Obama campaign tries to explain his “revenge” comment

Obama and Maher have set race relations back 40 years.

John the Libertarian on November 3, 2012 at 1:59 PM

With added help from one of the resident Leftist Loons in the WaPo Editorial Mental Ward, namely the noted race-baiter Colbert King:

Mitt Romney could be the next Andrew Johnson

-snip-

What would be the consequences for race of a Mitt Romney victory?

A Romney takeover of the White House might well rival Andrew Johnson’s ascendancy to the presidency after Abraham Lincoln’s assassination in 1865.

Let’s dispense with something right now. I am not asserting that, in the unlikely event President Obama loses, the result could be chalked up to his being black.

Yes, race still matters in America, as Romney surrogate John Sununu recently reminded us with his slur regarding Colin Powell’s endorsement of Obama.

A Romney win would be worrisome, however, because of his strong embrace of states rights and his deep mistrust of the federal government — sentiments Andrew Johnson shared.

And we know what that Johnson did once in office.

The link

Paul Mirengoff at Power Line is still laughing at this steaming heap by King:

King presents no evidence that Mitt Romney is a racist. He points to no federal civil rights legislation that Romney has opposed, much less would attempt to repeal. He points to nothing in Romney’s record as governor of Massachusetts that suggests hostility to civil rights for African-Americans or unwillingness to enforce their civil rights.

What, then, is the basis for King’s idiotic assertion of similarity between Romney and Andrew Johnson? King relies on the fact that, like Johnson, Romney believes in “states rights” and “mistrusts” the federal government.

But Andrew Johnson is hardly the only American president who believed in states rights and mistrusted the federal government. The same can be said of Thomas Jefferson, Ronald Reagan, and many of the presidents who came in between. Why compare Romney with Johnson, rather than Jefferson and Reagan? The answer lies in King’s intellectual dishonesty.

King’s only other argument on behalf of his comparison is that Romney “stood by as Republican-controlled state legislatures passed voter-identification laws making it harder for people of color. . .to exercise their fundamental right to vote.” King presents no evidence that such laws impose an undue burden on “people of color” and he ignores the argument that the laws are an appropriate method of preventing voting fraud. In any case, it is obscene to compare the post-Civil War Black Codes to legislation requiring voters to prove they are who they say they are.

-snip-

King offers no evidence that any of his pantomime villains resembles Andrew Johnson, either.

But being a mindlessly liberal Washington Post columnist means never having to present evidence.

Del Dolemonte on November 3, 2012 at 2:41 PM