Gallup: McCain’s favorability rating down 25 points among blacks since last year

posted at 8:02 pm on June 6, 2008 by Allahpundit

Note: This isn’t head to head with Obama, it’s a simple favorable/unfavorable rating of McCain himself. June 2007: 26/33, with 41 percent having no opinion. June 2008: 27/58, with 15 percent N/O. That’s actually less of a decline than Her Majesty, and less severe: She lost 26 points, and all of them seem to have come from the favorable column, not the no-opinioners.

I’m sitting here searching mentally for anything McCain might have said or done to alienate black voters and drawing a blank. Frankly, he tends to stay out of racial matters (“I don’t think I have to address the issue of race”), and to the extent that he involves himself, it’s to try to build bridges to the black community, however belatedly. Maybe this is the product of news circulating about how he initially opposed a holiday for MLK? Or is it just an artifact of more people getting to know him and realizing that he bears the Klannish stigma of belonging to the Republican Party?

Minor solace: His favorable rating’s actually increased a point, from 26 to 27 percent over the past year. Exit question: Is there anything any Republican can do at this point to win more than say, 15 percent of the black vote? Not against Obama, I mean, but against any generic Democratic candidate.

Update: Comments imported from headlines.

Tags:

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 3

Maybe its because he is a white and a REPUBLICAN!!!!! Statistics will tell you that African Americans or Blacks just don’t vote Repub. It does not matter who the Repub is.

jwp1964 on June 6, 2008 at 11:08 PM

Sleep on it. If I have to tell you it won’t resonate nearly as much as if you come to it on your own.

MB4 on June 6, 2008 at 11:01 PM

Well I originally thought you mean that it’s demeaning to blacks to assume they need governmental help to succeed. I would argue that it’s more demeaning to broadly attribute black inequalities relative to whites to personal failings and character flaws, flaws which somehow permeate an entire race. It’s much less “demeaning” (and much more accurate) to attribute these inequalites to structural, rather than personal deficiencies.
Buuut then I thought “that point has been made and debunked a bazillion times, he/she must be on to something more original”. If thats what you meant, there’s your response.

crr6 on June 6, 2008 at 11:09 PM

I would argue that it’s more demeaning to broadly attribute black inequalities relative to whites to personal failings and character flaws, flaws which somehow permeate an entire race.

crr6 on June 6, 2008 at 11:09 PM

No one is doing that.

I do believe that is one of those Strawman thingies.

MB4 on June 6, 2008 at 11:18 PM

s that some kind of “new math”? Do you mean income earned or do you mean income earned minus what someone has spent? If you mean the latter it is extraneous to the case you are trying to make.

Two people could earn the same over their lifetime so far and one could have saved nothing, actually be deep in dept and the other could have hundreds of thousand in savings. In fact the person with the hundreds of thousand in savings could have earned less. There are lots of people who have made probably 10 times, 100 times what I have and have less than 16% of my savings.

Take Michael Jackson for example. He has probably earned 100’s of times what you have and *net* probably doesn’t even have 16% of your savings.

MB4 on June 6, 2008 at 10:59 PM

Wealth meaning “net worth”. It isn’t just income plus savings, it includes assets like your house, your cars etc. Michael Jackson may not have savings but he probably has lots of assets.

crr6 on June 6, 2008 at 11:22 PM

“but he probably has lots of assets”

According to the courts he shouldn’t be doing that anymore ;)

Lord Nazh on June 6, 2008 at 11:27 PM

Oh and while he may not be a writer, this is one of my favorite commentators–a conservative who happens to be black.

baldilocks on June 6, 2008 at 11:30 PM

I blame the teeth.

Weebork on June 6, 2008 at 11:44 PM

I’m sitting here searching mentally for anything McCain might have said or done to alienate black voters and drawing a blank.

ummm. . . how about pimping MLK Jr’s death anniversary by pandering and apologizing for ‘being racist’ in the past. If I was black, that would have offended me. He used them like an old pair of shoes.

They would have had more respect for him had he said the vote against the holiday was for fiscal conservatism. Instead, he says ‘well, I was racist then and I shouldn’t have been.’ I think that’s something that might tick people off.

In other words, it’s not anything that he did that was overtly racist. . . but he used them.

That and also the fact that he’s so close to the Latino community that the Affrican Americans feel like he cares more about the Latino ‘plight’ than the systematic racism that blacks suffered.

He hasn’t done much to help them except apologize for the Confederate Flag on SC capital grounds (not his place and he doesn’t understand) and apologize for ‘being racist’ by voting against MLK day.

He gets more racist by the day from where I see it. And I agree with the NAACP.

ThackerAgency on June 6, 2008 at 11:56 PM

. Michael Jackson may not have savings but he probably has lots of assets.

crr6 on June 6, 2008 at 11:22 PM

Last I hear he was “under water”.

MB4 on June 6, 2008 at 11:59 PM

it includes assets like your house, your cars etc. Michael Jackson may not have savings but he probably has lots of assets.

crr6 on June 6, 2008 at 11:22 PM

To the extent that you own those as opposed to owing on them. some people are “under water” on both.

MB4 on June 7, 2008 at 12:01 AM

I blame the teeth.

Weebork on June 6, 2008 at 11:44 PM

I blame the lettuce.

MB4 on June 7, 2008 at 12:02 AM

Yes, African Americans will vote Republican if you speak to their issues. Their issues aren’t MLK holiday. Their issues are equal opportunity.

I would give more, but there isn’t any point in me giving my advice about how to make blacks like Republicans. The closer McCain gets to the Latino community, the further he gets from the African American community. The more liberal he gets, the less reason blacks have to vote for him instead of the other liberal.

Mainly, republicans need to emphasize the opportunities that Bush and the Republicans have given to African Americans (Clarence Thomas, Condoleza Rice, Colon Powel). I don’t care how much the race hustlers call them ‘uncle tom’ they appreciate being given IMPORTANT opportunities.

McCain wants to give Latinos the opportunities that he won’t give blacks. That’s his problem, and it is a product of his coming from Arizona instead of the South where he would understand these issues.

Obama is coming to NC on Monday. Obama will likely win NC from McCain because he doesn’t understand the South. The NC GOP convention is in town tomorrow and I think I will go. Huckabee will be speaking. While I’m not a fan of his, I prefer him to McCain. At least he didn’t disparage North Carolina GOP from an ivory tower outside of this state. I’ll be looking to volunteer for the campaign for the Republican running for Governor in the Great North State.

ThackerAgency on June 7, 2008 at 12:06 AM

Also, most blacks don’t care about ‘global warming’. All his crap running off at the mouth about how much he’s going to do with the government to stop global warming by taxing the crap out of everyone and making the government bigger is not making the blacks say. . . hey, you know what?! He’s RIGHT!

Blacks would listen if he said he was going to drill for our oil in America to lower gas prices and reduce dependence on foreign oil. That message would resonate with blacks. . . but ooooops, that’s not mavericks position – you know the GOP position.

Blacks don’t care about global warming. The only people who care about it are the elitist leftist jet setters, the media, and the environmental industrial complex. It’s the equivalent of ‘white guilt’. . . it is ‘success guilt’.

McCain isn’t a very good campaigner. He lost horribly in Iowa. He only knew how to campaign in New Hampshire and South Carolina. That’s how he got the nomination. He’s not a brilliant strategist. . . it’s just that he was running against novices.

ThackerAgency on June 7, 2008 at 12:17 AM

His going on Ellen didn’t help either. His support for gay marriage doesn’t help with the black community. What would help would be if he went on Oprah. I doubt if he’ll get on her show, but I doubt she’d turn him down.

Anyway, I should be getting paid. But it’s not going to matter. McCain is the losing horse because he isn’t anything but the next-in-line Republican from a congress with an 18% approval. He’s had 25 years in national office. If he loses he’s still in national office. He doesn’t even really care, but he thinks it is ‘his turn’ more than Clinton did.

ThackerAgency on June 7, 2008 at 12:28 AM

Somebody Blacks would listen if he said he was going to drill for our oil in America to lower gas prices and reduce dependence on foreign oil.

+1

We butt heads a lot…mostly me accusing you of being a racial bomb-thrower or generally cantankerous. I go at you hard because I think you’re sturdy enough and usually give back pretty good.

Unfortunately, I really cannot find anything on which to disagree with you tonight. Next time… :)

The Race Card on June 7, 2008 at 12:35 AM

or more likely next thread…

The Race Card on June 7, 2008 at 12:35 AM

Anyway, I should be getting paid.

ThackerAgency on June 7, 2008 at 12:28 AM

All of the candidates sucked at hiring the right people–both the adviser and those designated to get their messages out. All of them picked Ivy grads, fresh young college grads and/or old political hands–as if any of them know how normal people think.

baldilocks on June 7, 2008 at 12:44 AM

adviser=advisers

baldilocks on June 7, 2008 at 12:44 AM

Oh and while he may not be a writer, this is one of my favorite commentators–a conservative who happens to be black.
baldilocks on June 6, 2008 at 11:30 PM

WOW!!! Thanks for that link. Absolutely Superb. I’m going to see if I can’t embed that in my own little blog.

I’ve never encountered anything like that before… Kind of like if you cloned the intellect of Thomas Sowell and Walter Williams with the delivery and enthusiasm of Chris Rock, with a little Dennis Miller thrown in for good measure.

LegendHasIt on June 7, 2008 at 1:40 AM

As long as McCain doesn’t use a Michael Jackson song for his campaign theme, he’ll do okay with black voters.

(I hope Obama uses “Smooth Criminal“. Although “Beat It” would be more useful..)

profitsbeard on June 7, 2008 at 1:56 AM

“beating the system” meaning beating the odds and succeeding in a situation where she was set up to fail.

MB4 already addressed this, but I was never set up to fail, because I never set myself up to fail, but rather to succeed. Mind you it wasn’t a straight line up, but up and up it went, based on much risk, work, learning and attitude. Also based on pride, and the lack of it where merited, and not listening to nay-sayers.

crr6, I also question your statements on opportunities, the rich and social justice. Also, you keep referring to “your camp”. I’m not a registered R, never was, never will be. But you’d have to kill me before I’ll ever register as a D, especially today’s kind.

This thread has clearly, and in great detail, reviewed the very different mindset of liberals versus free-thinking and independent people.

Entelechy on June 7, 2008 at 2:48 AM

baldi, I loved what you said about Thomas Sowell. I’d love it if he’d be my next door neighbor. Imagine the exchange with such brilliant sense.

Also, loved that video. I sent the link to others. Thank you.

Good to hear that Maxine Waters has competition.

Entelechy on June 7, 2008 at 2:52 AM

Maybe it’s because McCain is standing in Obama’s way to the White House. It’s as simple as that. Also, blacks are overwhelmingly Democrat and McCain, the GOP nominee, is now the enemy, not the Maverick.

infidel65 on June 7, 2008 at 5:06 AM

I agree with infidel65 at 5:06am

Anybody who had been running against Obama would have been “downgraded”. You can think that when asked of favorability opinion, they’re thinking of that person in isolation of everything else, but that’s not very believable when it comes to people. Do you think rabid Hillary supporters have a high favorability rating for Obama (and vice-versa)? Of course not.

meep on June 7, 2008 at 5:53 AM

McPain has also slipped to a 29 to 62 margin amoung Hispanics…so how’s that out liberaling a liberal thing working out for you Senator?

sabbott on June 7, 2008 at 6:50 AM

My guess is that McCain is in the tank for illegal aliens and other hispanics which pretty much leaves blacks out in the cold. McCain’s running down the middle and he’s stupid enough to think that’s his ticket to the White House. He won’t get there without the Conservative base, which pretty much means he won’t get there.

orlandocajun on June 7, 2008 at 7:17 AM

Blacks in the US are overwhelmingly voting for Democrats because the Democrats promise more handouts. Period. US blacks want the free ride, they have been told they deserve it, and they expect it. The few that don’t feel that way are the odd man out. Look at how any politician of any stripe panders to black audiences. Whites apologize for being white, and offer goodies. Blacks blame the whites, then offer goodies.

It is disgusting. But it is also pointless to pander to them. They will vote for the party of the slave-masters, the party of the KKK, the party of socialism EVERY TIME, until we start teaching the melting pot, protestant work ethic and the American Dream ™ again. And that won’t happen with the NEA in charge of our schools.

Spartacus on June 7, 2008 at 7:23 AM

apologize for the Confederate Flag on SC capital grounds (not his place and he doesn’t understand)

I disagree just because a flag of rebellion has NO place on a statehouse.

Squid Shark on June 7, 2008 at 7:48 AM

protestant work ethic

I hate that phrase, what a bunch of crap. Jews have a great work ethic. Arabs and Indians (mostly Muslims and Hindus) have better work ethic that most “protestants”.

Squid Shark on June 7, 2008 at 7:50 AM

So when will it be that blacks have had enough help?

Tough question. Generally speaking, when there aren’t gaping inequalities in income, education, wealth and just opportunity in general. When do you think the marker should be/was?

As far as readings/sayings, go see what the black writers are saying today. It’s actually very enlightening, if you can get off your horse for a while, and think clearly.

Entelechy on June 6, 2008 at 7:52

I’m waiting for the obligatory Thomas Sowell quote. Pretty much all ya got there.

crr6 on June 6, 2008 at 8:20 PM

So, I take it you’re a Communist… after all that’s the only way to achieve perfect equality via the Government, in those things you’ve mentioned. We should be encouraging people to create their own inequalities in income/education/wealth/opportunity by pulling themselves up and competing to achieve success! That is the American way!

dominigan on June 7, 2008 at 8:01 AM

What difference does McCain’s favorability rating with blacks is since he’s bound to get nearly 0% of their votes? A favorability rating of 5%= .05 x 0=0. A favorability rating of 75%= .75 x 0= 0.

MaiDee on June 7, 2008 at 8:19 AM

ThackerAgency on June 7, 2008 at 12:06 AM

A question (not rhetorical), “ThackerAgency” or any others who may have access to such data:

Regarding the 2007/08 Democratic primaries – Can you name a state/states in which the Black contingency did not vote in the ballpark of 90% for the Black candidate?

Lockstein13 on June 7, 2008 at 8:21 AM

idiots.

Education should be the number one concern going into this election. ugh

bridgetown on June 7, 2008 at 8:23 AM

Correction.

What difference does it make what McCain’s favorability rating with blacks is since he’s bound to get nearly 0% of their votes. A favorability rating of 5%= .05 x 0=0. A favorability rating of 75%= .75 x 0=0.

There are obviously some whites who vote racially but near all blacks do.

MaiDee on June 7, 2008 at 8:25 AM

Correction.

What difference does it make what McCain’s favorability rating with blacks is since he’s bound to get nearly 0% of their votes. A favorability rating of 5%= .05 x 0=0. A favorability rating of 75%= .75 x 0=0.

There are obviously some whites who vote racially but nearly all blacks do.

MaiDee on June 7, 2008 at 8:26 AM

the Klannish stigma of belonging to the Republican Party

posted at 8:02 pm on June 6, 2008 by Allahpundit

Bravo, AP!
I have met dark-skinned Americans with that thought process. The incredible irony of that is that true Klansmen are DEMOCRATS! Hello? Senator Robert Byrd is a DEMOCRAT not a Republican!

When Byrd was twenty four he joined the Ku Klux Klan in 1942. He was unanimously elected Exalted Cyclops of his local chapter.

According to Byrd, a KKK official told him “You have a talent for leadership, Bob… The country needs young men like you in the leadership of the nation.” Byrd recalls, “suddenly lights flashed in my mind! Someone important had recognized my abilities! I was only 23 or 24 years old, and the thought of a political career had never really hit me. But strike me that night, it did.”

Byrd held the titles Kleagle (recruiter) and Exalted Cyclops. During the war he did not serve in the military, working instead as a welder for warships in a Baltimore, Maryland shipyard.

When Byrd was twenty eight years old, he wrote about the 1945 racial integration of the military to segregationist Mississippi Senator Theodore Bilbo:

“I shall never fight in the armed forces with a Negro by my side… Rather I should die a thousand times, and see Old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again, than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen from the wilds.

When running for the United States House of Representatives in 1952, he announced “After about a year, I became disinterested, quit paying my dues, and dropped my membership in the organization. During the nine years that have followed, I have never been interested in the Klan.” He said the Klan offered excitement and was anti-communist, therefore he belonged to the Klan in the 1942-1943 period.

However, in 1946 or 1947 he wrote a letter to a Grand Wizard stating, “The Klan is needed today as never before and I am anxious to see its rebirth here in West Virginia… [and] in every state in the nation.”

In 1997, he told an interviewer he would encourage young people to become involved in politics, but to “Be sure you avoid the Ku Klux Klan. Don’t get that albatross around your neck. Once you’ve made that mistake, you inhibit your operations in the political arena.”

Red Pill on June 7, 2008 at 8:39 AM

I wish the black community knew how the Democratic Party has basically been “using them” for the last 30 or so years. Read this. It’s a start.

malan89 on June 6, 2008 at 8:28 PM

Bravo! Standing ovation!

Here’s another dark-skinned American who “gets it”.

The Democrats have 90% of the dark-skinned American population mentally enslaved on the Democrat plantation. The only difference so far in this election is that one of the “house slaves” is trying to take out “Miss Hillary” and run the plantation. But having him run the plantation instead of her would not improve life for everyone on the plantation. They’re still mental slaves!

Morpheus: I imagine that right now, you’re feeling a bit like Alice. Hmm? Tumbling down the rabbit hole?

Neo: You could say that.

Morpheus: I see it in your eyes. You have the look of a man who accepts what he sees because he is expecting to wake up. Ironically, that’s not far from the truth. Do you believe in fate, Neo?

Neo: No.

Morpheus: Why not?

Neo: Because I don’t like the idea that I’m not in control of my life.

Morpheus: I know *exactly* what you mean. Let me tell you why you’re here. You’re here because you know something. What you know you can’t explain, but you feel it. You’ve felt it your entire life, that there’s something wrong with the world. You don’t know what it is, but it’s there, like a splinter in your mind, driving you mad. It is this feeling that has brought you to me. Do you know what I’m talking about?

Neo: The Matrix.

Morpheus: Do you want to know what it is?

Neo: Yes.

Morpheus: The Matrix is everywhere. It is all around us. Even now, in this very room. You can see it when you look out your window or when you turn on your television. You can feel it when you go to work… when you go to church… when you pay your taxes. It is the world that has been pulled over your eyes to blind you from the truth.

Neo: What truth?

Morpheus: That you are a slave, Neo. Like everyone else you were born into bondage. Into a prison that you cannot taste or see or touch. A prison for your mind.

Red Pill on June 7, 2008 at 8:47 AM

Morpheus: I’m trying to free your mind, Neo. But I can only show you the door. You’re the one that has to walk through it

I believe that this will be the election where a lot of dark-skinned Neo’s take the red pill and leave the Matrix.

Neo: Why do my eyes hurt?

Morpheus: You’ve never used them before.

Red Pill on June 7, 2008 at 8:54 AM

Red Pill on June 7, 2008 at 8:54 AM

Nothing funnier than an evangelical who loves the psuedo-buddhist new age ramblings of a movie like the matrix.

Squid Shark on June 7, 2008 at 8:59 AM

Can one be banned for quoting really stupid movies…

Squid Shark on June 7, 2008 at 8:59 AM

There are obviously some whites who vote racially but nearly all blacks do.

MaiDee on June 7, 2008 at 8:26 AM

True Dat.

Red Pill on June 7, 2008 at 9:02 AM

Nothing funnier than an evangelical who loves the psuedo-buddhist new age ramblings of a movie like the matrix.

Squid Shark on June 7, 2008 at 8:59 AM

Why do you think one of the characters is named “Trinity”?

Must be a buddhist thing. /sarc

Red Pill on June 7, 2008 at 9:04 AM

Can one be banned for quoting really stupid movies…

Squid Shark on June 7, 2008 at 8:59 AM

Been there. Done that.

Just call me Lazarus.

Red Pill on June 7, 2008 at 9:07 AM

Therefore the people, who were with Him when He called Lazarus out of his tomb and raised him from the dead, bore witness.

John 12:17

Red Pill on June 7, 2008 at 9:11 AM

Red Pill on June 7, 2008 at 9:04 AM

Bcause there are many elements of the “heretical” gnostic sect, but that is about where the Christian influence ends.

But, like that one Christian film critic who read Christian influence into X-Men of all places, there is alot of reading in you own preferences into faux-philisophical crap like the Matrix.

Squid Shark on June 7, 2008 at 9:13 AM

Red Pill on June 7, 2008 at 9:11 AM

Yeah, I read you blog plenty, brother.

I know, hopefully next time you will leave in the flaming Chariot.

Lazarus only got one second chance.

Squid Shark on June 7, 2008 at 9:15 AM

Nothing funnier than an evangelical who loves the psuedo-buddhist new age ramblings of a movie like the matrix.

Squid Shark on June 7, 2008 at 8:59 AM

Do you remember the name of their ship?

Nebuchadnezzar

Must be a buddhist thing…

…NOT!

Red Pill on June 7, 2008 at 9:16 AM

Nothing funnier than an evangelical who loves the psuedo-buddhist new age ramblings of a movie like the matrix.

Squid Shark on June 7, 2008 at 8:59 AM

The word “Nebuchadnezzar” appears 89 times in the Bible.

Ask a “psuedo-buddhist new age rambler” how many times the word “Nebuchadnezzar” appears in their holy book.

Red Pill on June 7, 2008 at 9:21 AM

Is there anything any Republican can do at this point to win more than say, 15 percent of the black vote? Not against Obama, I mean, but against any generic Democratic candidate.

No.

Many in the black community are using racism to fight racism. In the end you just get more racism.

Mojave Mark on June 7, 2008 at 9:22 AM

BTW

What’s with the DailyKos
“sorry, I can’t seem to find this story” link?

Boil pasta then toss on wall to “see” if it’s al dente.
If the words stick, eat schtick.

When opposition mouthpieces let loose words fly, stick them back in the orifice under the nose that allowed them to escape unhinged.

When PC agents faux “you can’t say that” truth because it hurts, say it louder.

Gallup? HAH. Polls rate whatever the Machine dictates.

maverick muse on June 7, 2008 at 9:24 AM

Lazarus only got one second chance.

Squid Shark on June 7, 2008 at 9:15 AM

If AP ever decides to ban me again, that’s his right and his choice.

If he does so, I’ll keep commenting on my blog, and people who want to read what I have to say can find me there.

AP loves getting site traffic. He may not like what I say, but I’m good for traffic. He’s a pragmatist. It just got a little too personal last time.

Red Pill on June 7, 2008 at 9:25 AM

Many in the black community are using racism to fight racism. In the end you just get more racism.

Mojave Mark on June 7, 2008 at 9:22 AM

What you say is true, but it’s bigger than that.

The Democratic Socialist Communists are trying to use racism “in order to form a more perfect Socialist union”.

Red Pill on June 7, 2008 at 9:28 AM

Yes and the city is named “Zion” got it. It has nothing to do with cultural familiarity or anything *sarc*

Since “Nebuchadnezzar” was a real historical figure, and not really a positive figure in the bible, he is not someone I would tout as proof of Christian philosophy in the Matrix.

You still have yet to show me any actual philosophy in the matrix that would be anything but Buddhist or gnostic.

Prayer beads, Buddhist monks and Hindu and Buddhist Idols make appearances too, this would seem to show this theory to be a little thin.

I admit that I have watched the movies all of twice, because they were crap, but I am still a pretty observant movie watcher.

Squid Shark on June 7, 2008 at 9:28 AM

Since “Nebuchadnezzar” was a real historical figure, and not really a positive figure in the bible,

actually he was a very interesting, and very positive figure. how many holy and righteous people got the kind of revelations he did? he gave one of the greatest prayers of praise and worship every written in the bible. and Daniel, no slouch, had a great deal of respect for him.

have no doubts, he is in heaven.

right4life on June 7, 2008 at 9:33 AM

protestant work ethic

I hate that phrase, what a bunch of crap. Jews have a great work ethic. Arabs and Indians (mostly Muslims and Hindus) have better work ethic that most “protestants”.

Squid Shark on June 7, 2008 at 7:50 AM

It’s odd that you take offense at an historical term that is proudly embraced by hard working, capitalistic Muslims. It’s also referred to as “Calvinist Islam”.

Oh well, some people are easily offended, particularly by history, and invariably those people are libs.

Buy Danish on June 7, 2008 at 9:33 AM

Buy Danish on June 7, 2008 at 9:33 AM

Danish, I was mostly offended because it implies that no one has good work ethic in America unless they stole it from protestants.

Jews have a good work ethic all on their own.

You little ad hominem attack aside.

Squid Shark on June 7, 2008 at 9:41 AM

Prayer beads, Buddhist monks and Hindu and Buddhist Idols make appearances too

Squid Shark on June 7, 2008 at 9:28 AM

That’s representative of the world we live in. But Neo is “the One”.

The Matrix ==> Old Testament prophecy fulfilled
The Matrix Reloaded ==> New Testament
The Matrix Revolutions ==> Revelation

Or, if you prefer,

The Matrix ==> Past
The Matrix Reloaded ==> Present
The Matrix Revolutions ==> Future

Red Pill on June 7, 2008 at 9:43 AM

Gotta go. Family plans today.

Red Pill on June 7, 2008 at 9:46 AM

Red Pill on June 7, 2008 at 9:43 AM

OK, Got it whatever…

We will have to just disagree on this one.

Its still a crappy, stupid movie.

Like techno says, I need to hang up the Rusty Armor and go back to La Mancha. I am tired of tilting at the windmill that is you.

Squid Shark on June 7, 2008 at 9:47 AM

It’s also referred to as “Calvinist Islam”.

By whom, Calvinists?

Squid Shark on June 7, 2008 at 9:51 AM

Actually, I’ve got one more comment I have to get in before I go…

Read the Preamble to the CONSTITUTION OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

The Communist Party USA is the party of and for the U.S. working class, a class which is multiracial, multinational, and unites men and women, young and old, employed and unemployed, organized and unorganized, gay and straight, native-born and immigrant, urban and rural, and composed of workers who perform a large range of physical and mental labor—the vast majority of our society. We are the party of the African American, Mexican American, Puerto Rican, all other Latino American, Native American, Asian American, and all racially and nationally oppressed peoples, as well as women, youth, and all other working people.

The living standards of workers and the natural environment on which life depends are under constant attack due to the drive for maximum profits inherent in capitalism. Our party fights for jobs and economic security, a decent and rising standard of living, peace, justice, equality, a sustainable environment, gay rights, health care, education, affordable housing, the needs of seniors, democracy, and a fulfilling life for everyone, with socialism as our goal. Only through the abolition of the capitalist system and the socialist reorganization of society can exploitation of human beings by others, and the evils of oppression, war, racism, environmental degradation, and poverty be ended. We seek to build a socialist society which puts people and nature before profits.

Our country’s founding Revolution exalted the ideals of equality, justice, and democracy, of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness for all. Marxists have long hailed its progressive significance, while recognizing its historical limitations, chief of which was the failure to abolish slavery. The Communist Party today upholds the continuing struggle to realize these ideals. The revolutionary democratic traditions of the United States call for radical change when injustice, inequality, and exploitation become unbearably oppressive. This legacy gives us, the working class and its allies, the right and responsibility to build a new society. We advocate an expanded Bill of Rights to guarantee religious, political, and individual freedoms, but also freedom from poverty, hunger, joblessness, and racism.

Racism plays a particularly destructive role in the life of our country, imposing severely impoverished living standards on tens of millions of the specially oppressed, and lowering the quality of life for all workers. Racism harms all workers, obstructing the development of working-class consciousness, driving wedges in class unity to divert attention from class exploitation, and creating extra profits for the capitalist class. The Communist Party is unalterably opposed to all manifestations of racism, national oppression, U.S. national chauvinism, male supremacy, homophobia, and anti-Semitism, which are used by the enemies of progress to divide the working class and people’s forces. The principles of democracy, equality, justice, and class self-interest require a joint fight against all expressions of racism and gender oppression. We fight for full equality for all who suffer from racial, national, and gender oppression as an essential aspect of the unity that is basic to all social progress.

Issues of war and peace, wealth and poverty, ecology and pollution, racial and national division, gender discrimination, and international conflict are all connected to class struggle, and have common features on which to build unity among peoples, organizations, and coalitions. The working class as the necessary leading force along with the other core forces—all racially and nationally oppressed groups, women, and youth—can build a movement that also includes the many streams of our working people—such as family farmers, small business owners, and the self-employed—who united together have the power to make fundamental progressive change.

Peace is essential for the survival of the planet and humanity. The pursuit of world domination to further enrich capitalists has resulted in destructive wars, environmental devastation, and massive poverty. The Communist Party fights for solidarity among the working class and peoples of all lands and supports their pursuit of self-determination over their own lands and economies. In the spirit of working-class internationalism, the Communist Party builds the closest bonds with Communist and Workers Parties throughout the world.

Founded in Chicago in 1919, the Communist Party of the United States has an outstanding history in the struggles for peace, democratic rights, racial and gender equality, economic justice, union organization, and international solidarity. Our Party is organized on the principle of democratic centralism, combining maximum democratic discussion and decision-making with maximum unity of will and action, ensuring our ability to play a strong organizing role in the class struggle. We focus our efforts on increasing our ability to organize millions into struggle, fighting anti-communism as a divisive weapon of the capitalist class. With Marxism-Leninism guiding our actions, the Communist Party strives to build the broadest unity against global capitalist imperialism now headed by U.S. imperialism, for immediate gains and reforms that benefit working people, and for a progressive democratization of the government, the economy, and society of our country on the road to and after winning socialism.
With pride in our past and confidence in our future, we hereby establish this Constitution of the Communist Party of the United States America.

Red Pill on June 7, 2008 at 9:53 AM

Can there be any question that Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. is the Communist Party’s candidate for President of the United States?

But my journey is part of a larger journey - one shared by all who’ve ever sought to apply the values of their faith to our society. It’s a journey that takes us back to our nation’s founding, when none other than a UCC church inspired the Boston Tea Party [revolution] and helped bring an Empire to its knees.

Barack Hussein Obama, Jr.
A Politics of Conscience
Hartford, CT
June 23, 2007

Red Pill on June 7, 2008 at 9:57 AM

Well, I was going to put my two cents in about McCain, Obama, and blacks, but I see this thread doesn’t have anything to do with that anymore. Guess I’ll have to get in sooner next time before the hijacking occurs.

Rod on June 7, 2008 at 9:58 AM

Rod,
Have your say and put it back on track.

maverick muse on June 7, 2008 at 10:03 AM

Well, I was going to put my two cents in about McCain, Obama, and blacks, but I see this thread doesn’t have anything to do with that anymore. Guess I’ll have to get in sooner next time before the hijacking occurs.

Rod on June 7, 2008 at 9:58 AM

The topic of this thread is racism and how it is affecting this election. Dark-skinned Americans liked McCain until he became the “presumptive” Republican nominee.

“hijacking”, you say? Interesting word choice. You sound like Obama…

But somehow, somewhere along the way, faith stopped being used to bring us together and started being used to drive us apart. It got hijacked. Part of it’s because of the so-called leaders of the Christian Right, who’ve been all too eager to exploit what divides us. At every opportunity, they’ve told evangelical Christians that Democrats disrespect their values and dislike their Church, while suggesting to the rest of the country that religious Americans care only about issues like abortion and gay marriage; school prayer and intelligent design.

Barack Hussein Obama, Jr.
A Politics of Conscience
Hartford, CT
June 23, 2007

I expect Obama to say things like that. Part of his party’s game plan is “Defeating the Ultra-Right“.

Red Pill on June 7, 2008 at 10:09 AM

Rod,
Have your say and put it back on track.

maverick muse on June 7, 2008 at 10:03 AM

Amen.

Red Pill on June 7, 2008 at 10:10 AM

I’ve really got to go now.

Red Pill on June 7, 2008 at 10:10 AM

It’s also referred to as “Calvinist Islam”.

By whom, Calvinists?

Squid Shark on June 7, 2008 at 9:51 AM

Read the article and you’ll find the answer.

The historical facts are that prior to Calvinism, work was viewed as punishment, not as a noble pursuit. This view was held by Greeks, Romans, early Christians, and Jews. During the Middle Ages the concept of profits and “usury” were condemned, and it was Henry VIII who first allowed interest to be charged on loans.

The concept of work as virtuous and “Godly” was first emphasized by the Calvinist, and capitalism is rooted in Calvinism. These theories were carried forth by the Puritans and so forth, and it is fair to argue that America owes much of it’s prosperity to those influences.

Usury (in the original sense of any interest) was at times denounced by a number of religious leaders and philosophers in the ancient world, including Plato, Aristotle, Cato, Cicero, Seneca, Plutarch, Aquinas, Muhammad, Moses, Philo and Gautama Buddha.

That is not to say that other cultures have not adopted that view, but it was not the overriding theme of how to live one’s life prior to the Protestants’ explicit embrace of the “work ethic”.

Buy Danish on June 7, 2008 at 10:27 AM

If 90+ percent of white voters voted for a white man it would be called racial.
If 90+ percent of black voters voted for a black man it wouldn’t be mentioned.

coldshot on June 7, 2008 at 11:33 AM

Hillary Clinton could barely get 10% of the black vote in the primaries, and her husband was the first “black” President.

So why would anyone be concerned if McCain can’t even do that well with the black vote? They are going to vote for Obama regardless of what McCain or Obama does.

Hog Wild on June 7, 2008 at 11:52 AM

In related news O.J. Simpson still has managed to beat the rap for a double homicide while 95% of the O.J. jurors likely still rationalize blaming Mark Furman instead of the actual perp.

In related news Ray “School Bus / Chocolate City” Nagin was easily re-elected mayor of New Orleans and Rep. William “Cold Cash” Jefferson seems to be avoiding the steel motel even as his brother Mose and his sister are indicted for Katrina fraud posing as a charitable organization. The culture which elected Jefferson probably will re-elect him as easily as if he were named Marion Barry because in that culture as long as one can claim to be a victim and somehow owed something all else is excused. Add a sense of entitlement and one can readily see how Revrums Wright and Pfleger (plus Al $harpton and Jazzy Jackson) are cheered by their dupes in the background posing as some sort of whacked out congregation.

viking01 on June 7, 2008 at 12:22 PM

viking01 on June 7, 2008 at 12:22 PM

I agree, mostly. But Jesse’s and especially Al’s ascendancy isn’t fueled by black Americans.

baldilocks on June 7, 2008 at 12:46 PM

baldilocks on June 7, 2008 at 12:46 PM

I gather you are saying that it is white liberal elites like Al Gore who made Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson. Certainly the New York Times have been cheering them on for decades.

Buy Danish on June 7, 2008 at 12:58 PM

Don’t miss this poll, which shows McCain getting thrashed by Obama among Hispanics, 62% to 29%.

What a brilliant stroke of genius Shamnesty was!

flenser on June 7, 2008 at 1:02 PM

I gather you are saying that it is white liberal elites like Al Gore who made Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson. Certainly the New York Times have been cheering them on for decades.

Buy Danish on June 7, 2008 at 12:58 PM

Yes, ma’am. It’s a perennial subject with me.

baldilocks on June 7, 2008 at 1:09 PM

Wow. Came late on this thread. Apologies.

As an African American (who is voting for McCain–one of the very few in my entire extended family), perhaps I can enlighten everyone a bit.

While opposition to the MLK holiday does not help him, the biggest annoyance is McCain’s support for illegal immigration (which is VERY unpopular within African American circles).

If McCain could ease their fears about this, he may be able to get 15% of their vote (20% at best, since Obama is running).

Darnell Clayton on June 7, 2008 at 1:35 PM

There’s so much wrong with this I don’t know where to start. You actually make points early on that weaken your own later points. You also make the common mistake of equating liberals with democrats and conservatives with Republicans irrespective of time or social context. As for why blacks suffer such horrible social pathologies which are unique to all other groups…you provide an answer within your own post. The labor movement was racist. Whites idealize their grandfather’s hard work and sacrifice which led to them climbing the social latter, while glossing over the role of unions in this success…unions which were unavailable to blacks.Also social pathologies have not increased as a result of increasing transfer payments as popular neocon rhetoric suggests. The 70’s and 80’s were periods of welfare retrenchment. I’ll need some time to dig up the stats, but Nixon and Reagan were certainly not proponents of generous welfare. The war on drugs and the war on crime incarcerated huge chunks of the black population and broke up countless families. Those two largely conservative initiatives did little to aid the social pathologies you speak of, indeed they reinforced them.

Good Lord! You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about! So now we’re supposed to believe that the labor movement was conservative?! You think that black neighborhoods would be much better off if the criminals who prey on them weren’t jailed? And did you not know that the programs whose virtues you extoll had their greatest growth during the Nixon administration? Richard “We’re all Keynsians now” Nixon governed as a pretty straight down the line liberal. And those programs continued to grow under Carter and Reagan. The 70′s and 80′s were a period of welfare retrenchment?! In what country was that? Certainly not the U.S. Between 1970 and 1990 welfare spending at the Federal, State and Local levels about tripled in constant dollar terms. How is that retrenchment?

Now at least I understand why you are saying the things you are. You’re profoundly misinformed.

jl on June 7, 2008 at 2:20 PM

“Synergy is when we all go under together” – it’s what one of my American bosses termed synergy to be. He was a modest and wise owl.

Never, ever, aim to be equal and the same with anyone.

Entelechy on June 7, 2008 at 2:45 PM

No one is doing that.

I do believe that is one of those Strawman thingies.

MB4 on June 6, 2008 at 11:18 PM

ahhhh, now it may be your turn to consider how your “philosophy” stigmatized blacks. Sleep on it.

crr6 on June 7, 2008 at 2:45 PM

Of Course, it could be people like me telling my black friends that McCain is hoping to take the Black Man’s power by increasing the population of Amnesty Hispanics. Then I tell them that English is liable to be a second language under McCain.

Then I point out that McCain’s senior adviser Juan Hernandez is a famous racist who hates Blacks. Part of me feels badly about lying to people, but when I think of the dangers to Conservativism and the future of the nation, I manage to decide that the ends justify the means. Sort of like the Rendition Program, you know, the program that McCain came up with to help fight the war on terror?

Yes, I’m evil, but I honestly want McCain to lose that badly.

Snake307 on June 7, 2008 at 2:55 PM

Never, ever, aim to be equal and the same with anyone.

Entelechy on June 7, 2008 at 2:45 PM

Agreed! Always seek to be exceptional. The dems would have us all become bland and homogenous by being unexceptional and ‘equal’. And they actually derride, disdain, and discourage the exceptional effort; seeking to kill it in our youth before it takes hold of their developing psyches.

The world needs more exceptional individuals, not more unthinking sheep.

The fastest way to kill individuality and competition is to award a trophy to everyone who plays the game. If I can get a trophy by only exerting the effort to merely show up, why would I do more?

The American Dream is all about exceptionalism, and being rewarded based on successful effort and accomplishment.

But lately it’s turning into an ‘American Idol’ kind of thing where the encouraged goal seems to be massive adoration and unearned financial rewards that ‘fame’ can bring.

That might be the hollywood dream, it certainly isn’t the American Dream.

techno_barbarian on June 7, 2008 at 2:57 PM

Good Lord! You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about! So now we’re supposed to believe that the labor movement was conservative?! You think that black neighborhoods would be much better off if the criminals who prey on them weren’t jailed? And did you not know that the programs whose virtues you extoll had their greatest growth during the Nixon administration? Richard “We’re all Keynsians now” Nixon governed as a pretty straight down the line liberal. And those programs continued to grow under Carter and Reagan. The 70’s and 80’s were a period of welfare retrenchment?! In what country was that? Certainly not the U.S. Between 1970 and 1990 welfare spending at the Federal, State and Local levels about tripled in constant dollar terms. How is that retrenchment?

Now at least I understand why you are saying the things you are. You’re profoundly misinformed.

jl on June 7, 2008 at 2:20 PM

I didn’t say the labor movement was “conservative”, altough in terms of race I suppose it was. I said that the point you made that the labor movement was racist partially answers your own later question as to why blacks suffer unique social patholgies.
Just to clarify though…is it your opinion that the black community was well served by the war on drugs and crime? I mean, it jailed all those scary criminals right?
Could you provide sources for your position that transfer payments expanded under Nixon and Reagan? Relative to cost of living increases as well? If they did do that, it sure ran counter to their rhetoric.

crr6 on June 7, 2008 at 2:58 PM

is it your opinion that the black community was well served by the war on drugs and crime? I mean, it jailed all those scary criminals right?

I don’t know about him, but it’s my position. After all, the people suffering from the drugs and the crime, the victims of the scary criminals, were …. black people.

It seems to be your position that black people are better off being mugged by a black criminal than suffering the indignity of police in their neighborhoods. That seems rather racist to me.

flenser on June 7, 2008 at 3:17 PM

I don’t know about him, but it’s my position. After all, the people suffering from the drugs and the crime, the victims of the scary criminals, were …. black people.

It seems to be your position that black people are better off being mugged by a black criminal than suffering the indignity of police in their neighborhoods. That seems rather racist to me.

flenser on June 7, 2008 at 3:17 PM

So since the war on drugs the black community has been doing much better? Conservative initiatives such as the war on drugs and crime have been wildly beneficial towards the black community? Can you document this? I mean, if it weren’t for those dastardly welfare programs they might be approaching relative equality of condition with whites! I see you’re quick to toss around the “racist” barb, so here’s a question of you. Why didn’t the war on crime also focus on white collar crime?

crr6 on June 7, 2008 at 3:25 PM

Oh and while he may not be a writer, this is one of my favorite commentators–a conservative who happens to be black.

baldilocks on June 6, 2008 at 11:30 PM

Fantastic link, Baldilocks! I went HERE to watch and listen to all his other videos. Awesome stuff!

I’ll be giving Zo a look and a listen regularly. Highly recommended!

techno_barbarian on June 7, 2008 at 4:28 PM

I would argue that it’s more demeaning to broadly attribute black inequalities relative to whites to personal failings and character flaws, flaws which somehow permeate an entire race.

crr6 on June 6, 2008 at 11:09 PM

No one is doing that.

I do believe that is one of those Strawman thingies.

MB4 on June 6, 2008 at 11:18 PM

ahhhh, now it may be your turn to consider how your “philosophy” stigmatized blacks. Sleep on it.

crr6 on June 7, 2008 at 2:45 PM

I haven’t seen anyone on this web site doing it. Maybe you have seen it elsewhere. If so you should be more careful. Stay away from Klan meetings.

MB4 on June 7, 2008 at 4:33 PM

flenser on June 7, 2008 at 3:17 PM

We fully agree.

crr6 on June 7, 2008 at 3:25 PM

Why did your beloved Bill Clinton sign the biggest Welfare Reform Act then?

Entelechy on June 7, 2008 at 4:48 PM

Seeking to be equal is seeking to destroy everything, equally, and really fast. It’s easy to prove that if all wealth in the world were to be redistributed equally, we’d all last but a few days.

But crr6, and I’m sure you do know this, and even love it – this is not at all about the Utopian idealism of what you term “social equality”. This is simply what I tern Titbaloney, and yours use truly to gain votes.

The leaders and the media don’t give a rat’s ars about others. They would never accept to live like all other. Trust me on this. I lived under them for many years. They lived like pashas and kings, and we didn’t have milk, bread, vegetables/fruits in winter, oil to cook with and to heat with, etc, etc. I could write you novels about it, with myriad concrete examples.

Until you live it you will not believe it. By then it will be too late, here.

Entelechy on June 7, 2008 at 4:54 PM

I didn’t say the labor movement was “conservative”, altough in terms of race I suppose it was.

So they were enlightened progressives, except on the issue of race on which they were conservatives, because…they were racist. You define racism as conservative and use that definition to prove that conservatives are racist. I assert that racism is neither liberal nor conservative, and that both can be and have been guilty of it, including progressive members of the labor movement. My position has the advantage of not being circular.

I said that the point you made that the labor movement was racist partially answers your own later question as to why blacks suffer unique social patholgies.

Labor unions succeed to the extent that they can use force or the power of government to restrict access to labor markets, thereby pushing up the wages received by their members. So they work great for members, but only at the expense of non-members, regardless of color. Since non-members included blacks as well as whites, why should blacks have been uniquely disadvantaged by their exclusion from unions? Your novel explanation, sadly, does not explain the facts.

Just to clarify though…is it your opinion that the black community was well served by the war on drugs and crime? I mean, it jailed all those scary criminals right?

Is that a trick question, or are you seriously suggesting that the black community is well served by more drugs and violence?

Could you provide sources for your position that transfer payments expanded under Nixon and Reagan? Relative to cost of living increases as well? If they did do that, it sure ran counter to their rhetoric.

How about this:

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Welfare/Test030701b.cfm

And before you complain that this came from the Heritage Foundation, note that the numbers come from the OMB, and that no one seriously disputes that welfare spending adjusted for inflation grew during the period from 1970 to 1990. In fact, this exact period has been referred to as the “Golden Age” of welfare because of the growth in spending. How, in God’s name, could you have come to the conclusion that this was a period of “welfare retrenchment”?

So since the war on drugs the black community has been doing much better?

Better than if those criminals had been left on the street? Uh…yes. Implicit in your argument is that the idea that these people wouldn’t have been criminals except that they were arrested and jailed for crimes. You’ve got the causality backwards. The level of crime is a social pathology, but the criminal justice system is not and cannot be equipped to deal with it. All it can do is effectively and efficiently apprehend and encarcerate the criminals so that the innocent don’t have to live in fear.

I mean, if it weren’t for those dastardly welfare programs they might be approaching relative equality of condition with whites!

At last you’ve come up with a hypothesis that might just match the facts!

I see you’re quick to toss around the “racist” barb, so here’s a question of you. Why didn’t the war on crime also focus on white collar crime?

It didn’t? Well, if it didn’t, maybe it’s because the victims of white collar crime are primarily white, while the victims of violent crime and drug peddling are disproportionately black.

jl on June 7, 2008 at 4:55 PM

So they were enlightened progressives, except on the issue of race on which they were conservatives, because…they were racist. You define racism as conservative and use that definition to prove that conservatives are racist. I assert that racism is neither liberal nor conservative, and that both can be and have been guilty of it, including progressive members of the labor movement. My position has the advantage of not being circular.

Whole post is good, but that: jl ftw

Spirit of 1776 on June 7, 2008 at 5:18 PM

The formula is simple:

Blacks voting for blacks, okay.

White voting for blacks, okay,

Blacks voting for whites, not okay.

Whites not voting for blacks, racism.

Any questions?

madmonkphotog on June 7, 2008 at 5:36 PM

So since the war on drugs the black community has been doing much better?

I guess that depends on how you want to define “better”, but black people are less likely to be murdered or robbed, yes.

Can you document this?

I can. I’m not going to do it for you though. Take the initiative to look up the crime statistics for yourself.

flenser on June 7, 2008 at 6:01 PM

flenser, I do agree with you on much, and do like the way you argue. Here’s that tip for you (example all which flenser commented on at HA site:hotair.com flenser

You can always add words, sentences, or whatever you want to search on, after this string, for any site, of course.

Here’s all of your effort, to date.

Entelechy on June 7, 2008 at 6:11 PM

flenser, I do agree with you on much, and do like the way you argue.

I guess that depends on whether I’m arguing alongside you or against you. (He said with a smile.)

flenser on June 7, 2008 at 6:53 PM

Gallup: McCain’s favorability rating down 25 points among blacks since last year.

Another meaningless poll.

It is estimated that 99% of the blacks will vote for Obama.

So, what’s 25% of 1%?

pocomoco on June 7, 2008 at 7:01 PM

What I’d ask the Gallup organization is what were their popularity correction factors when polling opinions and voter support about the claimed first black president Bill Clinton for POTUS compared to their popularity correction factors for Clarence Thomas who somehow to many wasn’t black enough when he was nominated for USSC? Have Gallup also considered asking those polled how those polled define “black” (besides what’s on the birth certificate) before proceeding with further questions. Is the Gallup definition of black based upon appearance or culture or by circles and arrows and asterisks or by how certain self-proclaimed “black leaders” define to them who is black and who is not?

viking01 on June 7, 2008 at 7:59 PM

I guess that depends on whether I’m arguing alongside you or against you. (He said with a smile.)

flenser on June 7, 2008 at 6:53 PM

Believe it, or not, you’re fun either way :)

Entelechy on June 7, 2008 at 8:14 PM

Gallup: McCain’s Republican candidate’s favorability rating down 25 points among blacks since last year.

Entelechy on June 7, 2008 at 8:18 PM

Darn, forgot, …also, Europeans are for Obama.

Entelechy on June 7, 2008 at 8:19 PM

The Europeans can have him.

coldshot on June 7, 2008 at 9:56 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3