Sigh.

The majority of black voters in McKinney's district appear once again prepared to allow race to trump anything else she does. They have, it seems, willingly drank the kool-aid she prepared. It isn't her they're overly fond of, remember that she lost a race that contained parts of the same district, falling to at least relatively more sane black female candidate by 16 percentage points. Denise Majette then abandoned the seat to take an ill-advised run at the Senate, which saw her lose by the same 58-42 margin. That opened the door for McKinney's return, elected by many of the same voters who had previously rejected her. She's electable because she's an angry black female, which is what an adequate number of voters in her district identify with, an identification which trumps her being an utter & complete idiot. "She may be an idiot, but she's our idiot" sums it up pretty well IMO.

There have almost certainly been white politicians in other areas elected on the same basis, but that doesn't change the fact that McKinney's electability is also enhanced by her race.

To be fair to black voters, their leadership tends to make their lives very uncomfortable when they don't vote the "properly". They are called sell-outs and Uncle Tom's. It's the most effective form of intimidation I've seen in the US, and the 85%+ turnouts by blacks to vote Democrat really haven't been rivaled by any other party this side of the Ba'ath Party.

So don't blame the average black voter, blame their leadership.

i think congress would be more amusing if we had more angry black females

Funny you should mention that, since McKinney's camp is notorious for it, not only toward black voters but toward anyone they perceive that "should be" for them but aren't.

Examples from the campaign against Majette included "On the night before the primary election, McKinney's father stated on Atlanta television that "Jews have bought everyone" in the election. She also reportedly called Majette a "Tomette" (a female version of an Uncle Tom)." And more recently they feuded publically with several gay rights groups in Atlanta, threatening to withdraw support from any measures concerning them in retaliation for their support for Majette.

No, your first quote was:


Nice try, and an obvious example of what I described your favorite tactic as being: twisting words around to make them say something else.

I don't know - good ol' boys like you are pretty solid in their voting patterns as well. Heck, 50 years ago, you'd have been a perfect dixiecrat.

That doesn't logically follow.

I really don't know enough about her to make any kind of judgement on her.

Reading up a bit on McKinney back when this story first broke, I can't say that I'm surprised.

That was my impression - especially the "She may be an idiot, but she's our idiot" line. Now, I don't know enough about the specifics of Georgia politics, but is this a case where due to redistricting that McKinney is the only option for black voters ? Just scanning wikipedia, she seems to be the sole black delegate from Georgia (scanned Majette's record btw - looks a little more impressive that McKinney's :D ) - so at some level, ( given Georgia is what, 30% African American population) is this a case of we only have "one" black hope, and its better McKinney than no racial representation in the Congress whatsoever ?

Except I'm in the military, dumbass, not actually from the place you make your geopolitical stereotype. ;)

Woops - just saw Sanford Bishop. My question still stands fwiw.

Shit, so you're immune from being a homophobic jackass ? Not quite.

I hate to break it to you, but what I said is exactly what JiMG meant to say. He says that black people will vote for offensive idiots because they are black and taht race trumps everything. So...I was right. Now I'm the bad guy?

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but that is a racist comment. Every group, all else being equal, votes for a member of its own. That's just common sense. More blacks vote democratic because they share the same issues. And every group pressures its members into voting with the interests of the group: Union, Wall Street, whatever. Look at Dutch even, he compares black people to the Baath party.

haha, you lose again. :)

Now Dutch is a class A dumbass, but he didn't compare black people to the Baath - he suggested that the black leadership was akin to the Baath - a cute trick, but that is what he said.

I'm going to have to disagree. He said:
Clearly he is blaming the whole thing on the 'leadership', but he is definitely here comparing the black demographic to the Baath party.

So, JiMGA is still a racist, even though you admit that what he said is generally true, even 'common sense'.

Wow, now Crapshoot and Mr Bigglesworth can't figure out how extreme they should be. Maybe ya'll should take this to PM and then get back to me. :)

No what Mr Bigglesworth said was that Mr Bigglesworth isn't racist, so long as all blacks vote for his folks.

Hey - defending your brand of stupidity isn't an easy task for anyone. ;)

No, maybe I wasn't being clear. All else being equal, someone is more likely to vote for someone they perceive as part of their group, but to see that and claim that 'race trumps everything for the blacks' is racism, because that it just not true. Black people will vote for black people, the same that JiMG and I will vote for white people, all else being equal.

It's tough work, no doubt. Take a break and have a mineral water. :)

Umm, not sure what you were looking at but ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanford_Bishop
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lewis_(politician)
http://davidscott.house.gov/
(edit to add - the wiki entry for David Scott is pretty sparse & the primary search on his name brings up some astronaut)

And that doesn't mention Jim Marshall, a white (D) who represents the area around Macon which has one of the highest concentrations of black voters outside of metro Atlanta and has defended against several black challengers through the years, the counterpart of how Sanford Bishop won in a majority white district by defeating a black (R) candidate.

sorry - fixed that in my post right after that - didn't see those names initially. :D

Still wrong. He said the black people in this particular district did that. Not all black people everywhere as you are trying to claim. The direct quote:


You keep leaving out the parts where he specifically calls out this particular group / region. It happens elsewhere as well (Marion Barry, or the political power wielded by Farrakhan), also happens in the white community (David Duke), but in no case has anyone but you tried to paint a broad brush over race in general.

I've said it before, I'll say it again. If the south still wants to secede, please let them.

All else is never equal. Not in politics, not in job searches, not in love and not in war.

I simply refuse to accept racism as anything more than ugly behavior, and it should not be rewarded. The concept that you should only vote your skin color is straight out of the KKK handbook.

McKinney disgusts me. And if the people of Georgia can't see past the color of her skin and keep re-electing her, it's just one wasted seat in Congress.

I am so tired of people who spend all their time trying to divide us. Ever hear the phrase, "divide and conquer?" Well, this is how you conquer a stupid population. Get them thinking about trivial differences and fighting each other.

One of the fonder memories I have of voting (not that I have all that many) is voting for Majette over McKinney in the primaries, and being lumped into the group of Republicans who "crossed over" to vote her out.

I am reminded of your "rural vs. urban" diatribes of a few weeks ago....

I feel like I'm taking crazy pills. Someone asked who would vote for someone crazy or something (I forget the actual wording), JiMG, in so many words, said: "black people". I'm not the one that generalized that, if he had wanted to be specific there he would have said, "the people of her district", but he said, "check the demographics". That's a clear cut racist statement. Let's just admit that and move on, it's not the dumbest thing he has ever said. No need to try and defend it because you like him or hate me.

I think you are fighting a war on straw. It's not that people ONLY vote their skin color, that's obviously false. It's that people are more likely to vote for someone of their skin color. And that isn't necessarily racism, it's just that people vote for people they identify with and it's just a fact of human psychology that people idenify with people that are like them, whether it is race, religion, hair color, whatever.

Umm ... Biggly ... that's what I said, which seemed to be what upset you in the first place.

Unless they are white people. Then it's racist.

Somehow Johnny Boy I doubt that if someone asked how a corrupt Delay kept getting re-elected, that you would point out the fact that it was because of all the white people in Sugarland. So is McKinney the only black person in the county willing to run for office? No. Actually, her opponent in the last election was Catherine Davis who also is a black woman.

Mr. B, just curious, but I'm wondering why you waited nearly 2 weeks to decide to come trolling about this? It's almost like you were bored, so you decided to try to get Jon worked up over a conversation that ended 12 days ago. You should think about getting a hobby.

His fresh batch of mail-order crazy pills arrived just this morning. Coincidence? I think not.

Uh duckman, it's you here that is fitting the definition of a troll. My posts are all talking about McKinney and devoid of personal attacks, while yours here is completely off topic and full of personal attacks.

As to your question, check my post history for a clue. You'll find that my last 5 (six now!) are all in this thread, separated by 12 days, with posts almost every other day before that. Hmmmm....what could possibly be the explanation?!

I liked you better when you actually tried to have a conversation. For the past couple of months you've just been trying to be funny...and it doesn't work.

This coming from you, jackass ?

somebody please move this thread to sportsdigs.com

Calling you out about starting shit from out of the blue and I'm a troll? That's some funny shit there, homecheese. And devoid of personal attack?


What was that again? :rolleyes:

On the subject of your post history, I don't personally give a shit that you were gone for 12 days. It must have a miserable experience for you to do whatever you were doing for that time and couldn't get that final word in. Again, you really think about taking up some kind of hobby.

And you keep trying to be an assclown, heh, at least you're having better luck.

My response was directed towards Mr Bigglesworth's favorite line.

Lighten up, Francis. ;)

:)

duckman, I think you need to look up in the dictionary what a personal attack is, because I don't think you know what one is. Secondly, I think you need to look up the phrase, 'out of the blue', because it also does not mean what you think it means (since you seem to think that I came 'out of the blue' for responding to someone's post directed at me, while you did not for jumping into a thread you were not involved in just to personally attack someone). Thirdly, you are the one that brought up my posting habits by asking me why I posted 12 days later, so when I respond to your question it's bad form to say you don't 'give a shit' about it. If you didn't 'give a shit', you shouldn't have asked about it.

Duckman, I'm sorry if I kicked your dog or slept with your wife or did whatever to get you pissed at me. I apologize. You can stop with the repeated trolling out of the blue.

And I think that....if Jesse Ewiak were here today....he would advise...that you don't mention that all your posts have been in a political thread.

And I think that....if Franklinnoble were here today....he would mention....that this thread was on sportsdigs two weeks ago.

I was going to mention this, but I was afraid biggles would call me a troll. He likes calling people "troll", I've noticed.

Well played, sir. ;)