I'm probably wrong about that, his writing is so convaluted I must have missed his point. I really don't understand what tiger's situation has to do with obama's, tiger disgraced himself. I find it ironic that a black conservative would use this as a comparison as if tiger has more shame because he had to put on some mask for being black if that's his argument about tiger, then how could he be against affirmative action if he feels that blacks have a harder time being successful in this country, if that's his point. again, i can't tell.
i agree (and noted) the tiger (and oprah/cosby) stuff didn't really fit w/ what i thought the central tenet of the article was (which wasn't really about affirmative action). SS argument is that white guilt allowed a clean and articulate black man to get elected, when it was obvious that said man had no central belief system that could guide his actions. i think we're seeing that now, in the health care debacle (outsourced to Pelosi/Reid) Afghanistan (dithering for months, then essentially doubles down on dubya) Copenhagen, and now a genuine national security breach, where he's looked lost.
was george w. bush 'lost' when he failed to speak about the shoe bomber for 6 days? must have been alot of cedar brush that needed clearin'!
IIRC, basso lives in New York, which was a union state. Therefore, your post makes little to no sense whatsoever.
It's clear that white people should not be allowed to vote any longer. I mean they voted 44 consecutive white guys in because they were white and then they felt guilty about it and voted for the black guy. This nonsense must stop.
basso, you've brought up this white guilt thing before and I let it go, but I have to comment now. Ignorant, intolerant morons like you who attribute whites voting for Obama out of guilt are no different from ignorant, militant black fools who insist that any black who is a conservative or a Republican must have some flaw in their character that poisons their reasoning. People like you are complete disgraces to legit political discussion because the motives of those who disagree with you are always at the forefront instead of their ideas because your belief HAS to be right. I've got some news: People like you are the reason it's nearly impossible to have sane discussions on issues of the day because you shift the debate from one of ideas to one of attacks, hyperbole and posturing. The white guilt accusation of Obama's election was soooooo predictable, yet if your candidate won, it would be "the American people have spoken". You are utter trash when it comes to real discussion. It's a good thing for your own preservation you aren't as hard on yourself as on those who disagree with you. Let us know when you finish you B.S. in telepathy, then we might accept your psycho-commentaries about voters' motives.
heartfelt no doubt, but rather hilarious given the intense personal attacks conservatives here have experienced. and the "white guilt" argument is about ideas, or rather the lack thereof, on the part of Obama, unless of course you consider hopenchange to be a principled position on....what, escapes me...
on this: http://images.google.com/images?q=a...=&startPage=1&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wi this: http://images.google.com/images?hl=...sion+accomplished&aq=f&oq=&aqi=g3g-m3&start=0 this: <object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/AetdsxessBU&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/AetdsxessBU&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object> and a lot of other things that don't fit as easily into an image search or a video - but as far as I'm concerned, those things alone are worth it by themselves.
You could probably say the same thing about Bush and evangelicals, Clinton and boomers, Eisenhower with GIs or Kennedy with Catholics and the Irish. Large, cohesive or marginalized subcultures that feel validated by electing one of their own. You honestly think 100 - 150 million people are all going to vote for a single person for purely objective and relevant ideological reasons?
Let's see... nuts that claim white guilt was the reason behind Obama's election nuts that claim racism is the cause behind Obama's slipping poll ratings hey, they balance each other out
<object width="853" height="505"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/WjBNxVYw1Zk&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/WjBNxVYw1Zk&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="853" height="505"></embed></object>
