Democrats must be bored, because they are complaining about a single speech that Steve Scalise gave, but they didn't care that Robert Byrd had been a member of the KKK.



(Filed under "Hypocrisy")

yep,,, funny how that happens in politics

how complaints can form about things done by some politicians yet support for others doing the same

and vice versa

btw, I am democrat and I really don't care who he spoke too

would care less if he had done it decades ago than recently mind you,, but still don't really care

now, what he may have said,, might be something to feel upset about,, or not,,,

One of Steve Scalise's defenders is Rep. Cedric Richmond, a Democrat.

From the Washington Post:



I do wish there were more Democrats like Rep. Richmond.

A lot of people don't know what party they are.Or what they should be.
And it's easy if you get a paycheck and work for a living your ademocrat.and if you're the one that gives or right out the paychecks you are a republican...

The ones who sign the paychecks also work for a living.

while it probably doesn't matter that Scalise spoke to a white supremacist group all those years ago, it appears that he's being somewhat disingenuous about it now. Claiming ignorance about David Duke's affiliation to the KKK, as both politicians ran in the same circles and Scalise had been quoted at the time, claiming that he (Scalise) held similar views as David Duke, who made a big deal in the state, at the time, about being a former Grand Dragon in the KKK. Scalise needs to simply say something along the lines of him changing his stance on racial bias and/or civil rights legislation over the decades. Not that he "didn't know" to whom he spoke.

Anyway, it probably won't change the minds of his critics come the election season.

with millions of democrats out there, I belief its safe to let yourself believe there are,,,

well, the guilty by association philosophy is not a new one, Bill Ayers ring a bell?


its sadly, part of the balance of factual report and biased opinionated assumptions involved in the duo we call media and politics

apparently he didn't even address them!

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/395542/steve-scalise-not-guilty-charged-quin-hillyer

The first time I ever spoke to Steve Scalise, it was in the context of his helping me and his cousin, state senator Ben Bagert, block the political career of David Duke. In the quarter-century since that 1989 phone conversation, Scalise has given no indication that he holds any views anywhere near as odious as Duke’s racist and anti-Semitic garbage, and plenty of indications directly to the contrary — indeed, compellingly so.



Scalise, the House majority whip now under fire for having spoken back in 2002 to a white-supremacist group tied to the former Klansman Duke, says he did not know the nature of the group to which he spoke. The Duke lieutenant who invited him confirms that account, as does another attendee. Indeed, he says that technically Scalise spoke not at the supremacist group at all, but to a civic-association meeting just before the supremacist conference began.

By all accounts, Scalise spoke not on racial issues, but on taxes and spending.

In short, the more we find out about that event, and about Scalise, the more this whole “scandal” looks like a case of guilt not just by association, but by unintentional, second-degree association — a guilt wrongly assessed against a man with a long record of working not to divide the races but to bridge the differences between them.

Scalise deserves the benefit of the doubt.



seems some Democrats really are scraping the Bottom of the Barrel!

Desperation!
A bit late!

Ayers-Connection is a bit different!

not much

the presidents association was a professional one and only 'along the lines' of his social activism and political career

not along the lines of terrorist plans or beliefs,,,

him knowing and working beside someone is another example of a broad 'guilt by association' narrative the media and politicians (and miserable people) seem to so enjoy,,,

So you''re saying that anyone who disagrees with your belief is a miserable person?

Nice start to the new year!

Hope you enjoy a great one anyway

Actually seems to be an inner examination perspective as she has posted this more than once of late. As the supposition is more based on the emotional that the logical, can't really apply to others in general so therefore must be an inner summation.

paraphrasing is a lost skill, it should be taught in schools,,lol


apparently , if I said men seem to enjoy sports some would paraphrase me as saying those who enjoy sports cant be women or those who enjoy sports MUST be men,,,lol

no, nothing to do with making it about ME,, only exactly what was posted

miserable people, the media, and politicians SEEM to enjoy the guilt by association narrative,,,, and that's not an exclusive list by any means


deal with it,,,lol Happy New Years,,

Actually the indoctrination system does teach paraphrasing, to a large degree. The whole goal of the systemic dumbing down of the masses, and never so pungently demonstrated as.....

Sports, the entertainment of the masses so as to ignore reality. Personally I believe the Romans had a much better "sports" environment with the Gladiators. And why shouldn't females be entitled to indulge in such gross manifestations of ignorance? Better to be entertained than than educated anyway.

And all has to do with "you" as you make everything personal based on emotional perceptions, "exactly" as posted.

Would this somehow be based on an underlying psychological condition, Self-Loathing, that causes people to attempt to abdicate their own personal responsibility to exercise conscience, and fall into patterns of order-following and justification?

And it would seem that it's not others that need to "deal with it".

ty so much for the unemotional and not at all personal assessment doctor,,

If for one moment you actually believe I would accept that, you would again be mistaken. Or, in the infamous words of Hitler (the real one not that little fake in the White House):

"Faith is harder to shake than knowledge, love succumbs less to change than respect, hate is more enduring than aversion, and the impetus to the mightiest upheavals on this earth has at all times consisted less in a scientific knowledge dominating the masses than in a fanaticism which inspired them and sometimes in a hysteria which drove them forward."

The world of "Hope and Change", even Hitler would have been impressed, almost as much as he was over the Catholics and their dogmas.

I think you had better research that Ayers/Obama-Association once again!


Obamas Terrorist Friend
William Ayers, for those who don't know him was a member of the Weather Underground. These are the bombings his association was tied to.
February 21, 1970, bombs were exploded three gasoline-filled fire bombs at the home of New York State Supreme Court Justice Murtagh. The same night, bombs were thrown at a police car in Manhattan and two military recruiting stations in Brooklyn. March 6, 1970 a bomb under construction blew up in the groups home, killing three members. October 6, 1970 They blew up the 1886 Haymarket Riot statue in Chicago. Bombed the Unites States Capitol on March 1, 1971. Bombed the Pentagon on May 19, 1972. They bombed the United States Department Of State January 29, 1975.
William Ayers is unrepentant and has written and spoken about wishing he had done more during those years as an active member of the Weather Underground.
Knowing all this, would you want to be on the same board, have a political fundraiser thrown for you in his home, let him appoint you to another board of directors, shake his hand or even give him the time of day?
In a new afterword to his memoir, released after the election, 1960s radical William Ayers, who admits to bombing and planning to bomb government targets in the 70's, writes that the campaign controversy over their relationship was an effort by Obama’s political enemies to “deepen a dishonest narrative” about the candidate. “We had served together on the board of a foundation, knew one another as neighbors and family friends, held an initial fund-raiser at my house, where I’d made a small donation to his earliest political campaign,” he writes. Obama had been denying most of these statements for months and now we know it to be a lie.
As an internationally known figure, controversially pardoned by President Carter, Obama knowingly entered into a long term friendship with an unrepentant terrorist. Obama still refuses to publicly distance himself from Ayers or to admonish Ayers murderous, insurrectionist past.

from a Commentary by Tony Blankley
Wednesday, September 24, 2008

But worse than all the unfair and distorted reporting and image projecting are the shocking gaps in Obama's life that are not reported at all. The major media simply have not reported on Obama's two years at New York's Columbia University, where, among other things, he lived a mere quarter-mile from former terrorist Bill Ayers. Later, they both ended up as neighbors and associates in Chicago. Obama denies more than a passing relationship with Ayers. Should the media be curious? In only two weeks, the media have focused on all the colleges Gov. Palin has attended, her husband's driving habits 20 years ago, and the close criticism of the political opponents Gov. Palin had when she was mayor of Wasilla, Alaska.

But in two years, they haven't bothered to see how close Obama was with the terrorist Ayers.

Nor have the media paid any serious attention to Obama's rise in Chicago politics. How did honest Obama rise in the famously sordid Chicago political machine with the full support of Boss Daley? Despite the great -- and unflattering -- details on Obama's Chicago years presented in David Freddoso's new book on Obama, the mainstream media continue to ignore both the facts and the book. It took a British publication, The Economist, to give Freddoso's book a review with fair comment.

Perhaps that is why the National Journal's respected correspondent Stuart Taylor wrote, "The media can no longer be trusted to provide accurate and fair campaign reporting and analysis."

That conspiracy not only has Photoshopped out all of Obama's imperfections (and dirtied up his opponent McCain's image) but also has put most of his questionable history down the memory hole.

The public will be voting based on the idealized image of the man who never was. If he wins, however, we will be governed by the sunken, cynical man Obama really is. One can only hope that the senior journalists will be judged as harshly for their professional misconduct as Wall Street's leaders currently are for their failings.

quite prophetic!

Knowing all this, would you want to be on the same board, have a political fundraiser thrown for you in his home, let him appoint you to another board of directors, shake his hand or even give him the time of day?



it wasn't merely a board, it was a HUGE network , working on initiatives to improve education,, one in which Many esteemed people and local parents and teachers and academics wanting the community to be improved were deeply involved

I would consider it an honor for a friend like Leff ( who actually recommended him, not Ayers, who didn't know him), who had been director of a presidential library and president of other organizations promoting progress in the community and civil rights attorney,,, to pick me for the job

I wouldn't turn it down because of what ONE involved person did more than twenty years before

I would shake his hands, if I were first meeting him and had none of the background assumed here to be known

and if I were up and coming in politics and meeting people in the community of which he was one,,,


and , I would also give him the time of day,, Im strange that way, I tend to give all types of people with all types of screwed up ideas of justice,, at least that

until they give me reason to believe they are going to actually be a waste of it,,,,