next page.
“concede the election,” he said. “But we will never concede our fight for equal rights for all Americans.
To many voters, this seems like just plain good sense. Duke carried baggage from his past, but the voters were willing to overlook that. And if he had been afforded the forgiveness an ex-communist gets, he might have won.
Liberals like Richard Cohen of the Washington Post say he got so many votes because Louisianians were racists and ignorant. Baloney.
David Broder, also of the Post and equally liberal, writing on an entirely different subject, had it right: “No one wants to talk about [race] publicly, but if you ask any campaign consultant or pollster privately, you can confirm the sad reality that a great many working-class and middle-class white Americans are far less hostile to the rich and their tax breaks than they are to the poor and minorities with their welfare and affirmative-action programs.”
Liberals are notoriously blind to the sociological effects of their own programs. David Duke was hurt by his past. How many more Dukes are there waiting in the wings without such a taint?”
Is this the offensive part?
Yes, because as I said before, it is telling the world that the wolf in sheep’s clothing is just a sheep. It is promoting the one of the most vile humans around because he said a few cute words knowing full well he was lying.
Or do you believe David Duke is for ‘equal rights for all Americans’? Are you that gullible?
So what is it you like about David Duke?
Is it the Klan robes? Is it the cozying up to Ahmadinejad? Is it the hosting of Holocaust denial conferences?
Tell us.