You couldn’t see what my point was? I was too vague?

I don’t deny someone their point of view, but your judgments about my character, were much akin to the judgments I saw made by HA posters on the topic above, that is: character attack first, without backing up that reasoning with anything that supported the point. The ONLY citation you made of anything I said or did was my being validated by SOUND reasoning by O’Reilly. So where did I go wrong? Oh, you couldn’t see what point I was making… and so I need to get MY act together?

I think I was clear as crystal, and your very obvious ad hominem attack on me didn’t shatter any glass. The only thing I might have to do in the future is possibly dumb things down a bit so you can grasp things a bit better. But I don’t want to do that, as I want to aim for the main part of the IQ bell curve, so perhaps my comments are doomed to continually go over your head and you are doomed to miss my points over and over.

Danzo on July 22, 2009 at 7:42 AM

Other than congratulating yourself for the dubious approbation of being “validated” by O’Reilly’s tepid analysis, what was your point? I couldn’t tell whether your rambling was anti-HA, anti-racism, anti-nouveau racism or just anti. All it clearly was was self-promoting.

Unfortunately, the Conservative parties in our country are home to many people who are just anti-, and they sometimes speak way too loudly when the camera is running. If that describes the way you’re going to be, good riddance. Leave. But don’t kid yourself that you were banished.

If you want to have a discussion, stay, and stop being so sensitive. “I can’t say what I really want because you might be offended” is actually a cry for help.

How I wish that the other 90% of black people understood what Mr. Alford does. Democrats promise anything, effective or not, to black people, to get their votes. Pandering is NOT representation. Senator Boxer has a plantation “I own you” mentality inherited from years of liberal Democrat pandering.

Does anyone yet NOT believe that Democrats are elitist authoritarians?

Danzo on July 22, 2009 at

Boxer is a racist because she only “loves” black people who stay on the Democrat reservation and keep in their place. That you can’t see that is not HA’s problem; it is yours.

Pitch white Dowd pitched race parity for you not me.

O’Reilly said EXACTLY the same thing I did on TEMS in text… that Boxer was not being racist, she was just using a cheap debate tactic.

But not a peep out of Ed or Duane that day, as they were busy making the case Boxer was being racist.

Alford remembers better than I do, and for good reason, Boxer’s past attitudes involving things racial. O’Reilly winds up by saying Boxer may just despise all things RIGHT, not all things BLACK.

In any event… I am NOT a PC kinda guy… but if you are going to go around calling Boxer racist, and you are NOT in debate, or using a debate tactic, but really really mean Boxer is racist, I have a HUGE bone to pick with you, Christian or Atheist. Guilty of racism until O’Reilly’s likely evaluation is proven to be true?

During this age of Obama, who was elected almost solely because of his race, we are going to see a lot of people we otherwise respect acting in strange ways, like suddenly doing a 180 and silently defending affirmative action or frivolously labeling someone a racist because of his or her political alignment.

This whole nation threw Martin Luther King under the bus, and few even remember what he was trying to teach us anymore. But his message will not die, because truth will not die.

But I myself am likely to die (be banned) as a commenter to this blog — I expect it. HA will conveniently deem me a racist because I defended the white person and that will be that. I’m especially guilty because my own skin is white. Racism is BACK, and the people on HA think it’s kewl topic, even if they have to contrive a racist story and even reheat it.

You think there was enough hate in this world, without HA trying overhard to add to it.

So long, and thanks for all the fish…

Look what the democrats have done for the blacks since 1968!

Want to educate yourself about O’Reilly? Have a listen:

Mark Levin on Bill O’Reilly Part 1

Mark Levin on Bill O’Reilly Part 2

When I first saw the video, I couldn’t believe that this was a U.S. senate hearing, and instead watching a kangaroo inquisition.

Ms. Boxer is way overdue for a swift voter boot in the ass!

Maam Boxer was very condescending for sure.

Notice how she attempts to speak the “black” lingo with him: “The NAACP guy would be proud to be here.”

She’s James Brown now? Moron.

baldilocks on July 21, 2009 at 6:09 PM

The “proud” thing – and she repeated it, unbelievably, in defending herself: “he’d be proud to be quoted”/”he’d be proud you were here” was enraging.

Only an utter and complete racist couldn’t see how thoroughly condescending that was. And he called it condescending, but not loudly enough. Blood still boils every time I see the clip.

Socmodfiscon on July 21, 2009 at 7:29 PM

In other words, Boxer is “the good Massah.”

That is why she continues on. She doesn’t get it because she is a stupid, ignorant, loathsome racist.

BB Date of Birth: 11 November 1940.

TK Date of Birth: February 22, 1932.

She only has an eight year wait.

OmahaConservative on July 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

I gotta call voodoo on that. She must have made a deal.

She looks at least 20 years younger than Ted.

To some.