This is a response to a highly offensive graphic a friend posted calling Hillary Clinton The Butcher of Benghazi, complete with bloody hands (blithely ignoring the fact that it was a Republican-led House -- from which all fiscally-related legislation originates -- that cut the budget for that very Benghazi compound). In spite of repeated requests not to engage in name-calling, this person insisted on referring to his opponents as dumbocrats and other such childish monikers. I am a lifelong Democrat and am willing to participate in any reasoned, rational debate, but to my way of thinking, if your best argument is calling names, you dont have much of an argument. Comb my postings; I defy you to find a single instance in which I have referenced the GOP as, for example, Rethuglicans. Given this person knows I am a Democrat, I can only infer that he considers me dumb. I am lots of things, not all of them admirable, but dumb I am not. Funny, but when it gets down to arguing facts, he is strangely silent. I also checked his wall shortly after sending this message and another detailing 13 consulate/compound attacks under GWBush (which Darrell Issa found strangely unsuitable for inquiry); he apparently has deleted both postings. Odd how some can dish it out, but are big ol pansies (and that AINT the P word Im thinking) when it comes to taking it. I have a feeling Ive been unfriended; can you see the big ol tears streaming down my face? Didnt think so. The last line of the graphic I just posted is why, beginning now, I will no longer participate in politically-oriented interchanges with you. [The line was that I treat people the way I wish to be treated.] I have asked you repeatedly -- and, I believe, given you excellent reasons in support of my requests -- not to engage in name-calling. I do not treat people in that unconscionable manner and do not expect to be treated that way. You repeatedly reference dumbocrats knowing that I am a Democrat; the only inference I can draw from that is that you consider me dumb. I may be lots of things, but dumb I am not, and masochistic I am not, so I do not stick around for abuse, verbal or otherwise. No, I am not a retired trial lawyer, but one of my degrees, from what is considered to be one of the top colleges east of the Mississippi, is in Political Science and I would put my knowledge base up against yours any day of the week. I seek information from a variety of sources, from the WSJ to National Review to Fox News to MSNBC and The Huffington Post. Unlike Sarah Palin, I can actually name publications that I read. And while we’re on the subject of Palin, -----, you lost all credibility with me when you consider a second-rate college drop-out (who couldn’t stomach college because she had to matriculate with -- horror of horrors -- peoples of color, according to her very own father), who quit halfway through her governorship to cash in on being a pundit in the very mainstream media she so snidely derides (#1 in ratings -- how much more “mainstream” can it be?), and who could not name ONE newspaper or magazine she read, whose very own children said they were lucky to get Taco Bell, and who claimed to see Russia from her back yard to be qualified to be POTUS. You seriously consider her to be in the same league with a person who has spent her whole life, from volunteering for Goldwater in high school, to graduating with honors from Wellesley, earning a JD from Yale, serving as a law partner, First Lady of Arkansas, FLOTUS, a U.S. Senator from one of our most populous states, and whatever you may think of her, by all OBJECTIVE accounts, a Secretary of State with distinction? Your “eminently qualified” gal quit everything she ever started and cashed in at her first opportunity. Hillary Clinton passed up potential millions to instead go into public service. I can’t find your original posting with the photo of LBJ and so cannot respond point by point. However, do you think your Republican friends’ motives were crystal clean regarding black votes? Here’s Lee Atwater in a 1981 interview (whom, I understand recanted/repented on his deathbed): “You start out in 1954 by saying “Nigger, nigger, nigger.” By 1968 you can’t say “nigger” -- that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states’ rights and all that stuff. You’re getting so abstract now [that] you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites. An subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I’m not saying that. But I’m saying that if is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me -- because obviously sitting around saying “We want to cut this,” is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than “Nigger, nigger.” You are dreaming if you believe the Democrats are the only party which has used the black voting bloc. The only difference? Democrats actually gladly accept black and brown votes and, has been the tradition since politics began, deliver something in return for those votes rather than utilize blacks and browns to drum up fear amongst whites. I’m usually pretty thick-skinned, particularly when it comes to a political discussion. I have many, many conservative Republican friends and love them all. But none has posted the hateful graphics you have posted, and none has lacked the heart -- or perhaps had the temerity -- to call me a “dumbocrat”. You may consider me dumb, but I’m intelligent enough to absent myself from abuse.
Posted on: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 14:02:52 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015