Racist Democrats??!?!??

[dd74]

Originally posted by Mulhollanddose
dd...Do you think it is politically wise to alienate a significant majority of the Republican party for the less than 1% gay Republicans?...Think Ross Perot here.

Gay issues not even Democrats will touch when push comes to shove...At a total of between 1-3% of the population they do not represent a democratic majority...The massive problems of the gay community aside (rampant brutal partner abuse, pedophilia, the pandemic of AIDS).

For one, I'd like to see those percentage figures - not that I doubt you - but just to see them officially.

Secondly (and probably because this is L.A.), it seemed the Log Cabin people received a lot of coverage during GW's first and second campaign. 1% might be small, but air time is golden.

Fact is a party needs to show inclusiveness; if that is accomplished, votes at the ballot box are a given.

Black Dems have their own issues within a divided party, and I agree it's distasteful for black Dems to project racial ill toward a person of same color of an opposing party. In this, I fault the so-called Black Dem leaders who say this is fair. Some might see this as overt racism and simply decide that neither party is for them and take the apathy vote.

BTW: any stats on what percentage of the Reps are black?

[dd74]

Originally posted by rrpjr
Now I don't get it.

Republicans aren't obligated to "first consider" anything. And they are hardly casting the first stone. They're trying to keep stones from being cast.

The issue here is a party which purports to champion blacks, and which hurls charges of "racism" at every opportunity at anybody who questions their noble purity, explicitly saying it is okay to use racism to block the ambitions of a black man whose views don't agree with theirs. In this case, his views challenge their covert determination to deny blacks true freedom to leave "the plantation" of their orthodoxy. Obviously, he must be destroyed.

A true "liberal" would celebrate this man's independence, his right to choose his own political and intellectual faith. Only a reactionary would object -- and fear would be his reason.

1) Republicans aren't obligated to "first consider" anything... Highly doubtful a train of thought like that could fly in a democratic society as is shown in GW's 37% approval rating.

2) The issue here is a party which purports to champion blacks... According to whom?

3) A true "liberal" would celebrate this man's independence, his right to choose his own political and intellectual faith... Would a true "conservative" celebrate this same man?

[Matt Holcomb]

So is Steele a sell-out?

[Nathans_Dad]

Originally posted by Matt Holcomb
So is Steele a sell-out?

Why would you ask that? Just because he doesn't march to the liberal drum he is a suspected sell out? Why can't a black person be conservative in this country??