s skippy the bush kangaroo: the gop political agenda: "shut up"

skippy the bush kangaroo



Wednesday, March 12, 2008

the gop political agenda: "shut up"

it's not just for bill o'reilly anymore.

conservative blogger of the year (according to cpac) ace of spades uses the phrase to explain the difference between repubbb david vitter's penchant for prostitutions versus elliot spitzer's fondness for same.

and tonite, on the dan abrams show on msnbc, pat buchanan couldn't stand to let a black woman finish her sentence in response to his allegation that geraldine ferraro was simply telling the truth. thinkprogress:

tonight on msnbc’s live with dan abrams, guests pat buchanan, rachel maddow, and keli goff discussed the role of race in barack obama’s presidential campaign. buchanan suggested obama is winning the black vote simply because he is black. goff countered that obama has won states that have small populations of african-americans. as goff spoke, buchanan grew more agitated, ultimately lashing out. “shut up for a second please!” buchanan yelled.
here's the video:

Labels: , , , ,

posted by skippy at 8:11 PM |

6 Comments:

"shut up," he explained.

keli goff was really impressive, by the way.
commented by OpenID Michael, 8:54 PM PDT  
So was Rachel Maddow-but I suppose that's old news.
commented by Blogger jiminy jilliker, 11:27 PM PDT  
so which slogan will mccain choose ???

Shut up, that's why

or

shut up for a second please!

they both have soooooooo much appeal to the free thinking voter

what a conundrum

still got the frickin eye test huh ???

freepatriot
commented by Anonymous Anonymous, 1:09 AM PDT  
so which slogan will mccain choose ???

Me thinks, "Shut up, you all on the am hate radio liked her so much, I picked her as VP."
commented by Blogger Frederick, 8:25 AM PDT  
At least he said please!

Just being Pat Buchanan makes him a racist. But Goff may have been out of line IMO implying he's racist for just being a conservative. And I admit, it's hard to be sure that's the case since she refers to an earlier statement by Buchanan not shown in this clip.

Should he have told her to "shut up", obviously not, but I have to admit I usually say it aloud whenever I listen to these talking heads. Let the other person have his or her turn, it is the respectful thing to do. If I wanted that, I'd just go to Bell-O.

Buchanan was right about one thing, South Carolina was what changed the course of the black vote demographic. The Obama camp courted the black voters (as any Democrat would), unfortunately using the infamous self-hating homophobic Donnie McClurkin, in Obama's South Carolina gospel tour, among other gay-bashers, while hurling major accusations of racism at the Clintons. The timing of these tactics was effective. Also, as Obama emerged as the surprise frontrunner in the prior contests, there was a major realization that Obama really had a chance to win this thing; the black voters responded to all of that. Doesn't anyone recall the news stories of "Is Obama black enough for black voters?" As if that wasn't racist in itself.

But it's absolutely batshit crazy to think Clinton would serve herself in any way by deliberately alienating such a huge percentage of the democratic voting machine.



From an article in "New York Magazine discussing demographics in the Obama/Clinton race:


Thus, it seems, demographics are destiny, but in this election really only in three particular cases: African-Americans drawn irresistibly to one of their own, white women of a certain age drawn irresistibly to one of their own, and young whites drawn irresistibly to youthfulness and the thrill of the new. Duh.



We have a bit of a double standard about this, of course. On the one hand, who can fail to be heartened by the spectacle of majorities of white southern guys voting for an African-American? We coo approvingly when certain people behave against type. I was even pleased (and slightly shocked) that 43 percent of black women in New York voted for Clinton.



Yet on the other hand, we selectively suspend our disapproval of the historically downtrodden as they behave according to type. We’re sympathetic to all the white women voting for Clinton, and all the black people voting for Obama. But we also hope—don’t we?—that this is another awkward, inevitable moment in our long, long march toward a society in which nonwhite and non-male presidential candidates aren’t thrilling by virtue of their race or gender.



The full article is here.

http://nymag.com/news/imperialcity/44216/
commented by Anonymous sean on li, 10:05 AM PDT  
As I commeted elsewhere, Buchanan is a dinosaur. He and several other commentators - mostly right-wing, that I've seen - are trying to pretend that Ferarro was saying that part of Obama's success has been due to being black, which no one disputes in states such as South Carolina. However, Ferraro suggested that Obama's success was only due to his race, which is clearly ridiculous - it certainly doesn't explain him getting the top spot in Iowa! I don't think this is sincere miscommunication, either.
commented by Blogger Batocchio, 4:07 PM PDT  

Add a comment