"A black sheriff?!": The Official Topic of Obama and New Era American Politics

[AdmiralViscen]

[youtube=560,345]c_8VQVhRmAc[/youtube]

Imagine if Anderson Cooper wasn't such a pussy?

[Stoney Mason]

 

Earlier this week, RNC Chairman Michael Steele told a group of 200 students at DePaul University that African-Americans "don't have a reason" to vote for Republican candidates.

During his remarks he also acknowledged that for decades the GOP pursued "'Southern Strategy' that alienated many minority voters by focusing on the white male vote in the South."

Steele was asked to explain why an African-American should vote Republican at a university-sponsored discussion on the conservative movement. The RNC chairman's response: "You really don't have a reason to, to be honest -- we haven't done a very good job of really giving you one. True? True."

Steele also discussed with students his own experience being the victim of racial discrimination -- a subject that the he has openly addressed in the past. Steele told TV One's Roland Martin in November that even some of his fellow Republicans are "scared" of him because of his race.

Steele acknowledged his party's failure to reach out and connect with African-Americans and other marginalized communities. "We have lost sight of the historic, integral link between the party and African-Americans," he explained.

Steele went on to make a candid statement about how the disconnect between Republicans and minorities is not new and has been a part of the party's strategy for years. The Chicago-Sun Times reports on what the RNC Chairman had to say:

For the last 40-plus years we had a 'Southern Strategy' that alienated many minority voters by focusing on the white male vote in the South. Well, guess what happened in 1992, folks, 'Bubba' went back home to the Democratic Party and voted for Bill Clinton.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/22/michael-steele-for-decade_n_547702.html

[Phoenix Dark]

southern strategy? what southern strategy!?

Steele don fucked up

[Cheebs]

Did Steele just admit the GOP caters to the southern white racists to win votes? 

[Stoney Mason]

Did Steele just admit the GOP caters to the southern white racists to win votes? 

No. He just admitted they "use" to. Which is always the joke.

When exactly did they stop?

[Phoenix Dark]

"Seriously though, most of the dedicated racists in the GOP left for the tea party, and the people that are left merely think you're criminals, they don't want to lynch you or anything.  I don't think so, at least.  Vote republican 2012."

Michael Steele, 2010

         /
 :himu

[Oblivion]

If Republicans are racist, then why did they pick Michael Steele to be the chairman of the RNC?

[youtube=560,345]c_8VQVhRmAc[/youtube]

Imagine if Anderson Cooper wasn't such a pussy?

Hey let's be fair, he did a pretty good job this time.

[Cheebs]

Michael Steele is a poor man's Michael Scott.

I think Jon Stewart is dead on, he is a poor mans Mr. Johnson


http://muppet.wikia.com/wiki/Mr._Johnson

[Mandark]

Old news!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/13/AR2005071302342.html

By Mike Allen
Thursday, July 14, 2005

It was called "the southern strategy," started under Richard M. Nixon in 1968, and described Republican efforts to use race as a wedge issue -- on matters such as desegregation and busing -- to appeal to white southern voters.

Ken Mehlman, the Republican National Committee chairman, this morning will tell the NAACP national convention in Milwaukee that it was "wrong."

"By the '70s and into the '80s and '90s, the Democratic Party solidified its gains in the African American community, and we Republicans did not effectively reach out," Mehlman says in his prepared text. "Some Republicans gave up on winning the African American vote, looking the other way or trying to benefit politically from racial polarization. I am here today as the Republican chairman to tell you we were wrong."

Mehlman, a Baltimore native who managed President Bush's reelection campaign, goes on to discuss current overtures to minorities, calling it "not healthy for the country for our political parties to be so racially polarized." The party lists century-old outreach efforts in a new feature on its Web site, GOP.com, which was relaunched yesterday with new interactive features and a history section called "Lincoln's Legacy."

I look forward to 25 years from now, when RNC chair Jenna Bush says the party used to maybe exploit homophobia.

[Phoenix Dark]

Or 35 years from now, when RNC chair Trig Palin says the party used to maybe exploit special needs people

[Eric P]

Or 35 years from now, when RNC chair Trig Palin says the parhy oosed to mambe espooid pessal nees peeble

[Mandark]

http://lowdenplan.com/

Convert your medical procedures to chickens!

[The Fake Shemp]

 

Where did you find that?

[Mandark]

Can't remember, but given my surfing habits probably a blog.

You know, I remember when right-wingers wanted to end fiat money.  Now they want to do away with currency altogether.

[Stoney Mason]

 

The Florida Republican Party on Thursday invoked a "Party Loyalty Oath" forbidding its members from supporting Gov. Charlie Crist should he decide to run as an independent in the state's Senate race.

In a memo obtained by the Palm Beach Post, GOP General Counsel Jason Gonzalez, who used to be a top lawyer in Crist’s office, informed state party members that there would be severe consequences if they did not rescind all support from the Florida governor:
The Republican Party of Florida requires members of all political party committees organized under the RPOF to abide by a Party Loyalty Oath.
...
Any member who fails to formally revoke his or her public support and request the return of any contributions made to a candidate running against the candidate of the Republican Party would be in violation of the RPOF Rules and would be subject to removal from party office and membership on Republican executive committees.


Gonzalez explained that the oath strictly prohibited any "Republican Executive Committee members from supporting any candidate other than the candidate nominated by the voters of the Republican Party through its primary election."

The memo surfaces as time ticks down until the deadline for Crist to decide whether he will make an independent run for Senate -- April 30.

Via the Palm Beach Post, here's General Counsel Jason Gonzalez's memo in full:
MEMORANDUM TO: Ronnie Whitaker Executive Director, Republican Party of Florida FROM: Jason Gonzalez General Counsel, Republican Party of Florida DATE: April 19, 2010
RE: Party Loyalty Oath - Candidates Running with No Party Affiliation

At your request, I have prepared the following memorandum involving the interpretation of Republican Party of Florida Rule 9 (Party Loyalty Oath). You specifically asked me to determine whether the Party Loyalty Oath would allow state and county executive committee members to support a registered Republican running with no party affiliation in a general election over the candidate nominated in the Republican primary election. As described below, my conclusion is that the Party Loyalty Oath forbids Republican Executive Committee members from supporting any candidate other than the candidate nominated by the voters of the Republican Party through its primary election.

The Republican Party of Florida requires members of all political party committees organized under the RPOF to abide by a Party Loyalty Oath. The loyalty oath is contained in Rule 9 of the RPOF Rules of Procedure. The Rule provides, in relevant part, that Members of all political party committees, and the National Committeeman and Committeewoman, shall before taking office, establish by written oath or affirmation that during their term of office they will not actively, publicly, or financially support the election of any candidate other than the Republican candidate in a partisan unitary, general or special election, or a Registered Republican in non-partisan elections, other than Judicial races governed under Florida Statute 105, if there is a registered Republican running for the same office, unless the county executive committee has taken an affirmative vote to endorse one Republican over another per Rule 8(B). The written oath or affirmation will also state that they will not engage in activities or conduct deemed by the Grievance Committee and affirmed by the RPOF Chairman as likely to injure the name of the Republican Party or interfere with the activities of the Republican Party.

At the heart of the Party Loyalty Oath is the requirement that members of the Republican Party of Florida's Executive Committees - from precinct committeemen and committeewomen in each county all the way up to the national committeeman and committeewoman - cannot provide their active, public, or financial support to any candidate other than "the Republican candidate" in a general election. The requirement of party loyalty is appropriate given the leadership roles within the party performed by executive committee members.

RPOF Rule 9 contains a few limited exceptions to its general requirement that members support "the Republican candidate." For "non-partisan" races, in which no partisan primary is held and in which the party affiliation of the candidates does not appear on the ballot, the loyalty oath requires executive committee members to refrain from supporting any candidate other than a registered Republican (if there is a registered Republican running for the office). Because judicial races are specifically exempted from the loyalty oath, executive committee members may support judicial candidates of their choosing without regard to political party affiliation.

The final requirement of Rule 9 relates to Republican primary elections. In a contested primary, Rule 9 prohibits executive committee members (in their official capacities) from supporting one Republican candidate over another unless the county executive committee has formally voted to endorse that candidate under RPOF Rule 8(B).

In sum, Republican Party of Florida Rule 9 prohibits any member of the Republican State Executive Committee or of any County Executive Committee from "actively, publicly, or financially" supporting a candidate running with no party affiliation over "the Republican candidate" chosen in the primary election. Any member who fails to formally revoke his or her public support and request the return of any contributions made to a candidate running against the candidate of the Republican Party would be in violation of the RPOF Rules and would be subject to removal from party office and membership on Republican executive committees.

Please do not hesitate to call should you have any questions.


-- Elyse Siegel
4/23/2010

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/28/florida-senate-2010-elect_n_516222.html

[Human Snorenado]

RUN, CHARLIE, RUN!

Spectacle would be awesome, and Meek would make a better Senator than either Rubio or Crist.  Actually, dealing with Rubio would probably be easier than dealing with Crist- you could just assume that Rubio would oppose everything and not worry about him.  Crist might try and cut deals and thus water down bills.

[Brehvolution]

That AZ law is some bullshit and highlights the fact that republicans should not be elected into office. THEY are the ones that are taking away people's rights.

[The Fake Shemp]

Republicans only take away rights from people who are not Americans, it's just the Democrats that want to take away Americans' rights!

[Cheebs]

The post-Obama Republican revolution that started with 2009 governor wins seems to be really working out for the public:
http://politicalwire.com/archives/2010/04/23/buyers_remorse_in_new_jersey.html

Nothing bad at all has happened in Virginia with the new Governor at least...oh wait.

[AdmiralViscen]

People are so fucking stupid.

[Green Shinobi]

People are so fucking stupid.

See above post for a prime example.

[AdmiralViscen]

Why do you even post here? I've never seen anyone so starved for attention at all times.

[Mandark]

Reading up on the AZ immigration bill.  Yech.

Telling police to make on-the-spot determinations of people's residency status is an open invitation for racism.  Any policy that will lead to the phrase "let me see your papers" being asked of people in public places skeeves me.

[Green Shinobi]

Profiling in general is pretty fucking indefensible IMO.

[Stoney Mason]

Good upstanding Americans have nothing to worry about!

Immigrants dress funny!!

[Phoenix Dark]

I'm expecting massive tea party protests over the government infringing on American civil rights in this AZ profiling bill.

[Cheebs]

I keep hearing how they can spot them based on their clothes by people defending the law. Which confuses me. Do they think all mexicans wear sombreros or something?

[Mandark]

I'm expecting massive tea party protests over the government infringing on American civil rights in this AZ profiling bill.

That won't be right away.

First, they're going to protest the Hutaree militia members being given civilian trials rather than being sent to Guantanamo Bay.

[AdmiralViscen]

Fellow Republican state Sen. Frank Antenori said the biggest reason he supported the bill was because a rancher in one of the counties he represents was murdered by someone who crossed the U.S. border with Mexico illegally. He said the person of interest in the killing had crossed the border numerous times and cited other similar violent crimes.

...

"When you institutionalize a law like this one, you are targeting and discriminating at a wholesale level against a group of people," Rep. Raul Grijalva, D-Arizona, said Tuesday.

Grijalva closed his two district offices Friday when an unidentified caller threatened to blow up his Tucson office and kill his staff members. The caller also said he was going to be "exercising my civil liberties, and I'm shooting Mexicans at the border," according to Grijalva's district director, Ruben Reyes, who fielded one of the calls.

I guess we need a second law to impound white people who might be radical gun owners.

I didn't know that "civil liberties" included suing police for not harassing/jailing/shooting your legal hispanic neighbor.

[The Fake Shemp]

John McCain will save the day!

[Brehvolution]

My mom lives in Phoenix. Good thing she's white.

[Phoenix Dark]

This law is going to spawn some interesting lawsuits. If only we had tort reform  :'(

[Brehvolution]

   http://www.canadafreepress.com/

[Boogie]

  http://www.canadafreepress.com/

Never heard of it.  It's not even a newspaper. 

Just a crazy right-wing website.  And yes, we have those in Canada.

[Boogie]

Also:  My perspective as a police officer on this Arizona law.

I don't want to come down *too* hard on the law simply based upon the fact that I'm a police officer in Canada, and I don't know the environment of policing in southern states with a high hispanic population.  I don't know the community, I don't know the dynamics.

But my instinct is simply that I don't see what "reasonable" suspicion might entail to lead an officer to think that someone is an illegal OTHER than that which leads to unacceptable racial profiling.

MAYBE situations through talking with witnesses where they can provide evidence that someone is an illegal, or through talking with an individual in the course of regular duties where they make statements that provide the officer with "reasonable suspicion" but other than that....

It's not even like, for example, a drug investigation, where you can profile someone based upon their actions, gestures, clothing, smell, or behaviour to articulate a reasonable suspicion or belief of criminal activity.  As someone who supports and defends the law enforcement community generally, this is a bad law that will almost certainly lead to the potential for unacceptable racial profiling, even by good officers.

edit:  and to drunkenly paraphrase someone else I read on this subject in the past couple days:  Any law that might result in the regular demand by law enforcement in the United States of America of "papers, please" is an awful, horrible law.

[The Fake Shemp]

Sounds like Boogie is just jealous that he won't be able to partake in any awesome racial profiling and deportation of dirty illegal immigrants trying to take all our free government money and middle class jobs!

[The Dark Shake 3000]

Yes cleaning toilets and shit is a middle class jerb

[Boogie]

Yes cleaning toilets and shit is a middle class jerb

You know, when another poster makes an obviously satirical post, you obliviously pointing out the absurdity of that intentional satire is kinda sad.  Just sayin'.

[The Dark Shake 3000]

So is being a cop in Arizona, apparently.

[Phoenix Dark]

What the fuck?

Climate Bill Derailed: Graham Accuses Dems Of Playing Immigration Politics

A bipartisan deal on climate change legislation suffered a major setback today as a key author of the measure accused Senate Democrats and President Obama of abandoning the issue to instead focus on an election-year immigration bill.

Sen. Lindsey Graham was set to release a climate change plan Monday with Sens. John Kerry and Joe Lieberman, but today Graham wrote a letter to "leaders in the energy independence effort" saying it was obvious the energy bill would have "no chance of success." He said politics will "impede, if not derail" the Kerry-Lieberman-Graham efforts that have been in the works for months.

Graham (R-SC) charged that Obama and Senate leaders have signaled immigration is their priority. Graham said that "has destroyed my confidence that there will be a serious commitment and focus to move energy legislation this year."

"All of the key players, particularly the Senate leadership, have to want this debate as much as we do. This is clearly not the case," Graham wrote in in the letter, obtained by TPMDC and included below.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) swiftly responded in a statement pledging that both immigration and climate change are top priorities. He said while he appreciates Graham's work on both issues, "I will not allow him to play one issue off of another."

Reid said energy "could be next" if the measure is ready, and said immigration would require "significant committee work that has not yet begun." The majority leader said the American people "expect us to do both, and they will not accept the notion that trying to act on one is an excuse for not acting on the other."

I'm told a Lieberman statement will be out this evening. The White House released a statement urging Graham to keep working, saying climate legislation can pass "this year" and saying both issues need bipartisan support. (Update: Kerry (D-MA) said in a statement that he and Lieberman are "pressing forward" with or without Graham.)

Graham said the hasty immigration push (following Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer signing a controversial bill Friday) is a "cynical political ploy" and cited the 2007 effort that fell apart under President George W. Bush despite months of negotiation. Earlier this spring, Graham told TPMDC that the process of passing health care was a bad sign for both immigration and climate change.

Here is Graham's letter, dated today:

(letter at link)
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/04/climate-bill-derailed-graham-accuses-dems-of-playing-immigration-politics.php?ref=fpa

Seriously?

[AdmiralViscen]

Wow

[Boogie]

So is being a cop in Arizona, apparently.

what the fuck are you talking about?

[The Dark Shake 3000]

[Boogie]

What the fuck?

Climate Bill Derailed: Graham Accuses Dems Of Playing Immigration Politics

A bipartisan deal on climate change legislation suffered a major setback today as a key author of the measure accused Senate Democrats and President Obama of abandoning the issue to instead focus on an election-year immigration bill.

Sen. Lindsey Graham was set to release a climate change plan Monday with Sens. John Kerry and Joe Lieberman, but today Graham wrote a letter to "leaders in the energy independence effort" saying it was obvious the energy bill would have "no chance of success." He said politics will "impede, if not derail" the Kerry-Lieberman-Graham efforts that have been in the works for months.

Graham (R-SC) charged that Obama and Senate leaders have signaled immigration is their priority. Graham said that "has destroyed my confidence that there will be a serious commitment and focus to move energy legislation this year."

"All of the key players, particularly the Senate leadership, have to want this debate as much as we do. This is clearly not the case," Graham wrote in in the letter, obtained by TPMDC and included below.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) swiftly responded in a statement pledging that both immigration and climate change are top priorities. He said while he appreciates Graham's work on both issues, "I will not allow him to play one issue off of another."

Reid said energy "could be next" if the measure is ready, and said immigration would require "significant committee work that has not yet begun." The majority leader said the American people "expect us to do both, and they will not accept the notion that trying to act on one is an excuse for not acting on the other."

I'm told a Lieberman statement will be out this evening. The White House released a statement urging Graham to keep working, saying climate legislation can pass "this year" and saying both issues need bipartisan support. (Update: Kerry (D-MA) said in a statement that he and Lieberman are "pressing forward" with or without Graham.)

Graham said the hasty immigration push (following Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer signing a controversial bill Friday) is a "cynical political ploy" and cited the 2007 effort that fell apart under President George W. Bush despite months of negotiation. Earlier this spring, Graham told TPMDC that the process of passing health care was a bad sign for both immigration and climate change.

Here is Graham's letter, dated today:

(letter at link)
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/04/climate-bill-derailed-graham-accuses-dems-of-playing-immigration-politics.php?ref=fpa

Seriously?

ie.

How dare you decide to tackle an issue completely unrelated to climate change, in favour of immigration rights.

Nevermind the fact that we never would have cooperated with you on energy and climate change.

Instead, allow us to cloud all current issues by our strategy to FUCK the idea of pursuing any progressive policy.

My fervent wish is that the Repulican party gets ass-raped by the demographics of opposing the hispanic demographic.  Fuck 'em.

edit:  sorry, that not really intended to be directed toward you, PD.

[Boogie]

No, really.

Please tell me, what the FUCK your point was, in saying "So is being a cop in Arizona, apparently."  By all means, tell me how you can intelligently comment on an issue unrelated to film, you vacuous fuck.

[The Dark Shake 3000]

I love getting under your skin

[Boogie]

I love being a total fucking moron douchebag, who contributes nothing to the forum other than film talk, and whose timer on being banned from the forum is quickly approaching zero....

Fixed.

[The Dark Shake 3000]

So hostile

Is this because I said you probably live a sad life? Pardon me if I was wrong, but that's what I gather from the majority of your posts on this site. You seem to love trying to be a condescending dick every time I post in a thread that isn't movie related and calling me out on random shit. Yes, I know Willco was making a joke -- am I not allowed to make one too? Was my reply some impassioned rant about the nobility of immigrants?

Please, calm the fuck down.

[Boogie]

So hostile

*shrug*

Is this because I said you probably live a sad life?

huh?  When was this?  If you knew the first thing about my life, the very idea would send everyone else laughing to the point where they would need oxygen to keep alive.

Pardon me if I was wrong, but that's what I gather from the majority of your posts on this site. You seem to love trying to be a condescending dick every time I post in a thread that isn't movie related and calling me out on random shit. Yes, I know Willco was making a joke -- am I not allowed to make one too? Was my reply some impassioned rant about the nobility of immigrants?

Please, calm the fuck down.

No, by all means, let's make a direct comparison about our lives.  Where you are a fucking joke on here who knows quite a bit about film but whom no one particularly likes, whereas I am someone who has fundamentally contributed to the security of the 2010 Olympics, the security of other world leaders visiting Canada in the past 2 years, and countless other  incidents that I'm not about to disclose to your pathetic film-schooled ass.  If you expect a federal agent with a Top Secret security clearance to disclose the full extent of his activities just to score some points on the internet against some fucking slack-jacked film student, you have about 539024 things to learn about life.

You're the one who seems to be interested in direct comparisons of our lives.  I guess you feel safe in doing so since I'll never be able to disclose exactly what I do. 

[Ichirou]

And yet, you can't get laid.

[The Dark Shake 3000]

No one likes? What, you and a handful of other trolls? That last Shake thread was full of people saying they like having me around, so I don't give a fuck whether you and the Shat Pack/Nihilist Mafia do or not. The fact that my mere presence on EB is enough to ruffle your feathers is pretty amusing, though. Yet again you try to be a dick and point out some flaw in my logic then get upset when I brush it off.

And yet, you can't get laid.

Pretty much my point. All I ever see if this dude bitching about how pathetic his love life was, so I figured he was just another internet tough guy who acts like a dick to make up for the pathetic void he is in the physical world. I didn't know I was, in fact, dealing with James fucking Bond.

[Phoenix Dark]

Chill dudes, come on  

It's amazing how the GOP has seemingly successfully turned this Goldman Sachs controversy into an indictment on the White House, without the media calling them out. Steele and Romney held a fundraiser at Paulson's house - the dude at the center of the entire thing. Yet instead we're hearing about the "curious timing" of the SEC's charges. smh

[Boogie]

And yet, you can't get laid.

A) That is not true.

B)  You are a key contributor in shitting up this forum via jacking off Shake due to, presumably, his film knowledge, to the exclusion of his other douche qualities.  Like Shake, you know a fuck lot about film, but are otherwise a slack-jawed moron capable of nothing more than distracting Green Shinobi in his psychosis.

[Human Snorenado]

Oh wow, isn't that cute.  Shake's boyfriend is here to defend him.

[The Dark Shake 3000]

If me and Ichi both left this place would be pretty boring. Cheebs would probably leave too, then this place would go back to being practically dead.

[Boogie]

No one likes? What, you and a handful of other trolls?

You're right.  It's not like I have access to the Icon forum where all the other grownups have concluded that you are a plague upon this place, and the only solution is to give you enough rope to hang yourself.....

[Human Snorenado]

I think I speak for the majority when I say that we can only hope that boringness comes sooner rather than later.

[The Dark Shake 3000]

The Icons make up a small percentage of this forum, and hardly ever post. And most of them have had issues with me for four fucking years. Nice try, though.

[Van Cruncheon]

wrong, boogie: ichi, like shake, is a dude with too much time on his hands who can't let any perceived internet transgression slide. one diss in a thread, and out comes their paper bags and chattering fingers; the only difference is the type of response, with ichi pulling the mother-in-law card and going personal and dredging up unrelated slights from years previous, and shake nervously waggling his chubby index finger and wheezing "nuh-uh, YOU started it" in what he hopes is an appropriately disaffected tone

i was fine with their return, but they're both back to their tired shenanigans. some personalities simply CAN get overexposed to quickly.

[Boogie]

Pretty much my point. All I ever see if this dude bitching about how pathetic his love life was, so I figured he was just another internet tough guy who acts like a dick to make up for the pathetic void he is in the physical world. I didn't know I was, in fact, dealing with James fucking Bond.

Internet tough guy.  Name, concretely, some way that you have contributed to society, if you mock my life so.  Cause all I see is you ignoring what i actually post in favour of mocking me as "James fucking Bond".   Which is not an altogether inaccurate description...