Patterico and Glenn pick up on an allegeldy right wing, racist photoshop effort depicting Barack Obama shining Sarah Palin's shoes. Paterico notes that the photo was recently circulated by a registered Democrat, which leads to a bit of headscratching as to motive.
Patterico closes with a question - is the photo racist? Personally, I am from the "there are no small roles, only small actors" school - if someone is putting a sincere effort into an honest job, then the job is not demeaning, regardless of its social status. On the other hand, there are certainly some racial overtones of servitude to the shoe shine imagery. Maybe that could be solved with a follow-up photo of Sarah cleaning Barrack's clock.
When in doubt, I turn to Wikipedia, which is reliably leftish and unlikely to cheerlead for my Neanderthal right-wing views. And whom do we find among famous shoeshine boys of history? The Godfather of Soul, James Brown. But more to the point, we find the Godfather of Talk Radio, Rush Limbaugh himself. Hmm, Rod Blagojevich also appears on the list, so maybe this Barack image is more offensive than I realized.
I am going to take a flyer here and opine that when Rush gets out of the hospital he won't be agreeing with the notion that shining shoes is a demeaning job for blacks only.
DON'T SHINE ME ON: Horatio Alger wrote a rags-to-riches story about a shoeshine boy that eventually made it to the National Music Theater Network in 2001. I infer that in the original story the kid was white.
So honest work is now racist. I call for a ban on all shoe-shiners. Let them collect welfare - cause that's where this is all going.
Posted by: Jane | January 02, 2010 at 09:46 AM
Charles Johnson, trying to out Andy Andy!
The best shoeshine I ever had was when I was living in San Francisco. At the California St. street car turntable next to the Hyatt off Market was Famous Wayne's shoe shine stand. He was the leather buffer to the stars. Anyone who was anyone had a Famous Wayne shine on his Ferragamo's or Thom McAn's. He made enough money to live in a 2 story Spanish revival in Oakland and drove a Caddy. He more in tips than the doorman at the Fairmont. He brought his stand, with umbrella, every morning in his Chevy van. I wonder what Wayne would think of this picture - probably would offer a criticism of The Once's technique on a high heel pump.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | January 02, 2010 at 09:46 AM
I don't think women get shoe shines - so clearly it is sexist too.
Posted by: Jane | January 02, 2010 at 09:53 AM
Rush is out of the hospital :)
Posted by: BR | January 02, 2010 at 09:55 AM
Johnson really has gone down the rabbit hole, as his behavior in August showed, as he went
along with the sludge roots, in perpetuating
their rumors. Frey knows that win lose or draw
Sarah is a thread winner, 175 at last count.
Posted by: narciso | January 02, 2010 at 10:01 AM
It's barely into the new year and already Cahlser Jhonsno has made a complete fool out of himself. I'm sure he's reading this because he doesn't really have a life other than trolling teh innertubez for comments regarding his ongoing descent into complete lunacy so: Get professional help, you worthless assbag. And cut off that stupid ponytail so you can less physically resemble a horse's anus.
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 02, 2010 at 10:09 AM
Come on Captain, don't hold back tell us what you really of him. I'm curious what Jeff Goldstein's view of this, with his focus on 'intentionalism' is. But this thread, will probably have few takers
Posted by: narciso | January 02, 2010 at 10:16 AM
I think once upon a time Charles did a great job and I will always respect him for that. But I wonder what is it that seems to drive so many bloggers around the bend? (Present company excluded, of course.)
Posted by: Clarice | January 02, 2010 at 10:23 AM
These right wingers have no shame. Next thing you know, they'll be photoshopping Obama's meetings with world leaders to make it appear that he bows to Saudi potentates.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | January 02, 2010 at 10:25 AM
We noticed this with Sullivan, Cole, who used the Schiavo situation to eject from the GOP into full netroots status, a fine Norwegian blogger Bjorn Stark who also succumbed to defeatism, sometimes around 2005 or so.
Posted by: narciso | January 02, 2010 at 10:36 AM
Patterico and Glenn pick up on an allegeldy right wing, racist photoshop effort depicting Barack Obama shining Sarah Palin's shoes.
Not sure if it's racist or not, but I'm somewhat interested in the provenance. Unlike the "Joker" poster, this one doesn't work for me at all in the sense of evoking an anti-Obama feeling, and it's definitely not something I'd send to a friend.
It strikes me, however, that when I see something like this being held up by a lefty as evidence of how eeeevil us righties are, I'd like to see some indication of a righty's fingerprints on it. Otherwise, I'm inclined to think cui bono?, and decide it's just as likely a put-up job.
Posted by: Cecil Turner | January 02, 2010 at 10:43 AM
Where is the thread on the Newsweek revelation of the December 22nd meeting with all the principle players. like the Luned one
Posted by: narciso | January 02, 2010 at 10:46 AM
"Paterico notes that the photo was recently circulated by a registered Democrat, which leads to a bit of headscratching as to motive."
Headscratching as to motive? Come on, you can't circulate evidence of racism on the right without the evidence.
Posted by: willis | January 02, 2010 at 10:49 AM
No idea what the intent was ... but other than "ironic amusement" or "sight gag" the photoshop seems more likely to generate anti-Sarah feelings than anti-Barak.
Posted by: boris | January 02, 2010 at 10:52 AM
I don't much care for the photoshop shoe shine picture, because it is probably meant to slander Palin as much as Obama.
That said, I think every satirical image or cartoon of Mr. I Won, will always be called racist.
Posted by: centralcal | January 02, 2010 at 10:52 AM
Did Barack Obama ever even have a summer job in high school or college? I have never heard of any stories or anecdotes from him or the media about jobs heheld as a kid.
Posted by: AJ Lynch | January 02, 2010 at 10:53 AM
Reminds me of being allowed to visit San Antonio in basic training back in the '50s. The bus stopped at a city park and 14,000 little Mexican kids came running out from wherever they were hid, shoeshine boxes in hand, wanting to shine our spit shined shoes.
Stranger yet, they all seemed to have a sister who was a virgin!
Posted by: Joseph Brown | January 02, 2010 at 11:09 AM
I think once upon a time Charles did a great job and I will always respect him for that
Rightly or otherwise, that's why I heap so much abuse on him. Unlike some lefties that grew up with nutty parents and were immersed in moonbat thinking, Chuckles made his cyberspace name by espousing conservative ways of thinking and poking fun at the left. Then for whatever reason, he started "seeing" malign conspiracies in righty sites and would allow no dissension from his proclamations. If he merely said he disagreed with some things I'd have no problem with him; instead he consigns all dissenters as minions of the Antichrist.
To his credit he never claimed to be a conservative, which puts him head and shoulders above Sullivan, a single issue ass spelunker who is incapable of being truthful or non-self-serving.
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 02, 2010 at 11:11 AM
High on MY list of racist remarks are the hypersensitive knee-jerk accusations of racism, the prime examples of which, of course, are the career-making epithets of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton.
The shoeshine photoshop is small change. Most of us, except the PC, are adult enough to discount and discard such gauche things for the drivel that they are. Most of us, except the PC, are adult enough to know that real way to address such things is with derisive laughter. Only the PC try to criminalize such actions and undermine the Constitution.
Posted by: sbw | January 02, 2010 at 11:11 AM
What kind of numbskull would take this seriously? Even leftist poseurs should know Obama doesn't have what it takes to be a shoe shine pro -- knowledge worth paying for.
Posted by: johny | January 02, 2010 at 11:15 AM
narciso-
The Newsweek article.
Posted by: RichatUF | January 02, 2010 at 11:16 AM
It seems on par with much of the Alinskyite garbage that has been circulating for the better part of a year, the Winner secessionist excerpt, the Kilkenny letter that took in MIT 'supergenius' Maatt Daamon, other snippets like the Levi Johnston traveling road show. BTW that's what I'm calling him now, Charles
Johnston because he has stooped so low.
OT, Barry seems to have smashed a mirror, or something, because this little tidbit
doesn't help his already crumbling facade. Then again challenging folks with a declassifying stamp, probably wasn't such a good idea
Posted by: narciso | January 02, 2010 at 11:18 AM
ACTUALLY THE PRECEEDING FRAMES SHOW THE WON LOOKING UP SARAHS SKIRT.
Posted by: desertman | January 02, 2010 at 11:21 AM
And we'll take the officials word, that little Yemen, which has been on the tip fo people's tongues for the better part of a month, was nowhere mentioned. Neither was Effendi Awlaki, Wuhayshi, or pick any two active former AQ detainees
Posted by: narciso | January 02, 2010 at 11:21 AM
I'm not convinced that Obama would be all that good as a shoe shine "boy." The really good buffers I've paid were go-getters who made their money the old-fashioned way. I don't think that accurately describes our president.
Posted by: trentk269 | January 02, 2010 at 11:22 AM
Our discourse is so warped and perverted by these stupid liberal shibboleths. I'm sick of hearing about it! anyone making charges of racism I reflexively consider intellectually bankrupt, and that is usually not far from the truth.
Posted by: John | January 02, 2010 at 11:29 AM
Republican State Senate candidate Mike Parry has scrubbed more than 43 tweets after fellow Twitterers found racist and homophobic content in the candidate’s Twitter stream. Parry is running to replace retiring Sen. Dick Day in southeastern Minnesota.
Among the tweets erased by Parry was a May 27 comment about President Obama:
“read the exclusive on Mr O in Newsweek. He is a Power Hungry Arrogant Black Man.”
http://minnesotaindependent.com/52899/senate-candidate-scrubs-racist-comments-from-twitter
Plausible Denialists cover the spectrum of political spectrum. Parsing overt statements with defensive verbiage does little to hide the covert racism.
Kinda like 'holocaust deniers' who have, what seems to them, plausible arguments.
Posted by: Semanticleo | January 02, 2010 at 11:31 AM
Then again. I'm maybe putting too much confidence in US intelligence as any reading of the August 2001 PDB, those various Aardwolf
cables out of Iraq and the 2007 Iran NIE would
suggest
Posted by: narciso | January 02, 2010 at 11:31 AM
strike 'political spectrum', insert political position.
Posted by: Semanticleo | January 02, 2010 at 11:33 AM
It really does beg the question, what did they know, you would think Abdulmutallab Sr's statement in Lagos, the NSA intercept in August, probably some more onsightintelligence
would be in the file
Posted by: narciso | January 02, 2010 at 11:43 AM
Wasn't it hollywood that made shoe shine a black thing?
Posted by: lonetown | January 02, 2010 at 11:52 AM
I think it was a defensive, Obama approved leak to staunch any inquiries as to the specifics.
Posted by: Clarice | January 02, 2010 at 11:53 AM
I'll tell ya one thing...there ain't enough shoe polish in the whole wide world for those size 14's that Michelle wears! Or is that racist too?
Posted by: Rocco | January 02, 2010 at 11:54 AM
I agree with the poster who said this is more about page hits for LGF than it is about racism. Apparently the offending pic is more than a year old.
Posted by: No1Dad | January 02, 2010 at 11:55 AM
Spitshine Tommy: "Maybe you didn't hear...I don't shine shoes anymore."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2oP1NMB_I0s
Posted by: Bill45 | January 02, 2010 at 11:55 AM
That might be, but it comes on the heels of that CBS report, blaming the CIA exclusively.
Then the NSA chiming in, and DNI and HS looking totally clueless
Posted by: narciso | January 02, 2010 at 12:01 PM
"Or is that racist too?"
It has to do with 'intentionalism'.
But that would require some redemptive self-awareness.
Posted by: Semanticleo | January 02, 2010 at 12:03 PM
My first impression when viewing the photoshopped image was--Zero isn't fit to shine SP's shoes.....
Posted by: glasater | January 02, 2010 at 12:04 PM
"that would require some redemptive self-awareness"
You first.
Posted by: boris | January 02, 2010 at 12:09 PM
are you out of the racist closet yet, boris?
Posted by: Semanticleo | January 02, 2010 at 12:10 PM
If he had to put up for a week, with just some of the garbage she has had to deal with, he would get 'wee weed up' real quick. No Lou Dobb's brief sojourns into birtherism don't count. if just some of the manufactured garbage that has been spread, if the Patina
of the Newsweek colors was just a touch less shiny
Posted by: narciso | January 02, 2010 at 12:12 PM
Rocco, that's why her new shoes that she wore in Hawaii were only the bottom half. The top "needs-polish" half was totally missing!
Posted by: Janet | January 02, 2010 at 12:15 PM
nowhere in this document was there any mention of Yemen
Well, he's off the hook, then. I wouldn't expect even the supergeniuses in the administration to get from "terrorists who are famous for blowing up planes plan something for Christmas" to "we better beef up security for planes around Christmas" based on a document that doesn't even mention Yemen.
Posted by: bgates | January 02, 2010 at 12:17 PM
ACTUALLY THE PRECEEDING FRAMES SHOW THE WON LOOKING UP SARAHS SKIRT.
Which would be the first relatively normal thing I've heard of him doing.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | January 02, 2010 at 12:21 PM
Was Obama's intention redemption when he spent 20 years in Rev Wrights' racist church?
Posted by: Rocco | January 02, 2010 at 12:22 PM
Wake up, conservatives. This is a new leftist strategy. Promulgate overtly racist images and force the Right to react, deny, comment. They hope the manifest reality of the "racism" in the image -- and the actual image of Palin -- will be enough to establish an association in the public mind.
Posted by: rrpjr | January 02, 2010 at 12:22 PM
Which is the racist part, Leo? "Power hungry", "arrogant", "black", or "man"? Seems like a fairly accurate description.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | January 02, 2010 at 12:23 PM
Wake up, conservatives.
Oh, shut up.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | January 02, 2010 at 12:24 PM
If that is true, then they really are incompetent, for the reasons listed above. Because I don't think Smadi, Zazi or some of the other also ran plotters would flag this level of attention. Now this comes from Isikoff who is not above passing incendiary
rumor (the flushed Koran) or self serving accounts like that of Ali Soufan, so take with a cup of salt, and call me in the morning
Posted by: narciso | January 02, 2010 at 12:25 PM
Seman: "It has to do with 'intentionalism'. But that would require some redemptive self-awareness."
If racism is so bad, using racism as a weapon is even worse.
The photoshop came from a Democrat, hoping to perpetuate stereotypes to keep "racism" alive and enslave more blacks to the Democrats Plantation.
...and someone must have pictures of Charles Johnson doing something sick. Its the only explanation for his meltdown into flip-floppery over the last year.
Posted by: Fen | January 02, 2010 at 12:25 PM
Fen, Charles is a musician in LA. Pictures of him doing something sick could be Christmas cards.
Narciso, far be it from me to defend the CIA, but in this case I really don't think it's their fault. NCTC works for the DNI, and they're supposed to be the merge point so CIA and FBI didn't have to speak.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | January 02, 2010 at 12:29 PM
"Which is the racist part, Leo? "Power hungry", "arrogant", "black", or "man"? Seems like a fairly accurate description."
I see your point Chaco. I suppose anyone could accurately say 'The Jew Senator, Joe Lieberman' and despite attempts to smear the statement as racist, could plausibly deny it.
Posted by: Semanticleo | January 02, 2010 at 12:33 PM
A federal customs and border protection official reversed himself today Link
Reporters Jennifer Chambers and Paul Egan of The Detroit News call this journalism! How about writing the first paragraph more clearly:
"A federal customs and border protection official admitted today that he lied to the public, an admission that means no one can ever trust what he says in the future."
Posted by: sbw | January 02, 2010 at 12:39 PM
I guess I'm back to my verbal haiku, again, Charlie, I think this was a pushback by the CIA, to bring all the players into the circle.
Despite Negroponte's efforts, the DNI was a bad call, frankly we can chalk up much of the 9/11 commission, as an evasion of the truth,
with Al Amoudi associates like Kean at the helm, with buck passers like Gorelick, the
'zelig of disaster' anywhere but the witness
chair
Posted by: narciso | January 02, 2010 at 12:40 PM
I see your point Chaco.
No you don't.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | January 02, 2010 at 12:44 PM
Leo,
"Speaking truth to power."
Sporty James (shoeshine impresario)
Posted by: Jack is Back! | January 02, 2010 at 12:45 PM
I see your point Chaco.
No you don't.
Sorry I missed it. Did you get my point?
Posted by: Semanticleo | January 02, 2010 at 12:47 PM
Well, the DNI thing, theoretically, wasn't a bad idea. The only problem is that the DNI's job is exactly what the DCI's job was supposed to be. That's why it was "Director of Central Intelligence" instead of "Director of the Central Intelligence Agency".
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | January 02, 2010 at 12:47 PM
Did you get my point?
Yes, that's how I knew you'd missed mine.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | January 02, 2010 at 12:48 PM
I will say the new haircut conceals it well.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | January 02, 2010 at 12:53 PM
Come on, now, if we're going to shun the mystic one and sylvia, then he's got to be on deck as well.
That was the intention, but the various components have become increasingly more disjointed. The analytical section seems to be trained not to look for patterns, the operational section, is discouraged from actually recruiting valuable assets, or gathering relevant intelligence
Posted by: narciso | January 02, 2010 at 12:55 PM
I'll go with glasater above; Obama couldn't shine Sarah's shoes--. That's analogous to saying that Obama is such a lousy President that he couldn't carry George Bush's jockstrap. Heckfire, Obama might have trouble lifting Millard Fillmore's jockstrap.
Posted by: Mike Myers | January 02, 2010 at 12:59 PM
"Yes, that's how I knew you'd missed mine."
That's an amazing example of sectored reasoning. You asked about the word examples and their racist intent, and I gave you a similar example. Is it possible you don't WANT to see?
Posted by: Semanticleo | January 02, 2010 at 01:01 PM
"that he couldn't carry George Bush's jockstrap."
He could wear it as a toe-ring.
Posted by: Semanticleo | January 02, 2010 at 01:05 PM
Well we could bring well known'intentionalist'
Hamsher whose taste for robust debate, always seems to focus on persons like Harman and Lieberman :the sophistication of using blackface to make what point exactly, back in 2006?
Posted by: narciso | January 02, 2010 at 01:11 PM
The Jew Senator, Joe Lieberman'
Actually if you were looking for a comparison you would have said: The Jewish senator, Joe Lieberman. Or does the word "black" have some sort of racist meaning to you cleo?
If I said: "I like your black shoes" to you, would you call the ACLU?
Posted by: Jane | January 02, 2010 at 01:16 PM
It's different in Spanish, because both meaning as noun and adjective are covered by the same word, but the former term would seem derogatory while the latter is merely descriptive
Posted by: narciso | January 02, 2010 at 01:28 PM
I haven't seen 'cleo in ages, since he confessed to his fundamental lack of seriousness and was consigned to the automated bit-bucket.
Occasionally, like today, someone will respond to some 'cleo drivel I can't see and I appreciate how fortunate I am to have a troll_blocker installed.
One who is insincere in communication is uncivil and anti-social.
Posted by: sbw | January 02, 2010 at 01:36 PM
OT, but this piece reveals much of the deception to the online operation during
the campaign, and why it didn't endure into
the first year of governance
Posted by: narciso | January 02, 2010 at 01:52 PM
Sorry wrong LUN
Posted by: narciso | January 02, 2010 at 01:52 PM
Caught the 1st half of "Invictus" (Morgan Freeman, Matt Damon, director - Clint Eastwood) last night which tells a sliver of the story of Nelson Mandela first months as President of South Africa.
The comparisons with the 1st year of the Obama Presidency end with Obama's words ... "I Won." Mandela is portrayed as a real post-racial president, while Obama is hyper-partisan.
Posted by: Neo | January 02, 2010 at 01:54 PM
Why only the first half, No Mandela and Obama, although they share somewhat similar philosophical precepts are nothing alike. One admires Mandela's perseverance, even if one takes strenuous objection to the methods he used to try to bring about change. The contrast is seen clearer with the rise of Mbeki and Zuma
Posted by: narciso | January 02, 2010 at 02:04 PM
When I saw Invictus on Christmas I was struck by how well Mandela realized (assuming that everything in it has a basis in reality; I generally trust Clint to not gloss over things but this is still Whoreyweird we're talking about here...) that engaging in recriminations would set things back significantly and that he had to actively fight against that. He certainly didn't vote "Present" or dawdle. Still having said that I didn't think it was a particularly good movie in that nothing really surprising happened that wasn't within the boundaries of feel-good city limits.
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 02, 2010 at 02:23 PM
WEll it's based on John Carlin's book about that game, and he's an inveterate RDS/BDS and one presumes PDS sufferer at the Guardian. Then again, Freeman is one of the few who could carry off such a performance
Posted by: narciso | January 02, 2010 at 02:27 PM
Apparently only idealistic elitists, or trained victims, have a problems with this profession.Perspective on Shineing Shoes
Posted by: JohnFLob | January 02, 2010 at 02:55 PM
I recommend Narciso's link above:
The Obama Disconnect: What Happens When Myth Meets Reality
It contains a bunch links to track down that I found worthwhile.
Posted by: glasater | January 02, 2010 at 03:14 PM
"I appreciate how fortunate I am to have a troll_blocker installed."
i loves me some trollblocker.
Posted by: Semanticleo | January 02, 2010 at 03:27 PM
Great link at 11:15, johnny.
Posted by: Extraneus | January 02, 2010 at 04:06 PM
Famous white shoe-shine boys.
Posted by: Dave (in MA) | January 02, 2010 at 04:38 PM
Underdog appears to be of mixed race judging by his ears. I wonder why Barry's aren't like that?
Posted by: Ignatz | January 02, 2010 at 05:17 PM
Ignatz, let's just be thankful that Ø doesn't run around wearing only a cap and vest.
Posted by: Dave (in MA) | January 02, 2010 at 05:33 PM
The message was clearly, "Obama is barely fit to shine Sarah Palin's shoes!" Whether you agree with this statement or not it went over the borderline into racism.
That being said, I didn't send it, I would have complained to anyone sending it to me, I take no responsibility for it.
Posted by: Orion | January 02, 2010 at 05:44 PM
I take no responsibility for it
Orion--I do take responsibility--and if you want to imply it "went over the borderline into racism" that's your problem not mine...
Posted by: glasater | January 02, 2010 at 06:11 PM
Hey Dave,
Are you feeling a Scott Brown buzz where you are? How about you Rocco?
Posted by: Jane | January 02, 2010 at 06:19 PM
this is some loonie lefto's equivalent of the "Polish provocations" of 1939.
I think we are seeing more people waking up to the institutionalized racism of the Democratic Party.
Posted by: matt | January 02, 2010 at 06:23 PM
"..are those who would attack our country, not our fellow Americans" ?
Que?
Posted by: Strawman Cometh | January 02, 2010 at 06:35 PM
Whether you agree with this statement or not it went over the borderline into racism.
How?
I mean, if racism is the belief in the superiority of one race or the inferiority of another, how is that expressed in that 'shop?
Posted by: Rob Crawford | January 02, 2010 at 06:39 PM
*sigh*
So I'm looking for something to watch this evening, and see that I've got the first series of BBC's "MI-5" in my Netflix instant queue. The first episode, from 2002, is about an anti-abortion activist planting bombs. The second is about white supremacists, the third about Kurdish terrorists. The fourth they're infiltrating an "anti-Bush protest group", which sounds promising, especially since Hugh Laurie's in it, but I think I'm gonna just watch "The Man Who Knew Too Much" (Hitchcock and Stewart version) instead.
Posted by: Rob Crawford | January 02, 2010 at 06:52 PM
Time for a racist corollary to Godwin's law.
If we're looking for deeper meanings, I suggest we contemplate the significance of living a palindrome:
Auspicious or minatory?
Posted by: JM Hanes | January 02, 2010 at 06:57 PM
The message was clearly, "Obama is barely fit to shine Sarah Palin's shoes!" Whether you agree with this statement or not it went over the borderline into racism.
Because, after all, you can't recognize a morally questionable, incompetent, indecisive, underskilled poseur without making it about race.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | January 02, 2010 at 07:04 PM
Auspicious or minatory?
Symmetric.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | January 02, 2010 at 07:05 PM
Symmetric
YinYang
Posted by: JM Hanes | January 02, 2010 at 07:11 PM
Mandela is portrayed as a real post-racial president
Obama will be portrayed as a real post-racial president too.
you can't recognize a morally questionable, incompetent, indecisive, underskilled poseur without making it about race.
Right, which is why we're all such big fans of Tim Geithner, Chris Dodd, Joe Biden, Ben Nelson, Max Baucus, Harry Reid, John Kerry, Al Gore, Bill Clinton, and the rest of the straight white nominally Christian men who are hellbent on destroying the country.
Posted by: bgates | January 02, 2010 at 07:26 PM
That shoeshine image is a false flag op, I'd bet money on it.
Posted by: Porchlight | January 02, 2010 at 08:47 PM
There's no racism here. Just like there wasn't with the shot of the WH lawn covered in watermelons. Or BO with a bone through his nose.
Nope, no racism whatsoever.
Posted by: JSD | January 02, 2010 at 08:57 PM
Accusations of racism are the next to last refuge of scoundrels.
Posted by: sbw | January 02, 2010 at 09:17 PM
ctually, I think the racism is on the other side of the aisle. How do you explain the dismissal of the case against the New Black Panther party?The bizarre reading of the voting rights act? The pledge to increase the number of hate crimes prosecutions?
I can stop any time....
Posted by: clarice | January 02, 2010 at 09:24 PM
Gotta work the selective bowing by the Buttkisser in Chief in there somewhere - it starts right at the tippy top of the Chicago gutter. It might have something to do with exposure to the Right Reverend 'Goddam Amerikkka!' Wright but that's just surmise.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | January 02, 2010 at 09:32 PM
Jane
Today I stopped by Brown headquarters in Worcester. I wanted to pick up a couple of signs and a fist full of bumper stickers. My wife has seen a couple of Coakley supporters holding signs in the AM on her morning commute so I'm going to join them with my Brown sign every day till the election on Jan 19.
Worcester Regional Area Coordinator Bob Lashua gave me permission to post the following information for anyone willing to volunteer their time making phone calls. So even if you're not from Massachusetts, you can still help Scott Brown by making calls from home. Contact Brad Hansen, Field Director at [email protected]
Posted by: Rocco | January 02, 2010 at 10:23 PM
And don't forget, Howard 'Yeargh' Dean, super genius there, they really thought he was a viable candidate, too much Wavy Gravy Ben & Jerry is needed to make that premise real
Posted by: narciso | January 02, 2010 at 10:28 PM