PDA

View Full Version : Not a single elected Republican



Shang
08-30-2013, 08:48 AM
There are 233 Republicans in the House of Representatives, 46 in the Senate and 30 in governor’s mansions across the country. Guess how many made the effort to appear at Wednesday’s giant rally commemorating the 50th Anniversary of the March on Washington. Zero. Ed O’Keefe reports:

Not a single Republican elected official stood on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial on Wednesday with activists, actors, lawmakers and former presidents invited to mark the 50th anniversary of the March on Washington — a notable absence for a party seeking to attract the support of minority voters.

Washington Post, Aug. 29, 2013
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/08/29/gop-leader-chose-oil-industry-over-mlk-marchers/

wardd
08-30-2013, 09:12 AM
all those republicans were busy aiding them by removing the burden of voting from them, no more standing in line for hours

John Smith
08-30-2013, 09:17 AM
The Republican method of winning their hearts and minds.

wardd
08-30-2013, 09:19 AM
The Republican method of winning their hearts and minds.

of their wealthy patrons

BrianW
08-30-2013, 09:23 AM
When one follows the link, and the links in them, it's not all that big a deal.

They ask Cantor 12 days in advance?

The only black member of the Senate claims to have not received an invitation.

Boehner spoke at an event earlier in July.

Sure, it would have been a good idea for some of them to show up, but eh, if it costs votes, then that's kinda shallow.

On a side note, I liked MLK Jr's memorial on the Mall. Impressive.

Tom Montgomery
08-30-2013, 09:27 AM
Sure, it would have been a good idea for some of them to show up, but eh, if it costs votes, then that's kinda shallow.
Or kinda courageous.

John Smith
08-30-2013, 09:28 AM
When one follows the link, and the links in them, it's not all that big a deal.

They ask Cantor 12 days in advance?

The only black member of the Senate claims to have not received an invitation.

Boehner spoke at an event earlier in July.

Sure, it would have been a good idea for some of them to show up, but eh, if it costs votes, then that's kinda shallow.

On a side note, I liked MLK Jr's memorial on the Mall. Impressive.

Pure bull. No one knew this anniversary was coming? About 1;15 in: http://www.nbcnews.com/id/26315908/#52880310

BrianW
08-30-2013, 09:32 AM
Pure bull. No one knew this anniversary was coming? About 1;15 in: http://www.nbcnews.com/id/26315908/#52880310

I had no idea.

Anyhow, speaking at the event would require an invite, preferably far enough in advance to plan and prepare.

Keith Wilson
08-30-2013, 09:39 AM
Republicans were invited: at the least both former presidents Bush, Eric Cantor and John Boehner. The Bushes declined for health reasons. The others just declined.

John Smith
08-30-2013, 09:46 AM
I look at this and see something behind the scenes going on. I cannot accept it as a coincidence that no Republicans attended. That defies the law of averages and common sense.

They must have seen some huge downside to attending this event. They certainly ALL knew it was coming, and, I would think, the leaders in the House and Senate would keep their calendar open for this event.

Shang
08-30-2013, 09:53 AM
I had no idea.

Anyhow, speaking at the event would require an invite, preferably far enough in advance to plan and prepare.

You had no idea?
Where do you live, Alaska?


...speaking at the event would require an invite, preferably far enough in advance to plan and prepare.

Thanks for clearing that up for us.

Gerarddm
08-30-2013, 10:03 AM
Next election, vote against every Republican, for every office, at every level. Be patriotic.

Osborne Russell
08-30-2013, 10:25 AM
Was Glenn Beck there? I can't imagine why not.

bobbys
08-30-2013, 11:51 AM
Republican Party officials reached out to organizers of this week’s March on Washington commemoration with a series of suggestions for possible GOP speakers, but several of the people they recommended were never contacted with invitations to speak, according to Republican National Committee officials.
Miscommunication and lack of coordination appear to have played a role in at least some of the invites not going out to Republican office-holders. Event organizers say they assumed Sen. Tim Scott, R-S.C., couldn’t attend, based on a failure to RSVP to an earlier, more general invitation. But his office says he was never actually invited to speak, and he may have been able to attend if he was formally invited.
More than half a dozen different prominent Republicans were invited to speak, but several of the invitations went out quite late in the planning. All sent their regrets.
Regardless of the motivations, the result was that an ostensibly non-partisan program on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial took on a political edge. Heated comments on affirmative action, gun rights, and racial discrimination in law enforcement echoed from the podium, with none of the 30-plus speakers – a list that included all three living Democratic presidents — representing a Republican point of view.
That’s not a tone that members of the King family and other groups involved in organizing the day wanted. And Republican Party officials, intent on reaching out to minority voters and with a large television audience tuning in to the 50th anniversary events, say they didn’t want the GOP to go unrepresented, either.
After it became clear that big-name Republicans like the Bushes were not going to be able to attend, RNC officials offered help in finding one or more appropriate Republican speakers, according to Sean Spicer, the RNC’s communications director.
“We were very proud of our efforts to commemorate this historic event, which we did in several ways over the last few days,” Spicer said. “Furthermore, we offered up assistance to the organizers of the event — our assistance in facilitating any Republican speakers that they would be interested in having.”
Starting August 14 – two weeks before the commemoration — GOP officials offered help in reaching out to a range of other Republicans. That list, according to an RNC official, included Scott, who is the only African-American currently in the Senate; former Rep. J.C. Watts, R-Okla., who is black; and T.W. Shannon, the 35-year-old African-American speaker of the Oklahoma House of Representatives.
Organizers did invite several prominent Republicans – including both Presidents Bush, former Gov. Jeb Bush, former Gov. Mike Huckabee, House Speaker John Boehner, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, and Sen. John McCain – to speak. They also reached out late in the planning process to the office of Rep. James Sensenbrenner, a veteran congressman from Wisconsin who has been prominent on voting-rights and sentencing-reform issues.
All of those invited declined, however, with the two former presidents citing health concerns, and the others pointing to scheduling conflicts. Cantor was invited just 12 days before the event, and Huckabee told ABC News he was invited just last week – too late for him to juggle other commitments.
“I was invited and so wished I had been able to do it,” Huckabee said in an e-mail to ABC. “I didn’t receive the invitation until last week, however, and it was too late for me to re-arrange things.”
One Republican aide likened the late flurry of invites to “unvitations,” the “Seinfeld”-inspired practice of inviting someone to an event with the knowledge that they won’t attend.
That accusation doesn’t sit well with those who put the event together. The lack of Republicans was a disappointment to event organizers, up to and including members of the King family, said Donna Brazile, a veteran Democratic strategist who was tasked by event organizers with helping line up a Republican for the program.
She said it’s just wrong to suggest that organizers didn’t want Republican voices represented.
“It’s not the fault of the King Center. The attempt was made, from the [former] presidents to the speaker of the House, to various other leaders,” she said.
Brazile said she assumed Scott was invited to speak. Other organizers said that when he didn’t respond to an invitation sent to all members of Congress months ago – to attend, though not necessarily to speak – that he was assumed to be unable to attend.
A Scott aide said it’s impossible to say whether he would have attended if offered a speaking slot. But the aide pointed out that Scott wrote an op-ed about the anniversary this week and spoke at a church in Charleston about King’s legacy Wednesday night.
“The senator believes the anniversary was a day to remember the extraordinary accomplishments and sacrifices of Dr. King, Congressman John Lewis, and an entire generation of black leaders,” said Greg Blair, a Scott spokesman.
Without addressing specific names, Brazile said organizers weren’t going to put a Republican into the program who didn’t have the stature to speak alongside presidents and heroes of the civil-rights movement. She said she worked directly with GOP leadership offices on Capitol Hill to find an appropriate speaker, to no avail.
“They weren’t looking for any Republican out of the wilderness,” Brazile said. “For Republicans to try to make an issue out of this – that’s a sign of desperation. The overtures were made.”
In a statement, the event’s executive producer, the Rev. Leah Daughtry, cited “scheduling conflicts” for the inability to include Republican voices.
“We regret that scheduling conflicts precluded the participation of many of our invitees, but we are confident that whether they were in Washington, DC or in their hometowns, everyone joined the celebration of Dr. King’s dream and remains committed to working and fighting for the fulfillment of the ideals Dr. King articulated 50 years ago,” Daughtry said.
In the event’s aftermath, though, some Republicans are suggesting their party was intentionally excluded, while some Democrats have accused Republicans of ignoring the King legacy.
“They asked a long list of Republicans to come,” Julian Bond, a veteran civil-rights activist who spoke at the event, said on MSNBC Wednesday (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/08/29/gop-leader-chose-oil-industry-over-mlk-marchers/). “To a man and woman they said ‘no.’ And that they would turn their backs on this event was telling of them, and the fact that they seem to want to get black votes — they’re not going to get ‘em this way.”
“I would have liked to have seen Republican speakers at that,” NAACP’s Ben Jealous said during an appearance at the National Press Club. “There are messages that could have been brought.”
But the RNC’s Spicer said it should have occurred to organizers to make a special effort to invite Scott, given the fact that he’s the only African-American U.S. senator.
“Overlooking Tim Scott would be like overlooking the president for the State of the Union speech,” he said.
And looking at a speakers’ lineup that included lower-profile Democrats such as Rep. Marcia Fudge, D-Ohio, and Rep. Donna Edwards, D-Md., there were plenty of other “nationally known” black Republicans who could have been included, he said.
UPDATE: As Roll Call first reported (http://blogs.rollcall.com/wgdb/tim-scott-declined-invite-to-attend-march-as-spectator/), Sen. Scott’s office did respond to the request to attend the event by noting that he would be in South Carolina that day and would be “unable to attend.”
On August 9, a Scott aide replied to what appears to have been a form e-mail invitation sent to all members of Congress: “Thank you for extending to Senator Tim Scott the invitation to the 50th Anniversary of the March on Washington on August 28th. Unfortunately, the Senator will be in South Carolina during this time, so he will be unable to attend the event. Please do, however, keep him in mind for future events you may be hosting.”
That RSVP, however, does not mean that Scott might not have tried to rearrange his schedule if he was invited as part of the speaking program, according to Scott’s office. Scott’s office and organizers confirm that no additional contacts were made with Scott’s office to extend an invitation to speak.

Jim Bow
08-30-2013, 12:24 PM
You can't convince me that any Senator who showed up would not have been allowed to stand near the speakers. Who would have said "No" to a Senator?

They just did not want to be associated with the celebration.

Keith Wilson
08-30-2013, 12:28 PM
Eric Cantor was meeting with oil industry representatives in North Dakota. Jeb Bush was also invited, but declined, as was Tim Scott, the only African-American Republican in Congress. The organizers of the event say they started sending out invitations to Republicans and Democrats alike four or five weeks ago. Perhaps that was too late, but quite a few Democrats showed up.

That's OK; if the Republicans want to be the party of old angry well-armed southern evangelical white men, they'e going about it very effectively.

Osborne Russell
08-30-2013, 12:36 PM
No invitation, listen to yourselves. You would have gone to the Washington Monument but you weren't invited?

The choice not to go is based on the calculation that not going is not a matter of shame among the rabble.

Joe (SoCal)
08-30-2013, 12:44 PM
Eric Cantor was meeting with oil industry representatives in North Dakota. Jeb Bush was also invited, but declined, as was Tim Scott, the only African-American Republican in Congress. The organizers of the event say they started sending out invitations to Republicans and Democrats alike four or five weeks ago. Perhaps that was too late, but quite a few Democrats showed up.

That's OK; if the Republicans want to be the party of old angry well-armed southern evangelical white men, they'e going about it very effectively.

Exactly

Glen Longino
08-30-2013, 12:46 PM
What do you mean, "they just declined"? There are news reports that those invitations were made last minute, and met with inevitable scheduling conflicts.

"One Republican aide likened the late flurry of invites to “unvitations,” the “Seinfeld” inspired practice of inviting someone to an event with the knowledge that they won’t attend."

Where did you get this "just declined" notion?

See post #20, "Your Honor"!LMAO
For a "judge", how can you be so consistently dense and misinformed! :D

Keith Wilson
08-30-2013, 01:42 PM
You instinctively believe everything you hear from liberal activists?http://www.reduser.net/forum/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif You instinctively believe everything you hear from conservative activists?

OK, have it your way. Republican politicians were just aching to attend, were very sorry to have missed it, and would certainly have gone if they been asked nicely and earlier, and if they didn't have to spend money on airplane tickets (a major consideration for the Speaker of the House, yes indeed), and didn't have to go to North Dakota to meet with the oil guys, and could get special absolution from the members of the Tea Party who still believe that MLK was a communist, and weren't washing their hair that night. Sure.

Glen Longino
08-30-2013, 01:45 PM
Your comment is not relevant to my post. Reading comprehension fail for you.

You're in a state of denial, as usual!

John Smith
08-30-2013, 01:51 PM
Eric Cantor was meeting with oil industry representatives in North Dakota. Jeb Bush was also invited, but declined, as was Tim Scott, the only African-American Republican in Congress. The organizers of the event say they started sending out invitations to Republicans and Democrats alike four or five weeks ago. Perhaps that was too late, but quite a few Democrats showed up.

That's OK; if the Republicans want to be the party of old angry well-armed southern evangelical white men, they'e going about it very effectively.

The extent to which they rearrange, or do not rearrange, their schedules to speak, or not to speak, at events tells us a great deal about their priorities. This is a case where their actions speak louder than their words.

John Smith
08-30-2013, 01:55 PM
The big name Republican recipients of the invitations say they were sent out some 12 days or less prior, not 4 or 5 weeks. You instinctively believe everything you hear from liberal activists? Let's see you get the speaker of the House to attend a worthy community event with only 12 days notice. Let's see you get a major political figure to engage in costly travel and take a bunch of personal time to address a hostile crowd of Republican haters. Are you kidding? It's clear that they weren't really wanted.

More from the ABC News story that bobbys copied:

"More than half a dozen different prominent Republicans were invited to speak, but several of the invitations went out quite late in the planning. All sent their regrets.Regardless of the motivations, the result was that an ostensibly non-partisan program on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial took on a political edge. Heated comments on affirmative action, gun rights, and racial discrimination in law enforcement echoed from the podium, with none of the 30-plus speakers – a list that included all three living Democratic presidents — representing a Republican point of view."

This is just a bunch of whipped up nothing.

This is a once in every 50 years event. It marks an incredibly important place in our history. An invite the day before should have been honored. Those who expected to be invited could have kept the day open, even if they attended without speaking.

This was a party wide snub. It was orchestrated as a boycott. That is the only rational explanation for the total lack of attendance.

John Smith
08-30-2013, 01:58 PM
So what? They have staffers... it's not like they didn't know the event was coming, MONTHS in advance... and no one NEEDED an invitation to be asked to be included.



Only slightly less than YOU instinctively dis-believe anything from other than the right wing rags.... just like Bill O'Reilly did (and had to apologize for, later).



The only thing clearer is that they didn't want to appear.


[/FONT][/COLOR]
Well, how did they expect a 'Republican point of view' to be expressed, if no Republicans showed up?

And since when is a commemoration of the civil rights movement somehow an 'anti-Republican' point of view?



You're right. Mealy-mouthed excuses for intentionally staying away are about as hollow as an excuse can be.

The other side of this is people, I'm sure, could have asked to speak. It would have been a great opportunity for the Republicans to widen their appeal. On the other hand, when I think about recent Republican votes, I wonder if anyone who supported King's dream would have wanted them there.

Joe (SoCal)
08-30-2013, 01:59 PM
Norman not MONTHS in advance how's about FIFTY YEARS IN ADVANCE. You make it sound like these elected officials who make their living on what we presume is political knowledge and savvy diplomacyn need some intern or staffer to tell them that MLKs 50th anIversary of his incredible march on Washington and I have a Dream speach was comming up? They needed someone to tell them this ? If my JOB was to serve the public I would know my history and poli-sci

Just say

Wating for an invite my a$$

Glen Longino
08-30-2013, 02:02 PM
No Glen, you're wrong. You quoted a link to a bit debunking a claim that Reps WERE NOT INVITED at all. I made no such claim. I posted reference to a news report that said they WERE invited, but invitations were sent out last minute.

Read more carefully before responding.

So, does this mean we're in agreement that any Republican who wanted to attend the ceremony could have, and the fact that None did show up means None wanted to be there?

johnw
08-30-2013, 02:05 PM
Sure, it would have been a good idea for some of them to show up, but eh, if it costs votes, then that's kinda shallow.



I'm not sure what you mean by that. Do you mean that's a shallow excuse?

BETTY-B
08-30-2013, 02:10 PM
That's a lame excuse alright. Twelve days is plenty of time for every single one of them to get their hoods back from the dry cleaners.

BrianW
08-30-2013, 02:11 PM
This is just a bunch of whipped up nothing.

Bingo.

You'd think it was more important than Benghazi or the IRS scandal from the liberal howling. :D

Keith Wilson
08-30-2013, 02:15 PM
You'd think it was more important than Benghazi or the IRS scandal from the liberal howling.Well, considering that there is no 'IRS scandal', perhaps it is.

BrianW
08-30-2013, 02:17 PM
That's a lame excuse alright. Twelve days is plenty of time for every single one of them to get their hoods back from the dry cleaners.

What?

Senator Byrd, the last KKK member of Congress, and outstanding Democrat, was due to return from the grave to attend?

Did he have a speaking invite?

switters
08-30-2013, 02:20 PM
So who here read the text of the speeches or watched/listened to them?

I did not, but as a tradition of mine I reread MLKs speech every year on the anniversary.

pefjr
08-30-2013, 02:21 PM
Who cares, WB bilge must be the only place in the world that cares, and they only care enough to poke the righties. Do we have to salute the man every month now. Enough with a holiday.

Joe (SoCal)
08-30-2013, 02:21 PM
Any distraction in a storm.

I would say bringing up Benghazi and the NON IRS scandles is exactly the distraction BrianW was looking for.

Paul Pless
08-30-2013, 02:25 PM
So who here read the text of the speeches or watched/listened to them?

I did not, but as a tradition of mine I reread MLKs speech every year on the anniversary. i lustened to the entire program anc as i commented earlier was particularly struck by the force of the women speakers. . .

bobbys
08-30-2013, 02:30 PM
I was referring to Eric Cantor, and I DO know why he didn't show... or, should I say, I know what he was doing at the time.....

He was meeting with an oil industry lobbyist, by his own admission.

We know where his priorities lie..

I can play your game too.

On the eve of a war that makes no sense, Obama talks to Magic Johnson but has no time for Congress.

We know where his priorities lie...

switters
08-30-2013, 02:32 PM
Time makes what seems plebian, at the moment, profound, in history.

Do you think MLK's speech 50 years ago was instantaneously revered as one of the greatest speeches in modern history?

We don't know if the speeches at that event will rise to even remotely the same level... but one of them just might. Ask me in 25 years.

50 years ago it was instantaneously revered as a watershed moment in the civil rights movement by several newspapers of the time. Two days after the speech the FBI started keeping a file on him. Yes, it was recognized as great speech instantaneously if you take that to mean within a week. Kennedy extended an invitation to King and others at the march to the white house after hearing it.

Glen Longino
08-30-2013, 02:32 PM
Good to see The Judge and Brian and Peffer all in agreement.
!
Come 2016 they'll be wondering why the Republican candidate for POTUS LOST...again!:D
keep it up, Troglodytes!
Guarantee another victory for Democrats and the country in 2016!:D

Chris Coose
08-30-2013, 02:35 PM
Next election, vote against every Republican, for every office, at every level. Be patriotic.

switters
08-30-2013, 02:37 PM
i lustened to the entire program anc as i commented earlier was particularly struck by the force of the women speakers. . .

Any one in particular that I should look up?

BrianW
08-30-2013, 02:37 PM
This is a once in every 50 years event.

We're going to have another 50th Anniversary of the March on Washington in 50 years? :D

BrianW
08-30-2013, 02:39 PM
I would say bringing up Benghazi and the NON IRS scandles is exactly the distraction BrianW was looking for.

Or perhaps this non-story is a distraction by Shang, to keep us from following the news of an impending Syria attack? :)

Joe (SoCal)
08-30-2013, 02:41 PM
Time makes what seems plebian, at the moment, profound, in history.

Do you think MLK's speech 50 years ago was instantaneously revered as one of the greatest speeches in modern history?

We don't know if the speeches at that event will rise to even remotely the same level... but one of them just might. Ask me in 25 years.

Naaaah it didn't look like a big deal 50 years ago. Probably wont end up being a big deal at all.

http://newsbcpcol.stb.s-msn.com/amnews/i/fd/4ee5cb12ab72b4cc6425292145dc6/_h353_w628_m6_otrue_lfalse.jpg

bobbys
08-30-2013, 02:43 PM
http://cdn.pjmedia.com/tatler/files/2013/08/obama-flag-large.jpg Political tones?.

BrianW
08-30-2013, 02:45 PM
Naaaah it didn't look like a big deal 50 years ago. Probably wont end up being a big deal at all.

http://newsbcpcol.stb.s-msn.com/amnews/i/fd/4ee5cb12ab72b4cc6425292145dc6/_h353_w628_m6_otrue_lfalse.jpg


It was impressive 50 years ago. Awesome moment in history.

johnw
08-30-2013, 02:51 PM
When one follows the link, and the links in them, it's not all that big a deal.

They ask Cantor 12 days in advance?

The only black member of the Senate claims to have not received an invitation.

Boehner spoke at an event earlier in July.

Sure, it would have been a good idea for some of them to show up, but eh, if it costs votes, then that's kinda shallow.

On a side note, I liked MLK Jr's memorial on the Mall. Impressive.

I think you may be referring to the only black Republican in congress, Tim Scott, R-S.C. He was invited.


Bill O'Reilly has apologized for his mistake on this, by the way:


http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2013/08/30/20258714-a-rare-sight-oreilly-admits-error?lite
Shortly after the 50th anniversary celebration of the March on Washington, Fox News' Bill O'Reilly was, as per the norm, outraged. Specifically, the host was incensed that there were no Republican speakers who addressed the enormous crowd at the Lincoln Memorial.


Arguing with Democratic strategist James Carville, O'Reilly demanded an explanation as to why former President George W. Bush, for example, wasn't there. Carville said, "I do not know that he wasn't invited." The host responded, "He wasn't. No Republicans and no conservatives were invited."


Though repeated with certainty, O'Reilly was, of course, completely wrong (http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2013/08/29/20247366-they-asked-a-long-list-of-republicans-to-come?lite). Indeed, we knew a few hours before (http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2013/08/28/20234642-a-partisan-advantage-at-the-lincoln-memorial?lite) his show aired that Republican leaders were invited, but chose not to participate. Last night, in a remarkably rare sight, O'Reilly actually acknowledged (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/29/bill-oreilly-apology-march-on-washington-error_n_3840169.html) an error.

"Last night during my discussion with James Carville about the Martin Luther King commemoration I said there were no Republican speakers invited. Wrong. Was wrong. Some Republicans were asked to speak. They declined. And that was a mistake. They should have spoken.
"Now, the mistake, entirely on me. I simply assumed that since all the speakers were liberal Democrats, Republicans were excluded. So, here's the 'Tip of the Day' -- Always check out the facts before you make a definitive statement. And, when you make a mistake, admit it."
Now, I can think of some notable (http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2013/06/05/18773674-dont-let-the-facts-get-in-the-way-of-a-good-story?lite) examples (http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2013/02/08/16898130-oreillys-version-of-a-correction?lite) in which O'Reilly has refused to acknowledge on-air errors, but why quibble? We should cherish these rare corrections when they appear.


Incidentally, there was some discussion this week about whether Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.), Congress' only African-American Republican, had been invited to attend the event. Yesterday afternoon Roll Call confirmed (http://blogs.rollcall.com/wgdb/tim-scott-declined-invite-to-attend-march-as-spectator/) that Scott's office declined an invitation, telling organizers the senator would be in South Carolina on Wednesday.

hokiefan
08-30-2013, 02:53 PM
The Republicans not showing up is lame. That said, it is better behavior than what caused me to stop voting for them. I see nothing about their behavior that will earn back my vote anytime soon.

Cheers,

Bobby

Joe (SoCal)
08-30-2013, 02:55 PM
The speech till this day gives me chills. Agreed Brian it was an awesome moment in history. Being born in 1964 I was unable to attend the original, but if I was a member of congress or a Governor of any political party this year I would have been in attendance.

BETTY-B
08-30-2013, 02:59 PM
What?

Senator Byrd, the last KKK member of Congress, and outstanding Democrat, was due to return from the grave to attend?

Did he have a speaking invite?

No, Brian. We're not talking 70 years ago. We're talking about every single Republican leader of today. That's what the hoods are for. Duh! Hey, at least you're making a public record of excusing the inexcusable.

pefjr
08-30-2013, 02:59 PM
The Repubs I am sure are crying tears over these lost bilge votes.

Joe (SoCal)
08-30-2013, 03:04 PM
The Repubs I am sure are crying tears over these lost bilge votes.

They didn't do so well in the last general election outside of the bilge either ;) Don't see them doing much better in the next general election.

Maybe some pollster will start using the WBF equation in the next election :)

Joe (SoCal)
08-30-2013, 03:08 PM
Don't worry Judge I'm sure President Clinton ( Hillary ) will be in attendance on the 53rd anniversary ;)

Paul Pless
08-30-2013, 03:08 PM
Any one in particular that I should look up?
Bernice King and Mrs. Evers for sure.

pefjr
08-30-2013, 03:09 PM
They didn't do so well in the last general election outside of the bilge either ;) Don't see them doing much better in the next general election.

Maybe some pollster will start using the WBF equation in the next election :)I imagine the WBF equation, as you say, is different than the bilge Repub watchdog equation.

Joe (SoCal)
08-30-2013, 03:17 PM
I imagine the WBF equation, as you say, is different than the bilge Repub watchdog equation.

Winning Validates one over the other.

Glen Longino
08-30-2013, 03:22 PM
As I recall, the bilge picked the past two elections correctly.
Does that teach the Troglodytes anything? Hell NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!:D

Osborne Russell
08-30-2013, 03:25 PM
Norman not MONTHS in advance how's about FIFTY YEARS IN ADVANCE. You make it sound like these elected officials who make their living on what we presume is political knowledge and savvy diplomacyn need some intern or staffer to tell them that MLKs 50th anIversary of his incredible march on Washington and I have a Dream speach was comming up? They needed someone to tell them this ? If my JOB was to serve the public I would know my history and poli-sci . . .

That's really the only question.

To say they didn't know or forgot is to say they are stupid and incompetent, and/or ignorant and bigoted.

Therefore it must come to :


Wating for an invite my a$$

Which is implausible to suppose and contradicted as a matter of fact by Bill O'Reilly, for F's sake.

And yet the apologists leap in. I suppose they're doing their best, but don't they ever get tired of having to apologize? Legitimate rape, torture, no invitation, what's next?

BETTY-B
08-30-2013, 03:26 PM
There's no arguing with that kind of brilliance.

My over the top exaggeration is likely spot on in the minds of the minorities of this nation as they evaluate the absolutely zero participation rate of the Republicans in this extremely important gathering. This was an unnecessarily foolish symbol to cast by the Republican party. Brilliance indeed.

Osborne Russell
08-30-2013, 03:26 PM
Thanks to Bill O'Reilly.

Osborne Russell
08-30-2013, 03:27 PM
My over the top exaggeration is likely spot on in the minds of the minorities of this nation as they evaluate the absolutely zero participation rate of the Republicans in this extremely important gathering. This was an unnecessarily foolish symbol to cast by the Republican party. Brilliance indeed.

Who will step to say that the absolutely zero participation rate of the Republicans was a coincidence?

Canoeyawl
08-30-2013, 03:36 PM
It seems to have been a matter of the republicans finding an office holder with enough gravitas, and it couldn't be done...

"organizers weren’t going to put a Republican into the program who didn’t have the stature to speak alongside presidents and heroes of the civil-rights movement. She said she worked directly with GOP leadership offices on Capitol Hill to find an appropriate speaker, to no avail."

Osborne Russell
08-30-2013, 03:42 PM
The speech till this day gives me chills. Agreed Brian it was an awesome moment in history. Being born in 1964 I was unable to attend the original, but if I was a member of congress or a Governor of any political party this year I would have been in attendance.

I wasn't at the march but I was around. That speech hit America like a bomb. MLK threw down the gauntlet. The arguments were unanswerable and the situation was already highly developed, shall we say. From there it didn't take much to ignite a quasi-civil-war.

Not only did Jim Crow go down but all the genteel variants outside the south. First N's in the army, in the movies, TV and radio, records, in sports, and now N's on the bus, on the beaches, in the stores, restaurants, everywhere. Even in schools with the white chirren.

The result of which was the death of the old Republican Party and the birth of the new. That being so, on the 50th anniversary, a modern Republican could either not go, and cross their fingers, or go and say . . . what?

A modern Republican of moderate skill could have gone and recognized, genuflected, shown the flag, empathized, etc. and said well, it's good that it's all behind us. Which would have been problematic, but for none to go at all is just a big middle finger.

BrianW
08-30-2013, 03:44 PM
No, Brian. We're not talking 70 years ago. We're talking about every single Republican leader of today. That's what the hoods are for. Duh! Hey, at least you're making a public record of excusing the inexcusable.


The only current African American member of the U.S. Senate, Tim Scott, was not invited to speak at the 50th anniversary of Martin Luther King's "I Have a Dream" speech, even though high-profile celebrities including Oprah Winfrey and Ambassador Caroline Kennedy were included in the lineup.
The South Carolina Republican instead marked the occasion speaking at a King anniversary event in North Charleston. He also penned an op-ed for The State newspaper (http://www.thestate.com/2013/08/28/2945100/sen-tim-scott-march-on-washington.html), entitled, "March on Washington created legacy of opportunity."


Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/sole-black-sen-tim-scott-invited-speak-dream-event-article-1.1440736#ixzz2dUDsitsS



Apparently he got a group email sent to the entire Congress.

In any case, attempting to label every Republican in Congress as a member of the KKK is extreme. I can't attempt to politely laugh it off again, it's beyond reasonable.

P.S. See ya at the PT Show! :) We booked our tickets and got a car. Still looking for a room.

BETTY-B
08-30-2013, 04:10 PM
In any case, attempting to label every Republican in Congress as a member of the KKK is extreme. I can't attempt to politely laugh it off again, it's beyond reasonable.

P.S. See ya at the PT Show! :)

But you can imply that it is reasonable for not a single Republican leader to show up for the most important symbol of race unity in the country?

Anyways, it wasn't supposed to be funny or reasonable, Brian. It's an attempt to get through your thick skull the impression such a symbol leaves in the minds of the minorities your party doesnt give a sheet about. By condoning such behavior, you support it. You cant keep saying "but that was just one whack job on the fringe"! Ya, it's the whole lot of whack jobs on the fringe, dude! It's called integrity, man. Stand up for it.

Hmmm... So you're going to be there for sure now? I was going to bail on it. I better start checking finances again. We'll see.

Bobcat
08-30-2013, 04:14 PM
What strikes me about the whole thing is how tone deaf the GOP remains

BrianW
08-30-2013, 04:16 PM
Hmmm... So you're going to be there for sure now? I was going to bail on it. I better start checking finances again. We'll see.

Yep! I better skip the Bilge for awhile. Any resistance to the tide around here gets pretty ugly. ;)

Glen Longino
08-30-2013, 04:19 PM
Apparently he got a group email sent to the entire Congress.

In any case, attempting to label every Republican in Congress as a member of the KKK is extreme. I can't attempt to politely laugh it off again, it's beyond reasonable.

P.S. See ya at the PT Show! :) We booked our tickets and got a car. Still looking for a room.

Your Two references to KKK on this thread are the Only references on this thread! Extreme? Look in the mirror!

elf
08-30-2013, 04:21 PM
Everyone was invited sometime between two and five weeks before the event in a mass mailing to all congresspeople. The emails were not addressed to specific people, but instead to "Congressman".

The organizers hoped to receive acceptances in good time to make speaker invitations.

Republican congresspeople were slow in responding, or responded in the negative.

Some were then deliberately invited to speak, in hopes of evoking a positive response.

All of those excused themselves, mostly claiming they were not going to be in town. Former President Bush pleaded recovering from his stent operation, his father pleaded old age, his brother simply declined.

No Republican dignitaries thus appeared.

Pundit O'Reilly apologized for misunderstanding the situation publically today on his show.

Sad.

Tom Montgomery
08-30-2013, 04:24 PM
Waiting for an invite my a$$
Which is implausible to suppose and contradicted as a matter of fact by Bill O'Reilly, for F's sake.

And yet the apologists leap in. I suppose they're doing their best, but don't they ever get tired of having to apologize? Legitimate rape, torture, no invitation, what's next?Naw... they don't get tired. They evidently enjoy it.

Tom Montgomery
08-30-2013, 04:25 PM
Who will step [up] to say that the absolutely zero participation rate of the Republicans was a coincidence?
The absolutely zero participation rate of the Republicans was a complete coinkydink.

SMARTINSEN
08-30-2013, 04:56 PM
You can make any excuse for his that you like, but 0/309 sends a pretty clear message that the Republicans had no interest in attending this. I agree with Emily: sad.

S.V. Airlie
08-30-2013, 05:28 PM
How mant dems went other than Obama and his puppet?You failed to mention this in the OP.Why?Obama loves giving speeches!

elf
08-30-2013, 05:37 PM
http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/tim-scott-didnt-speak-at-mlk-event-because?


A source connected to the 50th anniversary of the March on Washington said Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC), the only sitting black senator, was not invited to speak at the event because his office had declined an invitation to attend the commemoration as a spectator, Roll Call (http://blogs.rollcall.com/wgdb/tim-scott-declined-invite-to-attend-march-as-spectator/) reported.

An email exchange obtained by Roll Call showed that an invitation to the 50th anniversary commemoration appeared to be sent to all members of Congress, as the form letter identified the recipient as "Representative" rather than by name.


The exchange showed that a staff assistant to Scott, Rachel Shelbourne, sent a reply to the invitation that read in part, "Unfortunately, the Senator will be in South Carolina during this time, so he will be unable to attend the event. Please do, however, keep him in mind for future events you may be hosting," as quoted by Roll Call.


The source explained to Roll Call that the speaking program was largely drafted according to who was able to confirm availability to attend the event.


House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) and House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) reportedly were invited (http://blogs.rollcall.com/goppers/boehner-cantor-turned-down-chance-to-speak-at-march-anniversary/) to speak at the ceremony, but declined.

S.V. Airlie
08-30-2013, 05:59 PM
Half of our elected officials were probably there in 1963. They probably are saying "Been there, done that."

Joe (SoCal)
08-30-2013, 06:08 PM
Half of our elected officials were probably there in 1963. They probably are saying "Been there, done that."

What a lame a$$ comment :(

wardd
08-30-2013, 06:16 PM
What strikes me about the whole thing is how tone deaf the GOP remains

not at all tone deaf they hear their base very well

CWSmith
08-30-2013, 07:17 PM
Time makes what seems plebian, at the moment, profound, in history.

Do you think MLK's speech 50 years ago was instantaneously revered as one of the greatest speeches in modern history?

We don't know if the speeches at that event will rise to even remotely the same level... but one of them just might. Ask me in 25 years.

Setting aside the huge cheer that arose at the end of the speech, two things are true: Before the march Kennedy was afraid there might be violence and after the march he drafted legislation that changed America. Something moved him.

Nicholas Carey
08-30-2013, 07:52 PM
Willing to bet that if the Koch brothers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koch_family#Political_activities) had rang up John Boehner, Mitch McConnell, Eric Cantor, etc., and said they needed to meet 12 days hence about a legislative topic dear to their flinty little hearts, schedules would be rearranged and the meeting would take place.

hanleyclifford
08-30-2013, 08:15 PM
While at the Lincoln Memorial I hope all those emancipated folks took note of the man on the seat - and his party affiliation.

David G
08-30-2013, 08:28 PM
While at the Lincoln Memorial I hope all those emancipated folks took note of the man on the seat - and his party affiliation.

What a steaming load. Are you really that desperate to spin this discussion that you'll trot out THAT bit of disinformation?

hanleyclifford
08-30-2013, 08:31 PM
What a steaming load. Are you really that desperate to spin this discussion that you'll trot out THAT bit of disinformation? Spins real true, David; Lincoln was a flaming Republican.

Glen Longino
08-30-2013, 08:36 PM
Spins real true, David; Lincoln was a flaming Republican.

Lincoln would have waded into you present day Troglodytes with an axe handle!

SMARTINSEN
08-30-2013, 08:39 PM
Spins real true, David; Lincoln was a flaming Republican.

Do you see any irony in the fact that the nullificationists on the other thread are all Republicans? Comparing today's Republicans with Lincoln, when in fact they are the direct opposite, is fallacious, and you know it.

hanleyclifford
08-30-2013, 08:49 PM
Lincoln would have waded into you present day Troglodytes with an axe handle! Ooh! Kinda like Lester Maddox?:rolleyes:

David G
08-30-2013, 08:54 PM
hc - if, in your desperation, you can do no better than blatant disinformation, and obvious deflection... why do you even bother? Are you really so anxious to highlight the fact that you have no case?

BrianW
08-30-2013, 08:56 PM
Lincoln would have waded into you present day Troglodytes with an axe handle!

I saw that movie!

Joe (SoCal)
08-30-2013, 09:12 PM
There is a familiar thinking among our repug forum memebers, shuck and jive make lite and quick quips, pat each other on the back few backs you have, but never make a substantial honest contribution.

Kinda sad that you make a carature of your party

S.V. Airlie
08-30-2013, 09:40 PM
Dembats do the same thing and you dembats just ignore them when the do. SOP!!!!

ljb5
08-30-2013, 09:42 PM
How mant dems went other than Obama and his puppet?You failed to mention this in the OP.Why?Obama loves giving speeches!

If you knew, or knew how to find out, you wouldn't need to ask.

Andrew Young
Vincent Gray
Wintley Phipps
Johnny L. DuPree
Joaquin Castro
Martin O’Malley
Donna F. Edwards
Marcia L. Fudge
Caroline Kennedy
John Lewis
Jimmy Carter
Bill Clinton
President Obama


And those were just the ones who spoke. There were many others in attendance.

Thanks for asking.

Good lord! Why can't you ever find out anything for yourself?!

S.V. Airlie
08-30-2013, 09:49 PM
It's funny, the OP (lib) didn't answer my question; how many dems other than Obama and wanna be president, attended the ceremonies this week?

BrianW
08-30-2013, 09:56 PM
There is a familiar thinking among our repug forum memebers, shuck and jive make lite and quick quips, pat each other on the back few backs you have, but never make a substantial honest contribution.

Kinda sad that you make a carature of your party

I simply don't feel it's an issue. I find it funny that Democrats are trying to make it one. They couldn't give a hoot about Benghazi, but this is what they find important.

Among them, it's critical, outside their circle, it was another day.

Big deal. Don't expect the rest of us to care.

Which one of you whiners made the trip?

ljb5
08-30-2013, 09:58 PM
It's funny, the OP (lib) didn't answer my question; how many dems other than Obama and wanna be president, attended the ceremonies this week?

Why didn't you read the article linked in the OP?


...the Democratic party was well represented Wednesday by three presidents and a smattering of lawmakers, including civil rights icon Rep. John Lewis of Georgia.

Honestly, Jamie, I think there's something wrong with you.

You are in a world full of information and you can't be bothered to inform yourself...even when it's right in front of you. You just sit back and gripe that others don't spoon feed information to you.

David G
08-30-2013, 09:58 PM
Startled Varmint... don't you ever weary of embarrassing yourself? Or does your memory somehow allow you blissful ignorance of your folly?

Glen Longino
08-30-2013, 10:09 PM
I'm glad to see David and El Jay trying to give Jamie some free help.
God knows I've tried to help the poor ole coot for years until the Management told me to leave him alone.
He's only gotten more dysfunctional without my help.
Now maybe there is hope for him....but I doubt it!
Once a Troglodyte, always a Troglodyte!:D

elf
08-30-2013, 10:29 PM
Willing to bet that if the Koch brothers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koch_family#Political_activities) had rang up John Boehner, Mitch McConnell, Eric Cantor, etc., and said they needed to meet 12 days hence about a legislative topic dear to their flinty little hearts, schedules would be rearranged and the meeting would take place.
The meeting did. Who else do you think is an oil concern that they would be meeting with?

Joe (SoCal)
08-31-2013, 03:39 AM
I simply don't feel it's an issue.

Thank you for aptly exemplifying your party to the fullest. That's about the best example of your parties ideals I've seen on this thread.

skuthorp
08-31-2013, 04:56 AM
A boycott is a boycott. So just let the GOP get on with it, and enjoy the ride.

Joe Dupere
08-31-2013, 05:30 AM
While at the Lincoln Memorial I hope all those emancipated folks took note of the man on the seat - and his party affiliation.

Well, since no one else will do it, I will. I will concede that the thread title is wrong. There was a single Republican elected official represented at the 50th anniversary of the event. It's just a shame that he'd been dead for one hundred and forty eight years.

John Smith
08-31-2013, 06:36 AM
You have a fertile imagination...that and you believe every bit of liberal tripe that passes before your nose. The event was poorly planned, some say deliberately, to exclude republican participation. They didn't even invite the only black member of the US Senate because he was a Republican. Big surprise that Reps didn't feel inclined to rearrange their schedules to accommodate a last minute opportunity to speak to a crowd that didn't want them there.

"some say". Name names. This is an established Fox trick; unnamed sources.

Let me tell you what this says to me. The Republicans of today don't think the old march and the speech, or the progress that followed were good things.

John Smith
08-31-2013, 06:38 AM
:D
I was referring to Eric Cantor, and I DO know why he didn't show... or, should I say, I know what he was doing at the time.....

He was meeting with an oil industry lobbyist, by his own admission.

We know where his priorities lie.

I guess the oil industry lobbyist meeting couldn't have been put off a day or two.:D

John Smith
08-31-2013, 06:39 AM
Of course. The crowd was obviously overwhelmingly Democrat. Are you unaware of black party affiliation numbers? How could a wise politician see anything to gain by going before a hostile crowd? Do you think it cowardice that liberal Democrats don't go to Tea Party rallies or to speak to groups that oppose everything they believe in? No, of course you don't. There's nothing to be gained by doing so. Politicians aren't fools. Reps didn't want to be there, and the organizers didn't want them there. It's the natural order of things. Duhh.

"Hostile Crowd"? Celebrating a hostile march, I suppose.

John Smith
08-31-2013, 06:48 AM
The Republicans not showing up is lame. That said, it is better behavior than what caused me to stop voting for them. I see nothing about their behavior that will earn back my vote anytime soon.

Cheers,

Bobby

Maybe it's just me, but todays Republicans don't believe in anything King believed in. That is obvious by the actions in both Washington and in the states. They don't believe the black folks should have the right to vote. They don't believe women should be treated equally. To show up at this celebration would make them hypocrites, although that's never stopped them before.

I'd really like our friends on the right to consider how implausible it is that NONE came to this event. I can't see how that happens sans a conspiracy.

John Smith
08-31-2013, 06:57 AM
Apparently he got a group email sent to the entire Congress.

In any case, attempting to label every Republican in Congress as a member of the KKK is extreme. I can't attempt to politely laugh it off again, it's beyond reasonable.

P.S. See ya at the PT Show! :) We booked our tickets and got a car. Still looking for a room.

I would like to share your opinion, but today's Republicans are held hostage by the Tea Party, and they remind me of the KKK. Having personally known two Tea Party members, my brother and my aunt, I can say with certainty that both were racists of strong opinions.

I cannot see ALL republicans boycotting, which is what they did, this event unless they felt it would be a severe risk to their career. Their attendance would be used against them, and they would see a primary challenger; a very well funded primary challenger that would likely cost the incumbent Republican his seat.

Anyone who truly believes it a coincidence that no Republican came, IMO, is simply kidding himself. The only logical way to view their party wide absence is they were afraid of repercussions. This is not my dad's Republican party. It just isn't. Today's republican party does not like blacks or minorities. Some within it have expressed a desire to change this image, but the votes they cast cannot hide what they believe.

John Smith
08-31-2013, 07:00 AM
What strikes me about the whole thing is how tone deaf the GOP remains

Another comment I'd like to agree with, but what should strike you is the actions, via votes, the republicans actually take, wherein we can see what they believe. They don't want minorities to vote. They don't want immigration reform. They don't want women to have the right to choose.

John Smith
08-31-2013, 07:03 AM
Spins real true, David; Lincoln was a flaming Republican.

You think this is the same party in anything other than the name?

John Smith
08-31-2013, 07:06 AM
It's funny, the OP (lib) didn't answer my question; how many dems other than Obama and wanna be president, attended the ceremonies this week?

Here's a little math trick. If you have a crowd of 1000 people, and none of them are republicans, it's pretty likely they are all democrats, no?

John Smith
08-31-2013, 07:06 AM
I simply don't feel it's an issue. I find it funny that Democrats are trying to make it one. They couldn't give a hoot about Benghazi, but this is what they find important.

Among them, it's critical, outside their circle, it was another day.

Big deal. Don't expect the rest of us to care.

Which one of you whiners made the trip?

That's just not true.

John Smith
08-31-2013, 07:07 AM
Why didn't you read the article linked in the OP?



Honestly, Jamie, I think there's something wrong with you.

You are in a world full of information and you can't be bothered to inform yourself...even when it's right in front of you. You just sit back and gripe that others don't spoon feed information to you.

I sadly believe he's afraid if he looked up some actual facts he'd have to change his opinions.

elf
08-31-2013, 07:49 AM
Facts don't change Jamie's opinions. Even life experience doesn't change his opinions.

I'm not sure any of those things ever did, but certainly at this point his cynicism is so deeply ingrained that nothing will help any more.

It's sad when a human being reaches that point, especially when they're younger than me!

elf
08-31-2013, 07:51 AM
Here's a little math trick. If you have a crowd of 1000 people, and none of them are republicans, it's pretty likely they are all democrats, no?
Actually, no. Many of them are unaffiliated, but subscribe to the purpose of the crowd of the moment. And some of them are there by accident, or because they're curious and thought they'd check it out.

Shang
08-31-2013, 09:12 AM
Or perhaps this non-story is a distraction by Shang, to keep us from following the news of an impending Syria attack? :)

Indeed, you have devined my strategy. I knew that if I tossed out a shiney object the attention of the right-wing belly-scratchers would be diverted from all international issues, thus shifting the balance of world power.

Or then again I might have been drawing attention to the fact that no elected Republicans attended the MLK anniversary.

Arizona Bay
08-31-2013, 09:18 AM
The party of civil rights for everyone who knows their place, and stays there... civilly.

ljb5
08-31-2013, 09:58 AM
ROFL! It's no surprise that you see things that way....that there are only two groups of people. You're either with us, or you're against us, right? This is what's wrong with modern day politics...the blindered devotion by some (many) to the two major political clubs, as if there is nothing beyond their propaganda spheres.

And you've got a blind devotion to the party that didn't even bother to show up.

(Oh, and you were wrong when you said Tim Sott wasn't invited. He received the same invite as every other member of Congress.)

Gerarddm
08-31-2013, 10:05 AM
Nothing would have kept Jack Kemp from being there, for example.

This of course is not an issue to Republicans, but it is yet another canary in the coal mine to minorities who do not need yet another reminder that the GOP is dismissive of them. Symbolism counts, especially when you are playing catch up ( or pretending to ).

Shang
08-31-2013, 10:34 AM
Talk about stretching the truth...he received a form letter invitation to attend the event addressed to "member", not an invitation to speak. The only black member of the US Senate should've been invited to speak. It's incredible that he wasn't. Why do you suppose he wasn't? Didn't bother to show up? Pffft. You lame spinners make me l augh. He was deliberately excluded, despite his obvious relevance.

Personally I didn't see the invitation that was sent to Tim Scott but I'll take your word for it. Without a personalized invitation how could he know that there was going to be a celebration of The March!
Did Tim Scott tell you that he was so hurt by being deliberately excluded that he stamped his feet and cried?

ljb5
08-31-2013, 10:39 AM
Talk about stretching the truth...he received a form letter invitation to attend the event addressed to "member", not an invitation to speak.

He was invited. He declined.

The only black member of the US Senate should've been invited to speak.

Why? Just because he's black?

He's got an "F" rating from the NAACP.

He's opposed to women's rights. He's opposed to LGBT rights. He's against the voting rights act.

Maybe the slots for invited speakers were reserved for people who support civil rights.... not just those who happen to have dark skin.

David G
08-31-2013, 10:44 AM
Talk about stretching the truth...he received a form letter invitation to attend the event addressed to "member", not an invitation to speak. The only black member of the US Senate should've been invited to speak. It's incredible that he wasn't. Why do you suppose he wasn't? Didn't bother to show up? Pffft. You lame spinners make me laugh. He was deliberately excluded, despite his obvious relevance.

Talk about stretching the truth...

I'll buy the notion, for the sake of argument - since neither of us know for certain - that the invitation he received was generic. And yet you manage to convert this putative lukewarm invitation to 'deliberately excluded'. ROFL, indeed.

ljb5
08-31-2013, 10:59 AM
You bet because he's black! He's the most accomplished black American in government...

How do you figure that?


You've admitted that it was more of a political event than a celebration of MLK. That's what I've been saying, and that's why Scott was excluded.

Thanks for playing.

He wasn't excluded. He was invited.

Also, it was not a political event. It was a Civil Rights event.

I'm so sorry that you seem to think Civil Rights is a political issue. I think that might be part of your problem.

Maybe when you understand that either party, or even both parties can support civil rights, you'll start to understand.

elf
08-31-2013, 11:13 AM
Everyone was invited with the same form invitation.

Speakers were chose from among those who accepted.

Scott did not accept, therefore he could not have been selected to speak.

Canoeyawl
08-31-2013, 11:14 AM
Well...I failed to say that Scott is the most accomplished other then the President, who is half black.
Is that like half-human?

pefjr
08-31-2013, 11:19 AM
What a joke the bilge lefties have become, this thread is only an attempt to distract from the big boo boo that Obama is threatening to make in Syria.:d

ljb5
08-31-2013, 11:37 AM
Well...I failed to say that Scott is the most accomplished other then the President, who is half black.

Well, you're getting closer.... :rolleyes:


If this event had truly been a celebration of MLK and his ideals he would've been asked to speak.

I think you're absolutely wrong.

Tim Scott is opposed the Voting Rights Act.

Dr. King wouldn't have invited him to speak in 1963, so he shouldn't have been invited in 2013.

Maybe you don't understand what the March on Washington was about.

In 1963, Dr. King appeared surrounded by people of all colors. Patrick O'Boyle, Walter Reuther, Uri Miller, Joaquin Prinz...

Dr. King didn't select people because of the color of their skin. He asked them to speak because of their commitment to civil rights.

As long as you continue to hold forth Mr. Scott's (full-blooded) blackness as the single and only reason why you think he should have been invited to speak, you will never understand what happened there in 1963.

Tim Scott got his invitation to attend, just like everyone else. (All invitations are form letters, so please stop harping on that point.)

But an invitation to speak? That's something a person needs to earn.

Gerarddm
08-31-2013, 11:58 AM
But an invitation to speak? That's something a person needs to earn.



And there you have it. 'Nuff said.

wardd
08-31-2013, 02:02 PM
ROFL! It's no surprise that you see things that way....that there are only two groups of people. You're either with us, or you're against us, right? This is what's wrong with modern day politics...the blindered devotion by some (many) to the two major political clubs, as if there is nothing beyond their propaganda spheres.


didn't bush say that?

bobbys
08-31-2013, 02:30 PM
If MLK was alive today he would not have been invited to speak.....

ljb5
08-31-2013, 03:05 PM
If MLK was alive today he would not have been invited to speak.....

Care to explain that!?

Chip-skiff
08-31-2013, 05:02 PM
He's the most accomplished black American in government. . .

Aren't you forgetting Justice Clarence Thomas?

http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR1yyeBO3BJsKQNN6ukYaKhg117na8Oy 8FTpdIdT0FwAQLazF3a

hanleyclifford
08-31-2013, 05:06 PM
Well, since no one else will do it, I will. I will concede that the thread title is wrong. There was a single Republican elected official represented at the 50th anniversary of the event. It's just a shame that he'd been dead for one hundred and forty eight years. ....murdered by a Democrat!

S.V. Airlie
08-31-2013, 05:16 PM
I looked through quite a few posts and have yet received an answer; Other than Obama and his wanna be president, how many dems went to the 50th?

wardd
08-31-2013, 05:20 PM
I looked through quite a few posts and have yet received an answer; Other than Obama and his wanna be president, how many dems went to the 50th?

i bet most of those there were democrats

S.V. Airlie
08-31-2013, 05:27 PM
unelected and on welfare I bet.

wardd
08-31-2013, 05:32 PM
unelected and on welfare I bet.

yes jamie, all dem blacks is on welfare

S.V. Airlie
08-31-2013, 05:37 PM
Oh I get it, only blacks are democrats!Got it!That should be a big surprise to dems on the forum wart.

ljb5
08-31-2013, 05:37 PM
I looked through quite a few posts and have yet received an answer; Other than Obama and his wanna be president, how many dems went to the 50th?

Andrew Young
Vincent Gray
Wintley Phipps
Johnny L. DuPree
Joaquin Castro
Martin O’Malley
Donna F. Edwards
Marcia L. Fudge
Caroline Kennedy
John Lewis
Jimmy Carter
Bill Clinton
President Obama

ljb5
08-31-2013, 05:38 PM
I looked through quite a few posts and have yet received an answer; Other than Obama and his wanna be president, how many dems went to the 50th?
Again:

Andrew Young
Vincent Gray
Wintley Phipps
Johnny L. DuPree
Joaquin Castro
Martin O’Malley
Donna F. Edwards
Marcia L. Fudge
Caroline Kennedy
John Lewis
Jimmy Carter
Bill Clinton
President Obama

ljb5
08-31-2013, 05:39 PM
I looked through quite a few posts and have yet received an answer; Other than Obama and his wanna be president, how many dems went to the 50th?

And again:

Andrew Young
Vincent Gray
Wintley Phipps
Johnny L. DuPree
Joaquin Castro
Martin O’Malley
Donna F. Edwards
Marcia L. Fudge
Caroline Kennedy
John Lewis
Jimmy Carter
Bill Clinton
President Obama

wardd
08-31-2013, 05:51 PM
i don't think he heard you

S.V. Airlie
08-31-2013, 05:57 PM
LJB whatever has been on my ignore list. I'm sure he's in touch with Rachael Meadow though and will fill her in for tonight's segment. I don't pay attention to anyone paid for his efforts to spin the liberal top.:)

wardd
08-31-2013, 06:03 PM
LJB whatever has been on my ignore list. I'm sure he's in touch with Rachael Meadow though and will fill her in for tonight's segment. I don't pay attention to anyone paid for his efforts to spin the liberal top.:)


hmmmmm, anybody else smell a rat here?

CWSmith
08-31-2013, 06:09 PM
ljb whatever has been on my ignore list. I'm sure he's in touch with rachael meadow though and will fill her in for tonight's segment. I don't pay attention to anyone paid for his efforts to spin the liberal top.:)

he said:


andrew young
vincent gray
wintley phipps
johnny l. Dupree
joaquin castro
martin o’malley
donna f. Edwards
marcia l. Fudge
caroline kennedy
john lewis
jimmy carter
bill clinton
president obama

CWSmith
08-31-2013, 06:16 PM
Well, since no one else will do it, I will. I will concede that the thread title is wrong. There was a single Republican elected official represented at the 50th anniversary of the event. It's just a shame that he'd been dead for one hundred and forty eight years.

To be honest, does anyone think the current Republican Party would embrace Lincoln if he were alive today - the man who fought a war to preserve The Union, delivered the Emancipation Proclamation, and proposed the first federal tax?

wardd
08-31-2013, 06:27 PM
To be honest, does anyone think the current Republican Party would embrace Lincoln if he were alive today - the man who fought a war to preserve The Union, delivered the Emancipation Proclamation, and proposed the first federal tax?

all lincoln had to contend with was the southern rebellion not the tparty

CWSmith
08-31-2013, 06:31 PM
all lincoln had to contend with was the southern rebellion not the tparty

Robert E. Lee was a rational man. I think that all the southern leadership knew the difference between what they wanted and what was true.

ljb5
08-31-2013, 06:35 PM
Four Congressional Democrats. Is that really all? Four?

Those were just the Democrats who were on the list of speakers.

There were countless others in attendance.

(Please pass this on to Jamie.)

pila
08-31-2013, 07:06 PM
Heck, I didn't get invited either.......

S.V. Airlie
08-31-2013, 09:06 PM
Four Congressional Democrats. Is that really all? Four?Quite a few there LJ are not elected or in office now. C. Jennedy probably attended because her dady was president in Aug., 1963. The rest, I don't recognize..Not elected officials that I would see in Congress anyway. So tops four. Wow! 3 more than the Reps and there are 535 members in Congress. Blows the heck out of the OP! The rah, rah balloon is flat.

S.V. Airlie
08-31-2013, 09:20 PM
To be honest, does anyone think the current Republican Party would embrace Lincoln if he were alive today - the man who fought a war to preserve The Union, delivered the Emancipation Proclamation, and proposed the first federal tax?He only freed slaves in territories the Union controlled

ljb5
08-31-2013, 10:05 PM
Quite a few there LJ are not elected or in office now. C. Jennedy probably attended because her dady was president in Aug., 1963. The rest, I don't recognize..Not elected officials that I would see in Congress anyway. So tops four. Wow! 3 more than the Reps and there are 535 members in Congress. Blows the heck out of the OP! The rah, rah balloon is flat.


Good gosh, Jamie.

How did we decide that four is three more than zero? :rolleyes:

If anyone is interested, here's the list of speakers: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/dr-gridlock/wp/2013/08/27/road-closures-metro-tips-for-march-on-washington-anniversary-wednesday/

Bear in mind, this is just the list of speakers. The actual list of attendees was considerably longer.

I don't think it should be necessary for every single speaker to be a sitting Democratic Congressman. You gotta make some room on the schedule for Peter and Paul.

Still, the Democrats showed up and the Republicans didn't. You can spin it or ignore it. If you're Jamie, you can do both. Or you can deal with it.

ljb5
08-31-2013, 10:09 PM
He only freed slaves in territories the Union controlled

Or, the exact opposite of what you said. :rolleyes:

Nicholas Carey
08-31-2013, 10:09 PM
He only freed slaves in territories the Union controlled

Not true. The Emancipation proclamation freed slaves only in territory currently in rebellion:




By the President of the United States of America:

A Proclamation.

Whereas, on the twenty-second day of September, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-two, a proclamation was issued by the President of the United States, containing, among other things, the following, to wit:

"That on the first day of January, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-three, all persons held as slaves within any State or designated part of a State, the people whereof shall then be in rebellion against the United States, shall be then, thenceforward, and forever free; and the Executive Government of the United States, including the military and naval authority thereof, will recognize and maintain the freedom of such persons, and will do no act or acts to repress such persons, or any of them, in any efforts they may make for their actual freedom.

"That the Executive will, on the first day of January aforesaid, by proclamation, designate the States and parts of States, if any, in which the people thereof, respectively, shall then be in rebellion against the United States; and the fact that any State, or the people thereof, shall on that day be, in good faith, represented in the Congress of the United States by members chosen thereto at elections wherein a majority of the qualified voters of such State shall have participated, shall, in the absence of strong countervailing testimony, be deemed conclusive evidence that such State, and the people thereof, are not then in rebellion against the United States."

Now, therefore I, Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States, by virtue of the power in me vested as Commander-in-Chief, of the Army and Navy of the United States in time of actual armed rebellion against the authority and government of the United States, and as a fit and necessary war measure for suppressing said rebellion, do, on this first day of January, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-three, and in accordance with my purpose so to do publicly proclaimed for the full period of one hundred days, from the day first above mentioned, order and designate as the States and parts of States wherein the people thereof respectively, are this day in rebellion against the United States, the following, to wit:

Arkansas, Texas, Louisiana, (except the Parishes of St. Bernard, Plaquemines, Jefferson, St. John, St. Charles, St. James Ascension, Assumption, Terrebonne, Lafourche, St. Mary, St. Martin, and Orleans, including the City of New Orleans) Mississippi, Alabama, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, and Virginia, (except the forty-eight counties designated as West Virginia, and also the counties of Berkley, Accomac, Northampton, Elizabeth City, York, Princess Ann, and Norfolk, including the cities of Norfolk and Portsmouth[)], and which excepted parts, are for the present, left precisely as if this proclamation were not issued.

And by virtue of the power, and for the purpose aforesaid, I do order and declare that all persons held as slaves within said designated States, and parts of States, are, and henceforward shall be free; and that the Executive government of the United States, including the military and naval authorities thereof, will recognize and maintain the freedom of said persons.

And I hereby enjoin upon the people so declared to be free to abstain from all violence, unless in necessary self-defence; and I recommend to them that, in all cases when allowed, they labor faithfully for reasonable wages.

And I further declare and make known, that such persons of suitable condition, will be received into the armed service of the United States to garrison forts, positions, stations, and other places, and to man vessels of all sorts in said service.

And upon this act, sincerely believed to be an act of justice, warranted by the Constitution, upon military necessity, I invoke the considerate judgment of mankind, and the gracious favor of Almighty God.

In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of the United States to be affixed.

Done at the City of Washington, this first day of January, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty three, and of the Independence of the United States of America the eighty-seventh.

By the President: ABRAHAM LINCOLN
WILLIAM H. SEWARD, Secretary of State.

S.V. Airlie
09-01-2013, 08:29 AM
States in rebellion were often occupied by the north. The only way he could free the slaves were in territories the north occupied.

John Smith
09-01-2013, 08:35 AM
LJB whatever has been on my ignore list. I'm sure he's in touch with Rachael Meadow though and will fill her in for tonight's segment. I don't pay attention to anyone paid for his efforts to spin the liberal top.:)

Why do you ask questions if you really don't want them answered?

I think I addressed your question. If none of those there were Republicans, what would you think they were?

S.V. Airlie
09-01-2013, 08:43 AM
Actually, I often do. It's usually the libs who find it hard to answer them. Just spin if they answer them at all. SOP! I answered LJ via another poster about Dems who went to the 50th. Got a laugh at the response and I answered it John. What, ignore my answer?

elf
09-01-2013, 09:08 AM
Guys, you gotta just accept it.

There are quite a large number of people in the US who don't believe a fact unless it comports with their idea of the correct fact.

Jamie is among them, despite his apparent education and participation in the education establishment. There is the reason he's not teaching anywhere anymore.

CWSmith
09-01-2013, 09:53 AM
He only freed slaves in territories the Union controlled

He also delivered the 13th Amendment. You skipped over the power of the federal government and tax comment.

ljb5
09-01-2013, 10:09 AM
Other Democrats in attendance:

Gwen Moore
G.K. Butterfield
Yvette Clarke
Karen Bass
Shelia Jackson
Joyce Beatty

I think Clyburn and Conyers were there also.


Those are just the few I could identify by scanning Facebook. There are a lot of others.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest that certain other people on this thread are incapable of seeking information like this. Worse yet, it's never even occurred to him that he could even attempt to inform himself.

I hope someone reposts this for Jamie to see.

Shang
09-01-2013, 11:03 AM
As was said in the beginning of this thread:

"...Not a single Republican elected official stood on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial on Wednesday with activists, actors, lawmakers and former presidents invited to mark the 50th anniversary of the March on Washington — a notable absence for a party seeking to attract the support of minority voters."

Osborne Russell
09-01-2013, 11:08 AM
I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest that certain other people on this thread are incapable of seeking information like this.

Capable or not, they are unwilling. S.V. Airlie had no idea of the facts when he raised his "argument" and is no more interested in them now.

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink. The horse is capable of drinking water; that isn't the issue.

ljb5
09-01-2013, 11:20 AM
Capable or not, they are unwilling. S.V. Airlie had no idea of the facts when he raised his "argument" and is no more interested in them now.

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink. The horse is capable of drinking water; that isn't the issue.

I don't mind so much if he's ignorant and wants to stay ignorant. That reflects only on him.

... but the really offensive part is that he uses his impenetrable ignorance as an insult and attack against others.

If he doesn't know something, he turns around and complains that it's my fault because I didn't rush out and find the information for him.

His disgusting sense of entitlement is really shocking to behold. If you answer ten of his questions, he'll call you a jerk for not answering eleven.

Never, ever, ever has it occurred to him that it's not my obligation to spoon feed him whatever he demands. He just naturally assumes it's a service I owe to him.

pipefitter
09-01-2013, 12:03 PM
I can kind of see why this residual, Democrat, white guilt thing keeps popping up. James Ray was a Wallace supporter. Being that everything that can be said, or acknowledged with regard to MLK in 50 years, has been, it is only fitting that the Democrats still be trying to use such political gesturing and symbolism to try and right such a senseless act. I don't know that the black Americans will forget that Ray was a Democrat supporter, though. Perhaps that's why we are not hearing so much from the black community on this issue. It's mostly old white guys.

Forgive yourselves and move on. Most people have forgiven/forgotten you already.

S.V. Airlie
09-01-2013, 12:10 PM
Guys, you gotta just accept it.

There are quite a large number of people in the US who don't believe a fact unless it comports with their idea of the correct fact.

Jamie is among them, despite his apparent education and participation in the education establishment. There is the reason he's not teaching anywhere anymore.Same can be said about you. Stretching it about teaching but would expect a comment like yours. I can think of some nasty things too about you. Even if you make an attempt to be a school marm to 3 yr olds.FYI, I CHOSE NOT TO TEACH ANYMORE. Education is turning into a joke. Anyone can teach even you, the way the system works. Actually, you'd probably hate it.

CWSmith
09-01-2013, 03:22 PM
I don't mind so much if he's ignorant and wants to stay ignorant. That reflects only on him.

... but the really offensive part is that he uses his impenetrable ignorance as an insult and attack against others.

If he doesn't know something, he turns around and complains that it's my fault because I didn't rush out and find the information for him.

His disgusting sense of entitlement is really shocking to behold. If you answer ten of his questions, he'll call you a jerk for not answering eleven.

Never, ever, ever has it occurred to him that it's not my obligation to spoon feed him whatever he demands. He just naturally assumes it's a service I owe to him.

Isn't this what we see every day on Fox News and elsewhere? Real debate and discussion is destroyed when this sort of tactic comes into play and this is the goal of those who have nothing constructive to contribute. It leads to a jaded personality that sees corruption and lies everywhere - it's the "If we're dirty, you must be dirty, too." approach. For instance:


I can kind of see why this residual, Democrat, white guilt thing keeps popping up. James Ray was a Wallace supporter. Being that everything that can be said, or acknowledged with regard to MLK in 50 years, has been, it is only fitting that the Democrats still be trying to use such political gesturing and symbolism to try and right such a senseless act. I don't know that the black Americans will forget that Ray was a Democrat supporter, though. Perhaps that's why we are not hearing so much from the black community on this issue. It's mostly old white guys.

Forgive yourselves and move on. Most people have forgiven/forgotten you already.

... and then you wind up with nothing but character assassination and the threat of same. Like this:


Same can be said about you. Stretching it about teaching but would expect a comment like yours. I can think of some nasty things too about you. Even if you make an attempt to be a school marm to 3 yr olds.FYI, I CHOSE NOT TO TEACH ANYMORE. Education is turning into a joke. Anyone can teach even you, the way the system works. Actually, you'd probably hate it.

Real discussion ends when this cr@p gets thrown around. Too bad for our society.

Boater14
09-01-2013, 04:55 PM
they didn't show because it might have cost them their racist base. they've made their bed. Brian, the Alaskan perspective is wearing thin.

S.V. Airlie
09-01-2013, 05:04 PM
Read what she said about me CW in her post. Then, you can shut up.

CWSmith
09-01-2013, 07:16 PM
Read what she said about me CW in her post. Then, you can shut up.

There is plenty to go around. As for "shutting up", I can't say I see many fans for what you have to say. You attitude and assaults are an obstacle to real discourse.

BrianW
09-01-2013, 07:47 PM
they didn't show because it might have cost them their racist base. they've made their bed. Brian, the Alaskan perspective is wearing thin.

The people represented by 309 elected Republicans are racist.

Talk about unreasonable statements. If this is what you got for an arguement as to why none of them went to an anniversary parade, you've handed the debate to the opposing side.

Thanks!

Tom Montgomery
09-01-2013, 07:53 PM
The people represented by 309 elected Republicans are racist.
Sheesh... :rolleyes:

Some are indeed racist. And many more are simply ignorant. And the GOP politicians continue to pander to the No Nothings.

There is no need for them to pander to the ideologues.

Keith Wilson
09-01-2013, 07:56 PM
The people represented by 309 elected Republicans are racist.Some of them, not nearly all of them. That's OK. The Republican party is still steadily becoming the party of angry old well-armed evangelical Christian white men. Their choice, but it doesn't seem a good way to win elections, certainly not nationally.

ljb5
09-01-2013, 08:15 PM
The people represented by 309 elected Republicans are racist.

If it were just the anniversary parade, you might have a point.

But there is so much else going on. Voter suppression. Opposition to the Voting Rights Act. The occasional "Shoot the N****R" outburst on Facebook or what not. Calling people "Macaca" at a campaign rally. Opposition to affirmative action. And the bizarre, bizarre conspiracy theories about Obama.

After a while, it starts to add up. And you start to think maybe Lee Atwater was on to something.


Questioner: But the fact is, isn't it, that Reagan does get to the Wallace voter and to the racist side of the Wallace voter by doing away with legal services, by cutting down on food stamps?
Atwater: 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. And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I'm not saying that. But I'm saying that if it 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."[8][9]

Osborne Russell
09-01-2013, 09:02 PM
The people represented by 309 elected Republicans are racist.

Talk about unreasonable statements. If this is what you got for an arguement as to why none of them went to an anniversary parade, you've handed the debate to the opposing side.

Thanks!

"it might have cost them their racist base" is what it says on my screen.

Similar to Jindal (R-Louisiana) saying "We have to stop being the party of stupid."

Who you all may be is a topic of speculation. Who's calling the shots is what counts. Who made the call that none would attend, and why?

Osborne Russell
09-01-2013, 09:05 PM
While at the Lincoln Memorial I hope all those emancipated folks took note of the man on the seat - and his party affiliation.

And his southern strategy.

Osborne Russell
09-01-2013, 09:06 PM
I don't mind so much if he's ignorant and wants to stay ignorant. That reflects only on him.

... but the really offensive part is that he uses his impenetrable ignorance as an insult and attack against others.

If he doesn't know something, he turns around and complains that it's my fault because I didn't rush out and find the information for him.

His disgusting sense of entitlement is really shocking to behold. If you answer ten of his questions, he'll call you a jerk for not answering eleven.

Never, ever, ever has it occurred to him that it's not my obligation to spoon feed him whatever he demands. He just naturally assumes it's a service I owe to him.

Voila, the Cult Of Ignorance. He's an American, so he's equal.

Osborne Russell
09-01-2013, 09:09 PM
The absolutely zero participation rate of the Republicans was a complete coinkydink.

OK, so that's covered. What other lame Red thing is lacking to make this thread complete?

S.V. Airlie
09-01-2013, 10:25 PM
There is plenty to go around. As for "shutting up", I can't say I see many fans for what you have to say. You attitude and assaults are an obstacle to real discourse.My attitude is bewcause of the libs contantly harping and whining and pouting and complaining and spinning about Repubs when the Dembats ain't much better. That's what skews my attitude. And CW, ask me if I care if those who don't know me, sailed with me, or met me. They are the fans I don't have thankfully Those are the ones more than likely you are referring to. That's what skews my attitude.

BrianW
09-01-2013, 10:31 PM
As it appears nobody here went to the event, I'm led to believe it wasn't that important to them. Except as a soundbite against Republicans.

Like someone said, it wasn't a surprise party. They should have gone if it was that big a deal. :D

bobbys
09-01-2013, 11:32 PM
Republicans invited to this event is like me getting invited to a mystic bilge party.

O sure "everyone" is invited.

Course some said they would not come if i was there..

One needs to pay attention to the tone.

Im sure libs patted each other in the back and said looky here no tea party people came too our shin dig they must be anti social..

Not hard to figure out when libs dont want you there..

If Some Conservatives had spoke Rabble would have set the crowd to booing and used this to embarrass them.
When they spoke they would have cut the camera to shots of libs frowning or waving the Obama flag.

Nope it would have been a set up.

Republicans learned well the lesson of the Wellstone memorial where a funeral turned into a Democrat rally..

bobbys
09-02-2013, 12:10 AM
[ Originally Posted by ljb5 http://forum.woodenboat.com/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://forum.woodenboat.com/showthread.php?p=3891334#post3891334)I don't mind so much if he's ignorant and wants to stay ignorant. That reflects only on him.

... but the really offensive part is that he uses his impenetrable ignorance as an insult and attack against others.

If he doesn't know something, he turns around and complains that it's my fault because I didn't rush out and find the information for him.

His disgusting sense of entitlement is really shocking to behold. If you answer ten of his questions, he'll call you a jerk for not answering eleven.


Never, ever, ever has it occurred to him that it's not my obligation to spoon feed him whatever he demands. He just naturally assumes it's a service I owe to him..

QUOTE=CWSmith;3891524]Isn't this what we see every day on Fox News and elsewhere? Real debate and discussion is destroyed when this sort of tactic comes into play and this is the goal of those who have nothing constructive to contribute. It leads to a jaded personality that sees corruption and lies everywhere - it's the "If we're dirty, you must be dirty, too." approach. For instance:



... and then you wind up with nothing but character assassination and the threat of same. Like this:



Real discussion ends when this cr@p gets thrown around. Too bad for our society.[/QUOTE].

Did you notice any irony in your post?

elf
09-02-2013, 12:15 AM
Republicans invited to this event is like me getting invited to a mystic bilge party.

O sure "everyone" is invited.

Course some said they would not come if i was there..

One needs to pay attention to the tone.

Im sure libs patted each other in the back and said looky here no tea party people came too our shin dig they must be anti social..

Not hard to figure out when libs dont want you there..

If Some Conservatives had spoke Rabble would have set the crowd to booing and used this to embarrass them.
When they spoke they would have cut the camera to shots of libs frowning or waving the Obama flag.

Nope it would have been a set up.

Republicans learned well the lesson of the Wellstone memorial where a funeral turned into a Democrat rally..
This has to be one of the saddest postings I've ever seen in the Bilge.

I don't know anyone who comes to Lefty and Carter's who is not made to feel welcome, and Jamie and BrianW can testify that they've never felt excluded there.

And I don't know any "liberals" with such bad manners that they would not welcome a Republican who wished to participate in the celebration last week in DC.

I'm very sorry that you see the world this way, Bobbys. Please make sure you put the Mystic party on your calendar for next year, and come. Those already there will be glad to see you, and those not yet arrived will enjoy being welcomed by you.

BrianW
09-02-2013, 12:32 AM
This has to be one of the saddest postings I've ever seen in the Bilge.

I don't know anyone who comes to Lefty and Carter's who is not made to feel welcome, and Jamie and BrianW can testify that they've never felt excluded there.

And I don't know any "liberals" with such bad manners that they would not welcome a Republican who wished to participate in the celebration last week in DC.

I'm very sorry that you see the world this way, Bobbys. Please make sure you put the Mystic party on your calendar for next year, and come. Those already there will be glad to see you, and those not yet arrived will enjoy being welcomed by you.

You are correct Emily.

Our EBS visits are always great. I seem to recall someone saying they wouldn't show up if bobbys showed, and that's more than I've ever experienced. Of course if it were me, I'd make sure to attend, and let whoever made such a claim miss out themselves. ;)

\

bobbys
09-02-2013, 12:38 AM
This has to be one of the saddest postings I've ever seen in the Bilge.

I don't know anyone who comes to Lefty and Carter's who is not made to feel welcome, and Jamie and BrianW can testify that they've never felt excluded there.

And I don't know any "liberals" with such bad manners that they would not welcome a Republican who wished to participate in the celebration last week in DC.

I'm very sorry that you see the world this way, Bobbys. Please make sure you put the Mystic party on your calendar for next year, and come. Those already there will be glad to see you, and those not yet arrived will enjoy being welcomed by you..

Sure i would like to come but its a fact some said if i came they would not, No one spoke up and said knock it off so it goes.

BrianW
09-02-2013, 12:46 AM
.

Sure i would like to come but its a fact some said if i came they would not, No one spoke up and said knock it off so it goes.


I apologize if I saw that and failed to act.

Come to the PT show, and start a tradition! Between the two of us, we can take'em on.

(except Dan is pretty big and I suspect James is too)

:D

bobbys
09-02-2013, 12:53 AM
I apologize if I saw that and failed to act.

Come to the PT show, and start a tradition! Between the two of us, we can take'em on.

(except Dan is pretty big and I suspect James is too)

:D.

Nothing to do with you nor PCford who extended his hand many times.

If one is faced with showing up and making others not show up then im a prick either way..

However i like most everyone and there is no body i would not want to meet.

leikec
09-02-2013, 01:45 AM
.

Nothing to do with you nor PCford who extended his hand many times.

If one is faced with showing up and making others not show up then im a prick either way..

However i like most everyone and there is no body i would not want to meet.

I would only come to a party like that if I could beat republicans with a big stick while I ate corn dogs....

:D

Jeff C

bobbys
09-02-2013, 02:08 AM
I would only come to a party like that if I could beat republicans with a big stick while I ate corn dogs....

:D

Jeff C.

An real lib does not admit to eating corn dawgs, Thus you have exposed yourself as a impostor.

BrianW
09-02-2013, 02:34 AM
I would only come to a party like that if I could beat republicans with a big stick while I ate corn dogs....

:D

Jeff C

I'll challenge you to a game of online chess.

http://gameknot.com/

You can have first move. My handle there is wbfbrianw

You can eat all the corn dogs you like. :)

leikec
09-02-2013, 10:53 AM
I'll challenge you to a game of online chess.

http://gameknot.com/

You can have first move. My handle there is wbfbrianw

You can eat all the corn dogs you like. :)

Nah...I always get mixed up trying to remember the difference between the horsey and that castle thingy. Too much pressure. :D

I have worked for a congressional campaign though. Any guess as to the party affiliation of the candidate?

Jeff C

johnw
09-02-2013, 02:12 PM
Nah...I always get mixed up trying to remember the difference between the horsey and that castle thingy. Too much pressure. :D

I have worked for a congressional campaign though. Any guess as to the party affiliation of the candidate?

Jeff C

I'm a lousy chess player. When I think about how to move the prawns, it makes me hungry.

mariner2k
09-02-2013, 04:58 PM
What could Boehner or cantor possibly have to say anyway? Square pegs in a round hole.

elf
09-02-2013, 05:38 PM
Not an excuse, but certainly, and sadly, a question to be considered.

Had either of them attended, it certianly would have signaled a sea change in the relationship between them and the positions they've taken during the last 5 years.

Had they had the courage to assemble a small group of their regressive cohort to appear, even a token group, they would have had a little cover for expressing a tiny blink of human decency.

We also need to keep in mind that many of the leading Democrats in Congress did not attend either, for the same reason the Republicans didn't - feeling they need to take care of business in their districts. And one could view them with the same opprobium had they also had critical mass.

But some Democrats did come, so that blows that angle out of the water.

Keith Wilson
09-02-2013, 08:17 PM
A real lib does not admit to eating corn dawgs, Thus you have exposed yourself as a impostor.Dude, I went to the MN state fair today, and while I did not eat any corn dogs (the local name for 'em is 'pronto pups'; I don't know why) I did eat deep-fried cheese curds, a chocolate malt big enough to swim in next to the butter sculptures in the dairy building, and several things on sticks best left unmentioned. And bobbys, if you ever show up where I am, I'll shake your hand, tell you sincerely that I'm glad to meet you, and go get you a glass of whatever beverage strikes your fancy. I think you're wrong about pretty much everything, but what the %$#* difference does that make?

Butter heads. Read all about 'em here. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Princess_Kay_of_the_Milky_Way)

http://withyou.cenex.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/StateFair_ButterHeads.jpg

bobbys
09-02-2013, 08:49 PM
I took my grandkids to the county fair, we had snow cones{Hawaiian}, curly fries, burgers and hot dawgs. We split 2 milkshakes.

No artists practicing their art in butter but we had a petting zoo, However my wife refused to let me go to the beer garden.

I did buy a 5 dollar raffle ticket for a .22 ruger from the tea party but alas lost..

Naw you kicked azz and took no prisoner's with butter heads, trumps our petting zoo..

We did have a full size cardboard cutout of Ronald Reagan at the Republican booth if that helps.

Keith Wilson
09-02-2013, 09:03 PM
Yeah, but it's the state fair; a bigger operation. Our Republicans had a cutout of Reagan, the Democrats had cutouts of both Mr. and Mrs. Obama, plus Hillary C.. Democrats have more cardboard, I guess. I tried to get some tea at the little Tea Party booth, but they didn't have any. I don't know why. The guy looked kind of confused.

:D

elf
09-02-2013, 09:23 PM
Now, now, Regressives. The devil made him do that, you know.

elf
09-02-2013, 09:33 PM
I wanna see more photos of the butter scuptures. And what happens to them after the fair is over?

BrianW
09-02-2013, 10:00 PM
I tried to get some tea at the little Tea Party booth, but they didn't have any. I don't know why. The guy looked kind of confused.

:D

Probably because they dumped the tea in the harbor.

I might have taken a few bags myself before dumping it all overboard.

Keith Wilson
09-03-2013, 08:31 AM
I wanna see more photos of the butter scuptures. And what happens to them after the fair is over?Just Google on 'Minnesota state fair butterheads'; you'll get more than you wanted. After the fair, each contestant in the 'Princess Kay of the Milky Way" contest (the Diary Queen, you might say), wholesome-looking and well-scrubbed young women from various dairy farms around Minnesota, gets to take her likeness home. You can read more about what happens to them here. (http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2012/08/30/daily-circuit-butter-heads-state-fair) No, I'm not making this up. They've been doing it since the 1960s.

http://www.tcdailyplanet.net/sites/tcdailyplanet.net/files/2013/August/_mg_8633.jpg

elf
09-03-2013, 10:00 AM
You'd think it would be in Wisconsin, Keith!

John Smith
09-03-2013, 10:06 AM
Yeah, but it's the state fair; a bigger operation. Our Republicans had a cutout of Reagan, the Democrats had cutouts of both Mr. and Mrs. Obama, plus Hillary C.. Democrats have more cardboard, I guess. I tried to get some tea at the little Tea Party booth, but they didn't have any. I don't know why. The guy looked kind of confused.

:D

The Republicans seem to be still running Reagan. Strangely, he never lived up to the image they hold of him.

Keith Wilson
09-03-2013, 05:26 PM
Minnesota has a lot of diary farms, although not as many as Wisconsin or California. Stats here. (http://www.stuffaboutstates.com/agriculture/livestock/dairy.htm)

Ronald Reagan couldn't win a Republican primary today in most places; he was much too moderate.

hokiefan
09-03-2013, 05:46 PM
You'd think it would be in Wisconsin, Keith!

In Wisconsin they don't have butterheads, they have cheeseheads.

Sorry, couldn't help it.:D