Tuesday, September 18, 2007
I guess Republicans think they don't need the black vote
If Republicans don't need the African American vote, and they don't need the Hispanic vote, who are they trying to court? The Jewish vote? All .1% of the population? This snubbing of the minority populations is not good for minorities and their interests. The candidates can cry "other conflicts" all they want, but it seems very odd they the front runners snub both Hispanic and African American sponsored forums. It appears they don't care about minority issues. Clearly Fred Thompson, who seems to be shriveling away before our eyes, looks more comfortable in a hooded white sheet than he does speaking to an African American audience. However, it is no longer 1960 (as much as the GOP would like it to be). There is one group that is a growing minority that GOP still has in their pocket, that is the white male. Well, I guess there is always voter suppression for the GOP.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
15 comments:
I guess they're ignoring African Americans and Hispanics so that they don't alienate the Repugnicans base, the bigot vote. As far as their courting of the Jewish vote, Thompson et al would be misguided. While a small contigency of Jews (Cantor, Wolfowitz, Kristol, Lieberman et al.) support the neocon/Bush/Cheney position because they erroneously think that it's good for Israel, the vast majority of Jews in America support a progressive position and would readily advocate pulling out of Iraq and talking to Iran rather than the alternative. Among the most prominent of these in politics are Lantos, Boxer, Schumer, Feingold, Weiden, Kohl, the Levin brothers of Michigan, Rahm Emmanuel. To underscore this point take a look at who the prominent Jews in other fields (entertainment) are supporting such as Streisand, Spielberg, Michael Douglas, Paul Simon, Kanye West (just kidding).
Nice post!
Wait a second...you're basing American Jewish opinion on Hollywood? How scientific and I'm sure right on the mark...I take all of my cues from Streisand and Spielberg. They are my guiding lights!
You can disagree with the admin's approach for many reasons, but Israel had little to do with Iraq. In fact, Israel had cautioned America that Iraq was not the major threat...Iran was. And while no one wants to see more military action, please tell me what "talking" to this regime would accomplish? What has Iran done to signal it wants peace and to abandon its nuclear program?
We should be pushing for tougher sanctions, economic isolation, and diplomatic penalties...not a bonfire and hookah party.
I don't believe it was suggested that the Administration invaded Iraq because of Israel. Secondly, sanctions have never worked. They've done a real bang up job on Cuba and North Korea. Diplomacy hasn't been tried with Iran. Most of the generals (not beholden to Bush) and the folks in the intelligence community agree that diplomacy should be our first option.
True, sanctions don't often work. I agree with you completely on that point. But if investment in their energy sector ceases and European countries stop extending lines of credit, we may get the leverage needed to see a change in Iranian policy. Right now, what is our leverage? We have very little influence on that regime.
Anonymous 2, please don't take my words out of context. I merely suggested that some Jews who may support the ill-advised policies of Bush and Cheney do so because they believe it benefits Israel. I also suggested that the majority of American Jews would support a more moderate (less hostile approach). So you have a problem with entertainers. The fact remains that the vast majority of Jews who serve in Congress oppose the objectives of Bush, Cheney and the neocons (sounds like a rock group and a band one at that!).
We have very little influence because we've been unwilling to sit down and talk to them. I mean talk, not kiss their ass. As a matter of fact it, the powers that be in Iran (the mullahs, as well as the populace) may be much more approachable and reasonable than "A mad man in a dinner jacket"
Yes, the populace is approachable, but the mullahs are a different story. They're the ones that are funding Hamas and Hezbollah, and supporting terrorism in numerous other ways. This is a regime that sent young kids to clear minefields in the Iran-Iraq War with plastic keys around their necks - supposedly the key to heaven. The people in Iran are suffering too...we just need to get them more power, and get rid of the mullahs. Ahmadinejad has the mullahs' support, otherwise he would have been tossed out.
With regard to Jews and Congress...well, most of Congress opposes Bush, et al. I just don't favor using Hollywood as a guidepost. I think that their lives and the lens through which they see things is very different than that of most Americans - Jewish or not.
Back in 2005, more American Jews supported (vs. opposed) American military action against Iran's nuclear program. That number dropped in 2006, probably because of the way the Iraq war was handled. Still, a large number of Americans and American Jews would support an Israeli strike against Iran.
There you go again indicting Hollywood. Perhaps we should poll the Jews in academics to see how they feel about Bush- Oh, I forgot, they're a bunch of elite liberals who are out of touch with the everyday people..I mean the CEOs at Halliburton or members of the Carlisle group. As far as invading Iran, you're right the powers that be are all evil and unapproachable. Why wait. Why don't you organize a strike force and invade. I'm sure you could get Cheney, Wolfowitz, Rove to join up to defend "freedom" and our access to oil. Cheney may be willing to serve up his daughter and Rove might volunteer his military age son. Why not the Bush twins. Let's kick their asses. Why not conscript every American under the age of 40 into the National Guard (Canada could use some new immigrants). In the event we bite off more than we can chew (again) we could have another "surge".
Now you're talking...Game on!!!
War is not a game. Young soldiers and innocent civilians die or are maimed and disfigured for life, while chickenhawk pundits pontificate about the "fight to protect our freedom" (to make money and shop at the malls).
Thanks for the clarification. I hadn't known that... I was just jumping on the hyperbole and sarcasm of the previous anonymous. Take a deep breath...this is all for good fun and debate.
For someone who may love Hollywood so much, the humor has quickly disappeared from the blog.
Enough. Marc it's time for your next entry. How about a serious issue like OJ, Britney, or the View.
I hear Britney wants to attack Iran.
The last word on this. Britney Spears is a Bush supporter (if she even votes). The proportion of Republicans and Democrats in Hollywood mirrors that of society. You have Bruce Willis, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Jim Caviezel, Patricia Heaton etc. What Hollywood says and does is important. They have and can get an audience much easier than I can. I don't take my cues from them, but it is good to have them out there touting the cause.
Back to my original intent of this blog: Republicans don't like black people. Don't vote for them.
Post a Comment