT supporting Obama. Even the “majority white” county I grew up in, Montgomery, has Obama fever (and the county was historically Republican until Bush came along). Granted this may change, but it sounds like Rendell is a Clinton Mafia hit man.
TOPV on February 12, 2008 at 4:11 PM
This is really getting sad now.
Dash on February 12, 2008 at 4:12 PM
Thanks for the Protein Wisdom link, AP.
I would also note — along the lines of Ace’s comment –that the “Bradley Effect” is not really about racism. It’s about political correctness.
Karl on February 12, 2008 at 4:13 PM
And clearly your plans involve indulging Godwin’s Law as much as possible.
LimeyGeek on February 12, 2008 at 4:14 PM
Yeah, it only divided, historically, because it is a predominantly democrat city, large black population, and the Dems manage to play the race card to win elections (there was always some white man to blame on the Republican side for all the problems). This is a little bit more interesting…
I like watching how they try to eat one of their own.
TOPV on February 12, 2008 at 4:14 PM
Probably so. If that’s the case, the clinton machine has played the race card twice. They are getting desperate. That is what Hillary will be when this is all over. A “desperate housewife”.
kcd on February 12, 2008 at 4:16 PM
Hah! Good one! I lived in Atlanta (IN Atlanta), from 3rd to 8th grade, and somehow that meant a lot to the black people I worked with later on, and went to school with, etc. Or maybe they noticed I talked to them as normal human beings and wasn’t all antsy all th time. Though I was attacked as a freshman at UGA, and it had some racial motivations behind it. I guess saying “But I grew up in a black neighborhood and have LOTS of black friends” probably wouldn’t have helped, either lol.
I noticed when I went to NorCal that white people act all scared and antsy around black people, not out of real fear, but b/c they don’t know how to behave. Uh, behave like you normally do, retard. Geez. That’s why I say the South is more racially harmonized than other regions. People have learned to get along. With the usual caveats, of course.
RW Wacko on February 12, 2008 at 4:18 PM
I’m still trying to put myself in the head of a race-baiting, identity politicing Dem like Rendell… and failing miserably.
Is he projecting? Trying to out race-bait the race-baiters? I’m so confused.
Hollowpoint on February 12, 2008 at 4:19 PM
I’ll only vote for hot multiracial bisexual women. Put that in your pipe and smoke it Mr. Smartypants. I might be sitting out some elections for a while ’til you raclasgenderphobes catch up with my moral plateau.
Beagle on February 12, 2008 at 4:20 PM
LimeyGeek: I admit it, I can’t stand Fiddy. I’m one of those freaks that detests hip-hop (anti)culture.
BDS 2.0 in full effect.
12thman on February 12, 2008 at 4:22 PM
I live in Pa.
I am really offended with Ed Rendell. I will not vote for Obama because he has NO experience, is too liberal and his association with his church is suspect….I could care less that he’s black!
becki51758 on February 12, 2008 at 4:28 PM
From a White Guy perspective (I grew up in a small town with exactly one family of black kids in our school), that’s sometimes easier said than done. In the city it might sometimes be misplaced fear for some, but more often than not it’s being paranoid about saying or doing the wrong thing- no matter how inadvertant or well intentioned- that could be interpreted as “racist”. Such is the legacy of Political Correctness. Sadly, avoidance is just easier sometimes.
I get along well with black people I work and interact with because I do view and treat them like people instead of a racial demographic… but that doesn’t always mean it comes naturally, either.
It’s naive to think that race (like religion) wouldn’t be a factor at all, but this focus on race and gender by the oh-so-tolerant Dems is maddening.
Hollowpoint on February 12, 2008 at 4:30 PM
RW Wacko on February 12, 2008 at 4:18 PM
Sorry to hear that happened to you RW but it reinforces the point. The people who do things like we’re discussing aren’t primarily concerned with upbringing. They see things (literally) in black & white.
becki51758 on February 12, 2008 at 4:28 PM
I think that means you’re not part of the 2.5% that voted primarily based on race.
12thman on February 12, 2008 at 4:38 PM
My childhood exposure to black people was one little girl when I was only a few years old. Our nursery-school teacher made us feel how spongy her afro hair was. We were fascinated with her (in a “wow! cool!” sense), but she was only there a short while.
It was only in early adulthood that I became aware of racism. It took moving to the USA to really understand racial issues though. America has been a tremendous shock in that regard, even as a thirysomething. It’s very different in the UK.
LimeyGeek on February 12, 2008 at 4:41 PM
What the Governor is doing is a 2008 update to what the democrats perceive as swift boating. They came up with the terminology. Once they saw what they perceived as a new election tactic they decided to use it themselves. (Without the label of course). Remembering Bill Clinton’s remarks vaguely, he was appalled by this type of attack. While he was talking you could see the wheels turning in his head though. The statement comparing Barak to Jesse winning in Carolina is a derivative of the same. I contend that there will be many more of these modified “Swift boat attacks” made before the convention. A smart aide would keep a file of these clips. I believe they will be of use when the democratic attack machine cranks up full force after the conventions. But then, I have been wrong before.
Guest1.1 on February 12, 2008 at 4:45 PM
I, frankly, want to vote for a female or a black candidate but there aren’t any conservatives available right now. If Obama had Romney’s, or even McCain’s, positions on issues I would vote for him over any democrat.
I believe that that Obama’s problem is going to be with liberals who aren’t ready to vote for a black candidate. Just look what’s been happening in the New York mayor’s race for the past 15 years.
P.S. Check out http://www.allenwestforcongress.com/. Good guy!
Harpoon on February 12, 2008 at 4:46 PM
Call me a speciesist if you want, but I will never vote for a non-human.
AverageJoe on February 12, 2008 at 4:52 PM
Nailed it.
The Democrats like to call the Republicans racist, but when they point their bony finger at us they have have four fingers pointing back at themselves. The Clinton plantation “masters” aren’t happy that their black “slaves” are revolting and supporting one of their own to be the new “master”. Miss Hillary ain’t happy. Take your fake Southern accent back to the Senate, Miss Hillary.
Huckabee/Thompson defeats Obama/Edwards this November.
ITookTheRedPill on February 12, 2008 at 4:55 PM
With all due respect, you have it wrong. The “Bradley Effect” took place in the early 80’s (I THINK) when Bradley was running for Governor against Pete Wilson, and Wilson of course won, even though all polls showed Bradley ahead throughout the campaign.
However, I must admit I’ve been shocked in this primary season. I thought Obama had no real chance because of what I’ve seen in past elections, which you could say was “the Bradley effect.” I’d like to say race is no longer of consequence in America, but I’m still too jaded, and want to wait a little bit longer on this.
asc85 on February 12, 2008 at 4:57 PM
Huckabee/Thompson win in 2008.
For 2012, Fred realizes that he won’t run for president in 2016, so he steps aside so that Huckabee/Steele win in 2012.
In November 2016, say hello to President-Elect Michael Steele.
ITookTheRedPill on February 12, 2008 at 5:02 PM
So it is all about skin color then!?
I was not raised in an environment akin to my skin color. I am not in denial of the fact that there is more to me than how others define me by my skin pigment. But there is a definite cultural difference and upbringing that is usually determined by your skin color. If you choose to ignore that for the sake of being politically correct, you are being intellectually dishonest.
I am having a challenging time assimilating to my “true” (/s) culture right now because of the differences in the environment I was raised in compared to the ones my (now) peers were raised contrary to the fact we share the same skin tone. As long as I don’t speak, people don’t suspect the difference (again with sarcasm).
I’m not saying he is or isn’t what he says he is. I’m saying that to exalt his race by way of skin color without acknowledging he may have had contrary influences historically, and of the norm, of an African-American upbringing is disingenuous and misleading.
If the race designating African-American is looking to him because he “feels” them, can they be accused of not being able to look past his color despite Obama’s unfamiliarity of how to “keep it real?”
Please help me understand your point then, when you are asked to designate your race, how do you differentiate yourself from others with your same skin tone? Can you? Or is it really just all about skin color?
geckomon on February 12, 2008 at 5:04 PM
Do you have any more of those? The red pills I mean. I sure could use one right about now. “Take a little trip, Take a little trip, Take a little trip with meeehe…
kcd on February 12, 2008 at 5:04 PM
I’d be happy to see Huckabee/Steele this year, but it needs to be Fred Thompson in order to erase the doubts of those who don’t believe (yet) that Huck really will ensure that the border fence is completed by July 1, 2010.
Huckabee/Thompson defeat Obama/Edwards in November 2008.
ITookTheRedPill on February 12, 2008 at 5:05 PM
The Huckester won’t even give up his primary bid, I doubt he would surrender the Presidency after only four years.
JayHaw Phrenzie on February 12, 2008 at 5:05 PM
You, too, can take the red pill and leave the Matrix world where Juan McAmnesty is the best choice for the Republican party to field against the “messiah” Obama.
You, not me, are the one on drugs.
ITookTheRedPill on February 12, 2008 at 5:06 PM
Why pay attention to anything Rendall has to say about anything? Look at the number of things he had to say about guns and gun control:
“I believe with all my heart that we need more gun control” – Press Conference 10/3/2006
“I believe with every ounce of feeling that I have that there are far too many guns.” – Reason Magazine 7/1998
“I just can’t say publicly what we want to do, we have to take these things slowly.” – Overheard conversation with an anti-gun activist while running for Governor.
“What I’m going to try mostly to do is convince the legislature to let Philadelphia have the right to pass its own gun laws. We had that, when I was mayor, up until 1996 – then they took it away from us. I’d like them to give us that right back,” [Sebastian: It was taken away because the city tried to pass its own assault weapons ban and wouldn’t issue carry licenses]
“The sheer cost of defending these suits would be hard on the gun industry”.
“The impact of so many cities’ filing suit all at once would be monumental for manufacturers. . . . They don’t have the deep pockets of the tobacco industry, and it could bring them to the negotiating table a lot sooner.”
“I might sue the entertainment industry for glorifying gun violence.”
“I favor the one-gun-a-month legislation that’s passed in Virginia and South Carolina, which limits handgun sales to one gun per month”
“I thank the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence for their continuing support and their commitment to making Pennsylvania a safer place to live.”
“Neither the City nor the State are in the business of selling weapons; we are in the business of confiscating them.” Letter to a Pennsylvania resident, December 7, 1993
“To the people of Philadelphia, guns aren’t used for sport, guns aren’t used for recreation. Guns aren’t even very successfully used for protection. Guns are used for killing people.” ABC Nightline, May 26, 1998
“Rendell said that, as a city prosecutor, he had never seen a defensive gun use, and that as far as he was concerned, he had never heard of a defensive gun use. He said that he didn’t believe they occurred.” – John Lott relaying a confrontation with Rendell in 1999
And yet Rendell likes to say:
“There is nothing that I want to do to take a gun away from a hunter or a law-abiding citizen.”
Heck, for all we know, he may be endorsing Obama tomorrow and asking “Hillary who?” at the same time.
Politicians. Be it Democrat or Republican, no one says it stupidier.
pilamaye on February 12, 2008 at 5:08 PM
LOL! LOL! Hey don’t blame me I voted for Romney! LOL!!
kcd on February 12, 2008 at 5:11 PM
Didn’t Bradley run for mayor in the late 1960s against incumbent mayor Sam Yorty and lose the first time but get elected the second time around and then get reelected? I thought Professor Estrich was referring to his first run against Yorty. I might be wrong about that and I guess she is referring to his first run against Dukmejian. It is amazing what all that wii tennis does to my brain!!!
Larraby on February 12, 2008 at 5:13 PM
Wow…When an overwhelming majority of women vote for a woman and an overwhelming majority of blacks vote for a black it is called “identity politics”. But when “conservative” whites vote for a white person they are racist…
brtex on February 12, 2008 at 5:23 PM
Further, I had a roommate who was chastised for never “coming to the defense” of his fellow African-Americans. His reply: What do I know about African-Americans? I’m from Jamaica.”
It was funny how it was assumed he was African-American solely because of his skin color. He also spoke without the typical Jamaican patois.
geckomon on February 12, 2008 at 5:25 PM
Except in Pennsylvania
Wade on February 12, 2008 at 5:30 PM
In 2010, when the border fence is completed, all of you Huck-doubters and Huck-haters will thank those of us who, after our first choice candidate exited the race, saw the light and supported Huck.
ITookTheRedPill on February 12, 2008 at 5:32 PM
Or Atlanta, El Paso, San Antonio, Chicago…
brtex on February 12, 2008 at 5:46 PM
Allah, your “last best hope” is sinking like the Titanic.
“Inevitable” = “Unsinkable” = going to the bottom of the ocean fast.
It is amazing that you would call Hillary your “last best hope”. Again, if I had told you a year ago that you would be calling HILLARY! your “best hope” you would have scoffed and laughed mightily. Well, let me remind you that:
Huckabee/Thompson will defeat Obama/Edwards in November,
and you will Thank God that he did when the fence is completed in 2010.
ITookTheRedPill on February 12, 2008 at 5:46 PM
Nailed it. Welcome to the Matrix world of the MSM.
Take the red pill and leave the Matrix.
ITookTheRedPill on February 12, 2008 at 5:50 PM
But who are you supporting right now?
Huckabee, Juan McCain, Clinton, or Obama?
(You must pick one. Picking “Stay at home” = Obama)
ITookTheRedPill on February 12, 2008 at 5:53 PM
I won’t vote for an empty suit, no matter what color it is.
profitsbeard on February 12, 2008 at 5:59 PM
So if the youth vote in the primary for Obama, helping make him the candidate, but the youth aren’t that dependable in the general, what does that mean?
It means it’s one more reason to believe that
Huckabee/Thompson defeat Obama/Edwards in November
ITookTheRedPill on February 12, 2008 at 6:00 PM
You, and other sane Democrats. Which is one more reason to believe that
Huckabee/Thompson defeat Obama/Edwards in November
ITookTheRedPill on February 12, 2008 at 6:01 PM
You took the wrong pill, pardner.
Huck will be out of the race shortly.
McCain, I’m praying, will commit a fatal political faux pas and be asked by the party to leave the race, and then Romney can ride in and restart his campaign and take McCain’s delegates and win the convention.
Huck is too small for the Oval Office.
Better suited for selling fried squirrel fritters in a 4-H tent in Hot Springs.
profitsbeard on February 12, 2008 at 6:07 PM
You must have posted that same comment a thousand times by now. OK so we know your predictions. Give it a rest.
Pax americana on February 12, 2008 at 6:08 PM
Pennsylvania’s governor, Rendell, is a crooked political thug. He’ll throw racial bombs, do/say whatever it takes, to jockey for a Cabinet position in a Billary administration.
He’s also bought and paid for by Gamesa, the Spanish wind energy giant. Mark my words, if he loses on his Billary bet, he’ll resurface as a senior executive with Gamesa.
petefrt on February 12, 2008 at 6:09 PM
Yeah, Americans have only had that option in every other election. My heart goes out to all those non-racists who long for an all white ticket. Maybe you’re not a racist, but that remark resembles racism.
What makes him more susceptible to pandering than any other politician? You say you are not racist, but the only factor to which you attribute your fears is his race. What you said pretty much echoes the same prejudicial expectations of whites when some neighborhoods became integrated.
If Obama wins, it will be like cockroaches invading the Oval Office. White people, RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!
It’s sad. I consider my party to be the party of values. But I can see that running against a black candidate will test the bounds of many Republicans’ self-proclaimed righteousness.
I predict I will hear or read this statement several thousand times over the next year, “I’m not racist, but…”
The Race Card on February 12, 2008 at 6:11 PM
Let’s see…1st term Senator, with only 4 years in office, two of which have been spent campaigning, goes to the general election preaching a message of “Hope” and “Change” with nothing to back it up. But, he wrote an audacious book about Hope!
Meanwhile, a former governor with ten-and-a-half years of executive branch experience (we tend to elect governors, not senators, because governors have executive branch experience, while senators generally have only legislative branch experience), who was selected by his peers to be the Chairman of the National Governor’s Association, who was honored by TIME Magazine as one of the five best Governors in America, a fiscal conservative who cut taxes almost 100 times in the state of Arkansas (including the state’s first broad-based tax cuts, and turned a $200 million deficit into an $850 million surplus), goes to the general election preaching a message of “Hope” and “Change” with specific, written commitments of what he will change (like completing the border fence by July 1, 2010). And he has written not just one (1) but nine (9) Hope-filled books. Heck, the man was even born and raised in Hope (Hope, Arkansas).
(By the way, Bill Clinton may have been born in Hope, but he was raised in Hot Springs…Clinton called himself “The Man From Hope”, but his Presidency revealed that he was really “The Man From Hot Springs”, now didn’t it?)
You are looking at another former Governor of Arkansas who will serve 2 terms as President. Except this former Governor of Arkansas will win by not only getting over 50% of the electoral college vote, but also actually getting more than 50% of the popular vote (unlike Clinton’s pathetic 40-something percent that Clinton got twice).
Huckabee/Thompson defeats Obama/Edwards this November.
Do you have enough pieces of the puzzle yet to see the “Big Picture”?
This election will do a lot to help destroy the BillyJeff “Clinton Legacy” and the HillRod “Clinton Destiny”. Including the eventual replacement of Ruth Bader Ginsberg. The Clintons are livid. And some of you RINOs voted for Hillary today. Laughable. But thanks for doing that, because that was one less vote for Juan McCain.
ITookTheRedPill on February 12, 2008 at 6:36 PM
Billary just trounced Obama in Ohio. Good.
.
Speaking as a conservative who mostly goes for Republican candidates, I’m thinking in a Machiavellian way now. Let the Democratic races be close; let the Democrats make race an ugly (and totally unnecessary) issue, like the idiot leftist Dem. Governor of Pennsylvania did today. Let the Billary-ites and the Obama-ites have a really ugly knife fight, so that whoever wins the nomination has a damaged party with deep scars, that can’t fight the campaign effectively.
.
As a Pennsylvanian, I’m embarrassed by my ignorant seriously leftist Democratic Governor of Pennsylvani speaking to the effect that the ignorant people of Pennsylvania won’t vote for Obama because he’s black. BS!
.
Contrary to what a lot of cynical politicians think, most people are not stupid. A lot of Pennsylvanians (who happen to be white, Asian, whatever and don’t care that Obama is black) wouldn’t vote for Obama because they only hear glibness, not articulation; They hear extremely well presented platitudes, with no policy plans and details. They’ve figured out Obama’s an empty suit, as Hillary is an empty dress. (new term invented for worthless candidate who just happens incidentally to be female)
.
John McCain in 2008!
DavePa on February 12, 2008 at 6:40 PM
In the 1964 election, the nation was still recovering from the Kennedy assassination and longed for the stability that electing LBJ would bring. If you discount the 1964 election numbers, do you realize that only one Democrat since 1900 has received a greater % of the popular vote than our Born-Again Christian President received less than four years ago? And that was FDR. How many people voting in November 2008 are old enough to have voted for FDR?
Come on folks? Why are you all so afraid of Obama? Yes, his message of Hope and Change has connected with voters. So will Huckabee’s message of Hope and Change. Obama is a paper tiger. His choice of Edwards for VP will go along with his “Most Liberal Voting Record in the Senate”.
While race has been a factor in the Democrat primaries (rascists!), it won’t hurt Huckabee in the general election.
Why not?
Ask yourself what percentage of the black vote the Republican party typically gets in a general election. And as for whites, it was explained above that many whites on the Democrat side appear to be voting for Hillary privately, but claiming to support Obama publicly. Expect the same in the general election.
One more piece of the puzzle…
Huckabee/Thompson defeats Obama/Edwards this November.
Do you see it yet?
ITookTheRedPill on February 12, 2008 at 6:55 PM
Wouldn’t this have the opposite affect desired?
Insult your constituents into voting for the guy you didn’t endorse, by making them feel like racists if they don’t.
American-Infidels.com on February 12, 2008 at 7:28 PM
So why didn’t he vote for Swan in the last election??
I can see this coming,, if you don’t vote for Obama you are a racist.
If you don’t agree and support his bills as president, you are a racist.
JellyToast on February 12, 2008 at 8:35 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »