Posted on 09/08/2016 7:36:13 AM PDT by rktman
"That message -- I'll give you America great again -- "If you’re a white southerner, you know exactly what it means, don't you? It means I’ll give you the economy you had 50 years ago and I’ll move you back up the social totem pole and other people down,” Clinton said. "What Hillary wants to do is take the totem pole down and let us all go forward together!"
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
Thank you. I appreciate your disseminating that info when it seems appropriate.
No need to give me credit though. I wrote it in 2004, but I’m not looking for credit.
I’d love to see the information go viral. But I don’t care about being recognized as the author.
Oh, shut up, Nathan. You made a stupid comment, now own it.
When Billy Jeff was governor of Arkansas, there were numerous signs along the highways stating, “this section of highway sponsored by the Ku Klux Klan.”
It was a highway cleanup/ trash pickup program in which various businesses and civic organizations were responsible for maintaining and mowing alongside sections of highway, and their reward was a sign acknowledging their efforts.
The KKK’s participation in “trash cleanup” had controversial and menacing undertones, and was challenged by many, but Bubba Clinton, IIRC, was ok with it.
Somebody should go back and dig up THAT story. It should be archived in Arkansas government files and newspaper articles. Probably not online, but in Arkansas libraries on microfiche. Plus interviews with old timers.
The KKK was QUITE active in Clinton’s Arkansas. I’ll bet there are IDs of Klanners, as well as old photos of them elsewhere in civilian clothes hobnobbing with the Governor and Mrs. Clinton.
Also the Mena airport story really needs to be revisited. Mena is where quantities of cocaine first came into the US in the 80s, and from there flooded into black communities nationwide, with the resultant rise of the drug gangs and crack wars, and the rise of black-on-black murders.
All sponsored by the Democrats in general, with very specific links to the Clintons. Trump needs to use this, carefully of course.
He doesn’t have southern values? I don’t think he has any values. at least any that would be considered good and decent.
You know why I tell you to bugger off? It is because I have no patience or tolerance for a drive-by traducer such as you have revealed yourself to be who hurls about charges of racism, the most toxic allegation that can be made, as cavalierly as you do.
No Bill. Do tell.
“No, Windflier, it is you who is owned, owned by your own hypersensitivity, obstinacy and ignorance. You are owned by your own purblind racialism to think before you accuse.”
What a hypocrite. You’re not even hearing yourself.
All I did, was object to your inference that all U.S. politics is race based, and now I’m hypersensitive, obstinate, ignorant, and owned by racialism.
What I find most reprehensible, is that you accuse me of those things because of the color of my skin. I never even brought up the subject of race. You did.
That sort of ad hominem attack is only engaged in by cowards who hide behind the anonymity and safety of a keyboard. You wouldn’t dare to say such things to another man’s face.
Perhaps you assumed I meant blacks, when I used the phrase, “my people”. Well, I didn’t, but you never even considered that I might just be referring to the right conservative base of the American population, i.e., my people.
You’re out of line, Nathan.
Now don't be shy :) I will remove your credit if you wish. I will just say I stole it from you.
You are a liar.
The subject at hand is race (all politics in America is not global but ultimately racial) and in that context you file a reply which says:
You called my people racists, which I take exception to,"
Anyone who has a mind to can simply mash on the link above and find a picture of a black man which I presume to be you. When you speak on a thread which in this particular is about race, and you refer to "my people" and you sport a picture of yourself revealing yourself to be African-American, of course people understand what you mean. You did not mean conservatives in general, you meant African-Americans in particular.
You remain a liar as well as a paranoid.
You've got a lot of nerve telling me what I meant, simply because of the color of my skin. Talk about a "racialist"!
You're the one who stated that, "all politics in America is...ultimately racial." That comment was a slap in the face to every patriot commenting on this website. You reveal the racist content of your mind and character by insisting that a black conservative can ONLY mean 'blacks' when referring to "my people".
You assumed wrong, Nathan, and when I pointed out your error, you doubled down on your mistake, and launched into an ad hominem tirade to prove I'm some sort of "racialist". It's an insulting lie, and you would have already backed off if you weren't such a hypocritical narcissist in the first place.
I wonder what you would have inferred if a white conservative had uttered the words, 'my people'. Would you have immediately thought they were referring to white people? I doubt it. You would have at least stopped for a nanosecond to ponder what the person meant by that. In my case, you instantly jump to the conclusion that I can only be referring to blacks, because of the color of my skin.
That's despicable, considering the fact that I've been an active member of this community for almost ten years, and have no record of being "racialist, hypersensitive, ignorant, owned", or any of the other choice insults you've flung at me.
You sit there in a foreign country, accusing my countrymen of engaging in race based politics. Obama insults the American people from abroad, too. Funny that I get called names by liberals when I complain about him doing so. Just like you're doing now.
How's it feel to stand shoulder to shoulder with the racist in chief, Nathan?
"I’m glad you live in Germany. Please stay there." Hardly the response in defense of fellow conservatives.
It is incredible to believe that you launched this controversy because you thought I was slighting all conservatives. As a matter of fact I was defending conservatism against charges of racism, but as I pointed out previously you would have known that had you had made simple inquiries, but you would not.
It is incredible to believe that you waited until your fourth reply to deny that you were insinuating that I was a racist, that is, that you were not defending African-Americans but conservatives as your people.. Were you asleep for your first three replies?
You remain a liar but for the purposes of conservative amity I will give you a way to resolve this matter in a way that should be acceptable to both of us: Do you agree that my original post setting forth Nathan Bedford's first maxim of American politics, to wit: "all politics in America is not local but ultimately racial" is not a racist statement, however misguided you might think it otherwise to be?
If you agree, we could go our separate ways and I will retract all my remarks about you including the lying comment.
LOL!
Boom! Great post!
“What Hillary wants to do is take the totem pole down and let us all go forward together!”
Forward, Comrades, into Socialist poverty. We’ll be equally poor together.
Ah, yes. DemocRATS, all.
What kind of a man calls another a liar, while feigning an offer of conciliation?
So, let me get this straight. If I agree to accept your spin on your initial racist statement, you'll consider that an amicable parting of the ways? Excuse me while I wipe the tears of laughter from my face.
I don't think I've ever met a bigger narcissist than you, Nathan Bedford. You think much of yourself, and it comes through in every post you make. Like all egotists, you can't see your true reflection in the mirror, and have zero humility. You don't have friends, and have no ability to make them, because you're always the ONLY person in every room you enter. Much like your soul mate, Obama.
You're an excellent wordsmith. I'll give you that, but you're a poor excuse for a human being, and that's putting it nicely. Yes, I'm glad you're in Germany, and not polluting the precious soil of my dear country. As I said in my first reply to you - please stay there.
But it didn't take you too many replies to launch into flat-out race baiting. By your actions you actually proved out the truth of the maxim in your own life All I seek is to be relieved of that calumny, or put another way, all I ask is for you to agree with yourself. But you will not because you would rather scream "racist" as I knew you would when I pegged you at the very beginning.
You are what you are and it is not a defender of conservatism.
All you have to do to end this is to agree with yourself and stop calling me a racist. Abandon the most toxic charge in America today and continue on calling me stupid, narcissistic, egotistical as you please. All I ask is that you stop with the racism.
Freeper Nathan Bedford
Those are your words, mister - not mine. They're objectionable, which is why I spoke up when I first saw them. Its the sort of statement one would expect to see at a racialist forum, but not here.
What's really despicable, is that you're attempting to turn this exchange around and make me the racist, going so far as to refuse me membership in the mainstream of American culture, due to my race.
But enough of that. I want you to explain your initial statement. Its telling that you haven't once defended it, or tried to explain it. All you've done is throw brick bats at me for daring to object to it.
So go on. Make a logical case for that scurrilous comment, if you can.
Of course, in writing a maxim designed to reform and even capitalize on Tip O'Neill's famous rendering, I do not mean to say that politics is exclusively determined by race, just as Tip O'Neill would certainly not maintain that politics is exclusively local. I mean to say that race, and, yes, gender and religion are dominant among other influences which shaped our political world.
In undertaking respond to you I did some quick research and learned that in fact the statement, "all politics of America's local," was originated by an AP writer in 1932 and then used by Tip O'Neill in an unsuccessful bid for local election in Massachusetts in 1935. By 1936, O'Neill was in the United States House of Representatives where he became a staunch new dealer and ultimately a man whose mission was to undermine the Reagan revolution. Interestingly, prior to 1935, politics in America from one perspective at least might accurately have been described as local.
In places like Massachusetts the politics of the place and the time were dominated by local boss politicians such as Boss Tweed, Tammany Hall, Frank Hague and John F. Kennedy's grandfather, Honey Fitz Fitzgerald. To a large degree Franklin Roosevelt nationalized politics and nationalized the patronage which had theretofore reposed in the hands of these big-city Democrat bosses.
But in analyzing the term, "all politics in America is not local but ultimately racial," there are other perspectives. First, let us consider history.
If you look at my about page you will see reference to the original sin of America which was of course slavery and the problem of the Declaration of Independence which unavoidably from that perspective appeared to be hypocritical. Likewise, the Constitution had to be written as a compromise on many issues, not the least of which was slavery, or there would have been no constitution at all. The entire subsequent debate over the westward expansion of the United States turned largely on the issue of slavery, would a state be admitted as free or slave?. America fought its most costly war to resolve the matter and begin with blood to repent of America's original sin.
If one looks at the post-Civil War amendments one can see that at that time politics in America was truly racial. The advancement of civil rights took another century and, one might properly observe that the opposition to civil rights was largely a local phenomenon. Which, incidentally was local in the American South, of course, but also local in places like Boston in opposition to school busing. But that is not the point, the point is that race continues a dominant issue right on through the civil rights era. I know it because I stood on the roof of a building and watched one of America's cities burn in a race riot.
It should go without saying that not all political considerations concerning race have to do with the African race but with the integration of Irish, for example, or with the incarceration of Japanese. Today, we find that Asians are being discriminated against in the admissions to our great universities, because of race balancing. We find that Jews who have historically supported the United States defending Israel, are in many instances changing their view. We find that Cubans attempt to influence our policy concerning Cuba. Today we are watching Black Lives Matter protesters and NFL players declining to honor the American flag, all having to do with race. And so it goes.
Beyond our history, race as the dominant political issue might be expressed in another way. Note, the maxim is not that all policy in America is racial but that all politics in America is racial.
In order to determine the impact of race in American politics let's consider a hypothetical. We find a prominent pollster and put a gun to his head and tell him that we will shoot him unless he can identify how an unidentified citizen voted in the last election. To give our pollster a fighting chance for life, we advise him that he will be given one question and one question only. What question do you expect him to ask? Obviously, what is the race of the unidentified voter? Because it's race that is most determinative of voting patterns.
Indeed, we conservatives complain that the Democrats are balkanizing the country in their efforts to segregate voters by race, as well as gender etc. and manipulate that subgroup. That is one of the main reasons we object to unrestrained immigration, because we know that since Ted Kennedy structured immigration to favor people of color, they are voting overwhelmingly Democrat.
As a conservative, I believe that neither politics nor policy should be the product of race but of the values enshrined in the Constitution and in the Declaration of Independence, all as reformed by the Gettysburg address and the Civil War. But our Democrat friends are determined to advance a leftist ideology by exploiting race.
When I see a thread shaped by a leading article which touches on this principle, I often post a reply containing the maxim. The purpose: to demonstrate that it is racialism rather than constitutionalism which is shaping our destiny. Consider the very thread upon which our discussion is taking place. Bill Clinton says that a white Southerner knows what "make America great again" means. The implication, of course, be that it is racist, it is a "dog whistle"-a phrase which has crept into the language with a special racial overtone.
It is no matter that there are several video clips extent which reveal that Bill Clinton has himself advanced this phrase to further his political career or to further his policies. It matters that racialism is being exploited to affect politics, in this case to frustrate the election of Donald Trump. It matters that we do what we can to stop it.
My way is to quote Nathan Bedford's maxim.
Nathan, I just asked you for a straight answer - not a thousand word manifesto. An honest fellow could have explained himself in a few sentences. That mountain of text you just produced explains nothing.
You’re merely doubling down and attempting to justify having made a ridiculous, objectionable comment. A comment that is observably untrue. All politics is not ultimately racial, and if you think that way, you’re a racialist, or worse.
I think we’re done here. There’s no one on this long buried thread but you and I. I gave you several chances to do the honorable thing, and admit you spoke in error, but your pride and arrogance won’t allow it.
Fine. Go on and be right, but just know that that is how a man eventually imprisons himself inside a cage of pain he cannot escape.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.