Republicans Need Cuckoo part II

[Jaboney]

Or, maybe you just forgot to use a smiley when chastising CC?

No. But I also communicate via PM.

I'm shedding responsibilities and trying to find more time for the Pixie and Sprout. Any time you want to takeover IP again, I'll be more than happy to make room.

[Tigerman]

J,

Sorry if all this seems personal. Its not actually meant to. I'm just commenting on what I perceive to be a bias in the way some posters are treated. As a token of my good will, I am still saving some shirts for you.

Peace!

[Jaboney]

Sweet. Thanks.
Btw...you missed a good series.

I'm quite happy to admit that certain posters are treated differently. Not on the basis of political affiliation, but posting history, demonstrated dis/respect, ect.

It's the attitude and lack of respect that get to me, not the opinion. Thus:

21 pages. Please start another if you wish to continue gloating.

There are a very, very small number of posters whose opinions I find so noxious that I prefer to avoid any and all contact with them, but none of that touches on IP. There are more posters whose manner is (deliberately) offensive, who tend to congregate in IP, and if they get the shitty end of the stick, well, that's easily remedied.

[mofangongren]

Wait but Chris was denigrating the GOP establishment and not forumosa members. I noticed that when TC or CC or Fred or someone claimed Chris did that before, that Chris wasn't being a twat to another board member with whom he was arguing, he was clowning the topic of the post.

I reserve my vitriol for the vile people out there in the political and media world: the politicians (the Cheneys), their aides (the Roves), the pundits (the Limbaughs) and the preachers (the Dobsons), and maybe sometimes rank-and-file bozos like Joe the Plumber. It's these people who are the GOP establishment: their leaders and media spokespeople.

But I do not harbor any condemnation for anyone on Forumosa.

Ah, and that's what's dangerous to 'em. There's folks on Forumosa who will, when inspiration strikes, doctor a mighty spin over the notion that disagreeing with the GOP or Bush or Hastert or whomever or whatever should simply be deemed a "personal attack" upon themselves. I'm glad to disagree with any official, regardless of party affiliation. But to the Halliburton Chorus, they apparently feel they're personally affected, as if they were somehow the footsoldiers of the 101st Fighting Keyboardists, metaphorically jumping onto policy grenades -- albeit at no personal risk beyond whatever they're doing to their blood pressure and liver health.

[urodacus]

Bye Bye Helen Thomas. Don't let the door smack you in the ass on the way out.

[Chris]

Media Research Center, a right-wing media watchdog group, condemns TV sitcom for not portraying homophobes in a positive light:

[Chris]

Rush Limbaugh shows utter contempt for poor, starving children:

"Let them eat cake!"

[Chewycorns]

Interesting......very interesting. Still a ways to go before the Dims really represent the rainbow they often like to think they represent. Columbia and Stanford study by the way.

The media coverage of the Bernard Madoff scandal made extensive reference to Madoff’s ethnic and religious background and his prominent role in the Jewish community. Because the scandal broke at a time of great public outcry against financial institutions, some, including Brad Greenberg in The Christian Science Monitor and Mark Seal in Vanity Fair, have reported on its potential to generate a wave of anti-Semitism.

This concern makes good sense. In complex situations such as the current financial crisis, where the vast majority of us lack the relevant expertise and information, biases and prejudices may play a significant role in shaping public attitudes. To evaluate just how large a role, we conducted a study (part of a larger survey of 2,768 American adults) in which we explored people’s responses to the economic collapse and tried to determine how anti-Semitic sentiments might relate to the ongoing financial crisis.

Interestingly, Democrats were especially prone to blaming Jews: while 32 percent of Democrats accorded at least moderate blame, only 18.4 percent of Republicans did so (a statistically significant difference). This difference is somewhat surprising given the presumed higher degree of racial tolerance among liberals and the fact that Jews are a central part of the Democratic Party’s electoral coalition. Are Democrats simply more likely to “blame everything” thus casting doubt on whether the anti-Jewish attitudes are real? Not at all. We also asked how much “individuals who took out loans and mortgages they could not afford” were to blame on the same five-point scale. In this case, Democrats were less likely than Republicans to assign moderate or greater blame.

http://bostonreview.net/BR34.3/malhotra_margalit.php

[Chris]

Interesting......very interesting. Still a ways to go before the Dims really represent the rainbow they often like to think they represent. Columbia and Stanford study by the way.

Nothing to do with Limbaugh or his vile comments.

[Chewycorns]

Interesting......very interesting. Still a ways to go before the Dims really represent the rainbow they often like to think they represent. Columbia and Stanford study by the way.

Nothing to do with Limbaugh or his vile comments.

Say what? The title of this thread is Republicans need Cuckoo. Cuckoo is a foolish or crazy person.

My post above is merely demonstrating that in a study at Columbia and Stanford, more Democrats could be seen as Anti-Semites based on their responses they gave to this top-tier uni academic survey during the economic downturn.

This demonstrates the ongoing problem of racism in the Democratic Party. A lot of people on this forum seem to associate racism with the Repubs in their posts. I've posted again and again on the roots of racism in the Democratic Party from Nathan Bedford Forrest giving the keynote address at their convention in the late 19th Century, to the screening of Birth of a Nation under Woodrow Wilson, to the modern day ramblings of Sharpton, Jackson, former Senator Hollings, and a bunch of other tribalist leaders. Clearly the survey demonstrates the craziness that is still there when 31 percent had those tendancies (compared with only 19 percent for the Repubs). Let me get this straight, you don't think their answers were cuckoo? That would be very interesting indeed.