Yeah, About Haley Barbour....

I stood up for him yesterday but the feeding frenzy went into overdrive and someone sent Politico a quote from a 1982 NY Times story on Haley Barbour's run for Senate that year.

But the racial sensitivity at Barbour headquarters was suggested by an exchange between the candidate and an aide who complained that there would be ''coons'' at a campaign stop at the state fair. Embarrassed that a reporter heard this, Mr. Barbour warned that if the aide persisted in racist remarks, he would be reincarnated as a watermelon and placed at the mercy of blacks.

Jim Geraghty seems to think it's a near fatal, if not actually fatal, blow.

A pattern of remarks is a different matter than one off-the-cuff anecdote that suggests a man remembers the elders of his youth through rose-colored glasses. Watermelon jokes are appalling. Perhaps in that time and place the comment was common, but to modern ears, across the country today, its an unthinkably obnoxious and racially provocative remark.

I asked earlier, in reference to Barbour remembering his local Citizens Council as anti-Klan, This comment outweighs everything else hes done with his life? Presuming the anecdote of Barbours watermelon joke is accurate, it will outweigh everything else hes done in the eyes of millions upon millions of voters. Theres too much baggage to that remark to dismiss as a momentary stupid slip of the tongue. Even if a racially insensitive remark is said to rebuke anothers racially insensitive remark, with enough examples, the benefit of the doubt is eviscerated.

Read the whole piece. Geraghty isn't throwing Barbour under the bus. He defended him yesterday and doesn't conclude from this that Barbour is a racist but a pattern is emerging of Barbour's approach to race.

My one caveat in this (which Geraghty also seems to share) is the accuracy of the statement. The watermelon anecdote is not in quotes and Ben Smith, who published the tip, describes the original article in the NY Times as "almost sneering about Barbour". It's 28 years old, so I don't see how we are ever going to know the truth (a contemporaneous protest by Barbour to the Times would be nice) but it's politics, so truth is often irrelevant.

Barbour comes from a period of time where you could say the things he is accused of and still be considered a moderate in someways on race. But in 2010 it just sounds so jarring and is simply far beyond what is considered acceptable. A younger candidate could never get away with that today, it would be an automatic political death sentence.

When yesterday's liberal furor broke over the Standard piece, my initial interest in it was the double standard that is inevitably applied by the media when it comes to controversial remarks, especially about race, by Republicans and Democrats.

Yes, the case will be made that Democrats, including Barack ("typical white person") Obama, get away with murder on this score. But that doesn't mean Republicans should give a pass to people with views of race that are questionable at best. There's always a strong temptation to rally around and defend our own, especially when they are attacked in a way Democrats never are. However, it's simply bad politics to run out candidates that are less likely to win just to prove a point. And if the evidence is that they are racists, throwing them under the bus is just the right thing to do regardless of what Democrats get away with. To be clear, I'm not talking about Barbour personally here, just the principles involved.

That said, Barbour was always going to be a tough sell nationally. He's a big, gruff, heavily accented guy from a state that conjures certain images for a lot of people nationally (racism and poverty to put it bluntly). I'm not saying any of this is true or fair. I'm just saying it's the reality.

As I said yesterday, if Barbour wants to run for President, he's going to need to have a better spin on his recollections of what life was like in the south during his younger days (through his college and early adult years). Even before today's story, his remembrances of that time are too at odds with the experiences and beliefs of others.

I'll wait to hear what Barbour has to say on this watermelon thing but if it's true and/or there are more such quotes out there...he's done.

UPDATED: Barbour reacted to yesterday's story by firmly denouncing the Citizens Councils.

When asked why my hometown in Mississippi did not suffer the same racial violence when I was a young man that accompanied other towns integration efforts, I accurately said the community leadership wouldnt tolerate it and helped prevent violence there. My point was my town rejected the Ku Klux Klan, but nobody should construe that to mean I think the town leadership were saints, either. Their vehicle, called the Citizens Council, is totally indefensible, as is segregation. It was a difficult and painful era for Mississippi, the rest of the country, and especially African Americans who were persecuted in that time.

As I said yesterday, he needed a better narrative. That's better.

Posted by: DrewM. at 11:24 AM



Comments

1 maybe he meant racoons?

Posted by: Ben at December 21, 2010 11:26 AM (wuv1c)

2 it's politics, so truth is often irrelevant.

and this is why we lose. Liberals need the truth shoved up their ass like the BCoS.


Posted by: toby928 at December 21, 2010 11:28 AM (S5YRY)

3 There aren't "more" quotes out there, since - as you point out - the first was not a quote.

The man has been elected how many times?

What's the black population of Mississippi? Could he win if blacks were outrageously outraged about him? (Seriously, I'm asking.)

I like William Jacobson's take on this.

Posted by: Y-not at December 21, 2010 11:28 AM (IDL9N)

4 I wish I thought you were wrong.

I see the comment (in its original contest) as: "Don't be a racist, you idiot." The joke was then to play on another racial stereotype. As you said, in the 80's and (to a lesser extent) the 90's you might get away with this. Now, not so much.

The fact is, Haley Barbour has a lot of things going against him: name recognition not least among them. If his "name" begins to be recognized at the same time it gets equated with racism, or at least callous indifference to racial issues, then he's sunk.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) at December 21, 2010 11:29 AM (8y9MW)

5 I'm in wait and see mode, largely because a) I want to hear his response, b) he isn't a serious contender anyway.
Sure,"if"there are more, he's done. Duh.

Posted by: Dave in Texas at December 21, 2010 11:29 AM (WvXvd)

6 Could he win if blacks were outrageously outraged about him? (Seriously, I'm asking.)

His current job approval rate is 70%. Blacks make up 36% of Mississippi.

Do the math.

Posted by: toby928 at December 21, 2010 11:30 AM (S5YRY)

7 Just a reminder to people arguing over "electability"...
The media has something on any conservative they need to take down, which they will Journolist at the proper time. And if they don't have something, they'll just take something else and twist it, or make it up whole cloth.

Posted by: The Mega Independent at December 21, 2010 11:30 AM (BSeGu)

8 A lie gets half way around the world before the truth has a chance to get it's pants on

Posted by: Winston Churchill at December 21, 2010 11:31 AM (cYJn0)

9 Leave me out of this shit till next season.

Posted by: The Watermeon at December 21, 2010 11:31 AM (JpFM9)

10 Boss Hog ain't worth it.

Posted by: CJ at December 21, 2010 11:32 AM (9KqcB)

11 How dare someone make a comment about watermelons!

Posted by: Dan Rather at December 21, 2010 11:32 AM (BSeGu)

12 I think I need Dennis' take on this new information.

Posted by: toby928 at December 21, 2010 11:33 AM (S5YRY)

13 He's a big, gruff, heavily accented guy from a state that conjures
certain images for a lot of people nationally (racism and poverty to put
it bluntly).

My concern is still the Mississippi factor -- and not because of the Gregory Peck fed racial stereotypes. My concern is over the economics and general success of the state. If it has a growing economy, people are getting decent educations (secondary ed), and poverty statistics aren't bad, then ok. People will want a governor who's run a strong state. But if it's a place where the economy is weak, there's little high tech industry but instead purely agricultural, people are living at/below the poverty line, and the kids can't read... then why would someone vote for that?

If Barbour has a strong economy to run on, he should run on that. The other stuff - biases and innuendo at this point - won't matter.

Posted by: Y-not at December 21, 2010 11:33 AM (IDL9N)

14 Not that I'll defend a remark that was, oh 28 years ago (if true).
But it's fun that this would do him in, yet our VP can make the ticket with the same man that he just a few months prior called an 'articulate, clean, nice-looking, bright guy'.

Posted by: laceyunderalls at December 21, 2010 11:33 AM (pLTLS)

15 I may be in the minority, but I am far more concerned about the race card being played to allow crime and corruption without consequence (Chollie Rangel anyone?) than I am about watermelon jokes or "N" words. I haven't got a dog in the Barber fight but his alleged use of racial slurs is a big ho hum to me.

Posted by: WalrusRex at December 21, 2010 11:34 AM (xxgag)

16 Oh by all means, let's hang Barbour out to dry in order to please our political enemies and grovel before the politically moderate...

...perhaps if Barbour had been a Grand Klegal in the Klan that would have been OK, but racist remarks? Unacceptable.

I will condemn the racists on my side of the political spectrum when they start condemning theirs.

Posted by: g at December 21, 2010 11:34 AM (n2jRF)

17 ANYBODY that the Pubs run against Lord Zero is gonna be tagged as a racist. We might as well deal with that now.

Posted by: Luca Brasi at December 21, 2010 11:35 AM (YmPwQ)

18 He's only done as a Republican.

If he changed parties, he'd get a pass.

Posted by: Fritz at December 21, 2010 11:35 AM (GwPRU)

19 And you believe the New York Times and/or Ben Smith why?????? It isn't like neither of them has an agenda, or a known history of hatchet jobs against Republicans, or anything like that.....
Sheesh!

Posted by: rockmom at December 21, 2010 11:36 AM (w/gVZ)

20 Barber is being required to defend a remark allegedly made 28 years ago. I can't think of a particular instance but I'd be willing to bet I made a foolish remark that same year. I know for damn sure that Moonbeam Jerry Brown said that welfare checks were better than paychecks not much more than 28 days ago,

Posted by: WalrusRex at December 21, 2010 11:36 AM (xxgag)

21 Doesn't matter. Barbour is a longshot, anyway. If he's even that.

That said, the libs will seize on the 1982 "quote" and the dude is toast. I'd be reluctant to vote for him no matter what, as he's just another entrenched political goon who is being made flavor-of-the-month by the lefty media.

I suspect he actually did say this. He certainly would have seen -- or been told about -- the story, and has had 28 years to respond to it.

I thought his comment, accurately reported or not, was funny. Certainly funnier than the racist slime that spills out of the mouths of Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, "Pastor" Wright, Osama Obama, etc..

Posted by: MrScribbler at December 21, 2010 11:37 AM (Ulu3i)

22 But in 2010 it just sounds so jarring and is simply far beyond what is considered acceptable.

Yeah ... I keep praying for the time "when white will accept what's right."

Posted by: Rev. Joseph Lowery, Precedential Inauguration Benediction, 2009 at December 21, 2010 11:37 AM (G/MYk)

23 Mississippi ranks 42nd in unemployment @ 9.9%.

Watch out Ohio @ 9.8%!

Posted by: toby928 at December 21, 2010 11:37 AM (S5YRY)

24 No, I don't feel like reading the full piece because I don't assume that something published by Politico is accurate. Full Stop.

Posted by: Tom in Korea at December 21, 2010 11:39 AM (+gX1+)

25
See SEE SEEEEEEE!!!!!!

We neeed to git to killin cracka babies. Every iota of a cracka baby.

Posted by: Brother Shabbazz the Destroyer at December 21, 2010 11:39 AM (J5Hcw)

26 I also heard he called NYC Hymietown. He also referred to someone as a Jew bastard. Wait maybe I am confusing him with a couple of other people. I'll check later.

Posted by: Average voter at December 21, 2010 11:39 AM (cYJn0)

27 Another thing...

He supposedly made this remark directed at the staffer who made an outrageously racist remark, right? So Barbour recognizes that the racist comments were a bad thing (whether for political expediency or other reasons) and felt that slur was outrageous. Might it not just be that in order to communicate his objections to this moronic out-of-touch staffer, he felt it necessary to use equally outrageous phrasing so that it'd get through guy's thick skull?

Twenty-eight years ago.

Not in quotes.

Guy's been elected/vetted a number of times since then in a state with a sizable black population.

I'm not seeing the career-killer here.

Posted by: Y-not at December 21, 2010 11:40 AM (IDL9N)

28 Anything short of the endorsement of the NAACP, and La Raza, MALDEF, LULAC etc. will prevent any Republican candidate, for any office, from being elected. And Oh yeah, let's include LGBT endorsement for good measure.
What has our Country become?

Posted by: solitary knight at December 21, 2010 11:41 AM (p5bJn)

29
No, I don't feel like reading the full piece because I don't assume that something published by Politico is accurate. Full Stop.

This. The media is going to make shit up or fabricate it. As for the New York Times, they weren't reliable even back in 1983.

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at December 21, 2010 11:42 AM (TpXEI)

30 Do the math.

Technically insufficient data to answer the question, but I see where you are heading. Approximately 25% of blacks approve.

Posted by: dogfish at December 21, 2010 11:42 AM (NuPNl)

31 We'd like to be able to point out that some black people like watermelons and that's OK.

Posted by: The Watermelon Council at December 21, 2010 11:42 AM (t+tqr)

32 Did Barbour respond to the 1982 NYT accusations back then, btw?

Posted by: Y-not at December 21, 2010 11:42 AM (IDL9N)

33 So what's the deal here. Are we going to let the other side destroy one of our candidates every week? What is good for the goose is good for the gander also. Lets start going after theirs also, including the commie in chief

Posted by: nevergiveup at December 21, 2010 11:43 AM (0GFWk)

34 No actual quote, just a supposed paraphrase by Howell Raines, the one who let Jason Blair get away with murder, years later. You really have learned nothing from
the last two and a half years

Posted by: justin cord at December 21, 2010 11:43 AM (c0+w5)

35 Uh, make that 25% of the 36%. ...not just 25% of the total black population.

Posted by: dogfish at December 21, 2010 11:44 AM (NuPNl)

36 I officially quit caring about accusations of racism or racial insensitivity when the American people elected as President a man who quoted favorably his preacher's contention that "white man's greed runs a world of need."
Unless Haley Barbour is proven to have burned crosses on someone's lawn or participated in lynchings then I don't give a shit about anything he said. And if he did those things then I would just suggest that he switch parties as there is a recent opening for top Dem-Klansman.

Posted by: somebody else, not me at December 21, 2010 11:44 AM (7EV/g)

37 perhaps if Barbour had been a Grand Klegal in the Klan that would have been OK, but racist remarks? Unacceptable.
Posted by: g

Here's a follow up question: Did you ever rise in the KKK as high as Robert Byrd, the "Dean of the Senate"? No? You were'n't in the Klan at all? And this is breig flogged by whom? The Dems? Who lauded Byrd.
Got it
Next. Let's talk about how Blacks were hurt more by Obama's policies than whites.

Posted by: Blue Hen at December 21, 2010 11:44 AM (R2fpr)

38 Stop assuming that your political opponents (that includes the MSM and various online outlets like Politico) have your best interests at heart. They don't.

Posted by: Tom in Korea at December 21, 2010 11:44 AM (+gX1+)

39 the only way we are ever going to get rid of the Race Card is if we blow it up and render it useless by--gasp!!!--rallying around someone the left brands as racist. Even if that means you are a little uncomfortable defending them.
Remember how kicking Trent Lott out for really-not-at-all racist remarks helped?
Exactly: Didn't do shit for no one no how--except the left, they won. And we're right back there, jumping when they say jump, dancing to their tune 'cause "Racist" is the worst sin in the world--nevermind the same assholes who spend all day calling everyone to their right a racist are the same ones who have spent their whole lives trying to enslave us economically.

Posted by: Jimmuy at December 21, 2010 11:45 AM (BOkC/)

40 A younger candidate could never get away with that today

That pretty well brackets the only thing I don't like about Barbour. He's been there for a really long time and he's got the taint of inside the beltway country club republicanism all over him even if he ain't axually one of 'them'.

Posted by: Follower of Cthulhu, former republican at December 21, 2010 11:45 AM (F/4zf)

41 It's amazing how easy it is for the media to sink our candidates before they even get started. The best part? We do all the leg work for them.

Guess this is just another candidate to give up on because it "looks bad!" That is....until the next candidate "looks bad", and then the next and next and next and next..........

But not to worry, one day we'll find the perfect candidate who won't have said anything, done anything, read anything, or written anything that could ever possibly be construed badly ever. Oh how happy we'll be!

Posted by: Alex #11 at December 21, 2010 11:45 AM (fMQqT)

42 Stop assuming that your political opponents (that includes the MSM and various online outlets like Politico) have your best interests at heart. They don't.
Posted by: Tom in Korea at December 21, 2010 11:44 AM (+gX1+)

Ahmen and pass the amunition

Posted by: nevergiveup at December 21, 2010 11:45 AM (0GFWk)

43 Suspect he's done. Suspect he should be. While one can't pull a "third world" state like Mississippi out of the swamp in just a term or two, the fact of the matter is that Mississippi is,is in worse shape than Louisiana. He did very well with the hurricanes but like Louisiana outside New Orleans, Alabama and Texas, hell and Cozumel for that matter, the people have the wherewithal and strength to take matters into their own hands and so they did.
I really like him but we need no further stains on Republicans character.

Posted by: Mazzuchelli at December 21, 2010 11:46 AM (zAZNI)

44 I didn't know Barbour was witty. Dude knows irony.
But pretending what he said was racist, rather than a mockery of racism, and denouncing him publicly, over and over and over againeach and every one of you!will surely win over the "GOP=KKK" crowd and get black people voting Republican in droves.
Because every time you guys do that, that's exactly what happens.
Isn't it.

Posted by: oblig. at December 21, 2010 11:46 AM (x7Ao8)

45 The NYT 1982 article was during Barbour's (unsuccessful) run for Senate, btw. Imagine that.

Posted by: Y-not at December 21, 2010 11:47 AM (IDL9N)

46 Let's talk about how Blacks were hurt more by Obama's policies than whites.

The billboards in Atlanta pointing out that the abortion industry has effectively been performing genocide against blacks are a great start on this. And you can tell they're on target because the left was furious. There have to be many similar easily-communicated instances where Democrats are hurting blacks.

Posted by: Ian S. at December 21, 2010 11:47 AM (p05LM)

47 And Clinton-appointee Mike Espy is a self-hating Uncle Tom for endorsing Barbour in 2007.

Posted by: Y-not at December 21, 2010 11:48 AM (IDL9N)

48
The billboards in Atlanta pointing out that the abortion industry has
effectively been performing genocide against blacks are a great start on
this.

You say that like it's a BAD thing or something......

Posted by: Zombie Margaret Sanger at December 21, 2010 11:50 AM (J5Hcw)

49 This. The media is going to make shit up or fabricate it. As for the New York Times, they weren't reliable even back in 1983.
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk

Let's continue to crucify those whom the MFM condemns and runs the guy they pick. Because President McCain would agree with us.

Posted by: Blue Hen at December 21, 2010 11:51 AM (R2fpr)

50 At least Haley didn't say anything like "white folks' greed runs a world in need" ... That sort of truly stupid racist thought would have been devastating, one would think ... just from the stupid part of it, at least.

Posted by: iknowtheleft at December 21, 2010 11:51 AM (G/MYk)

51 .....but a pattern is emerging of Barbour's approach to race.

Yes a pattern is emerging but the pattern is not about Barbour being a racist. Its about assholes attacking hm over bullshit.

Posted by: Vic at December 21, 2010 11:51 AM (e4sSD)

52 In 1946 or 1947, when Robert Byrd was nearly 30 years old, he wrote in a letter to the Grand Wizard of the KKK saying that, "The Klan is needed today as never before, and I am anxious to see its rebirth here in West Virginia and in every state in the nation."

Yet he held the job of U.S. Senator from West Virginia for 50 years.

In 1982, Haley Barbour MAY have cracked an insensitive watermelon joke, in an era when watermelon jokes were used on popular network television shows. From "All in the Family":

"ARCHIE: [Lionel has brought over some food] Let me guess: pork chops?
LIONEL: Uh yeah, we was gonna bring some watermelon too, but they's out of season.

Of course, Barbour must be pilloried.

Posted by: Reno_Dave at December 21, 2010 11:52 AM (xNoK7)

53 You know, I have no problem with the right wing blogs/media covering this story. But I'd like to see some research, for example, how has he done in appointing blacks, the black vote, and blacks who've endorsed him? And what became of that staffer? And I'd like to see really carefully worded pieces so this alleged non-quote doesn't get tossed around like it's a quote.


Barbour was not high on my list - but I confess I had not researched him much - but I would like to have the option of considering him, if he's thinking of running. We're lean on people with experience who have track-records in government.

Posted by: Y-not at December 21, 2010 11:52 AM (IDL9N)

54 I... am not... a witch.

Posted by: Haley Barbour at December 21, 2010 11:54 AM (BSeGu)

55 The only way we can ever stop this kind of nonsense is the complete overthrow and/or destruction of our monolithic media culture.

I'm not sure how we'd do that, but . . .

As long as the MSM as we've known it continues to exist, there will be two sets of rules: one for Democrats, and one much tougher for Republicans. And the Republicans will always be tarred as racists, Jesus freaks, stupid, and/or criminal.

It drives me crazy.

Posted by: tsj017 at December 21, 2010 11:54 AM (4YUWF)

56

Posted by: Reno_Dave at December 21, 2010 11:52 AM (xNoK7)
We're sorry. Analysis in context is not allowed.Don't make us tell you this again.

Posted by: PC Police at December 21, 2010 11:55 AM (G/MYk)

57 That said, Barbour was always going to be a tough sell nationally. He's a big, gruff, heavily accented guy from a state that conjures certain images for a lot of people nationally (racism and poverty to put it bluntly). I'm not saying any of this is true or fair. I'm just saying it's the reality.
OK, take this quote and alter it so that it is addressing why it is tough to sell a black man from Detroit as a candidate because of all of the images that conjurs up, and you will understand why I consider the above quote so pernicious and offensive. Racist, in fact.
You say that's the reality? Change the reality.

Posted by: ed at December 21, 2010 11:57 AM (QLhy5)

58 Here we are allowing the liberal MFM to define our candidates again.

Ooooooowwww, he's not electable. How do I know? The meia is attacking him. His "negatives are too high"!

ONLY MCCAIN CAN BEAT HILLARY!

Posted by: Vic at December 21, 2010 12:00 PM (e4sSD)

59 48

The billboards in Atlanta pointing out that the abortion industry has
effectively been performing genocide against blacks are a great start on
this.

What do the billboards say?

Posted by: Timbo at December 21, 2010 12:00 PM (ph9vn)

60 Look, I keep hammering at the fact that until we take the artillery battery that is the media out of the equation, choosing an 'electable candidate' that will properly represent our values is little more than a parlor game. This is just the latest example of why that's so.

Until someone has a plan to deal with the fourth estate fifth column, don't bother me with anything else please. Charging those guns is a suicide mission.

Posted by: AoSHQ's DarkLord at December 21, 2010 12:01 PM (GBXon)

61 If Democrats can get their racists elected president, why should we instantly shun people when an unsubstantiated, third-hand, bull-shit quote from 30 GD years ago are created from thin air?

Posted by: Rob Crawford at December 21, 2010 12:01 PM (ZJ/un)

62 NYT lies, especially about conservatives. I am comfortable dismissing them outright.

Posted by: shillelagh at December 21, 2010 12:01 PM (Oz4Bj)

63 Eh, this is the ole Palin routine.

Get out there early and often with a mischaracterization and he/she's dead politically.

And it always works.

Barbour may or may not have a race problem but I doubt it as that doesn't play even in Alabama these days.

Except in the Libtardverse.

Posted by: naturalfake at December 21, 2010 12:02 PM (+kzvp)

64 I'm getting SOooooo tired of our side throwing someone under the bus for remarks made many years ago while only giving lip service to holding dim-o-KKK-rats feet to the fire. This is a pet peeve I have with Ace and others here and on other Conservative sites. It's like we got to be above any minor shadow of suspicion but the dims get a completely free pass.

We need to be a little lot more unforgiving of the dims and keep pounding them on these issues.

Posted by: TennDon at December 21, 2010 12:02 PM (o6Yv2)

65 For those who are bothered that it's a "media" attack, oran NYT smear job, whatever,
(those do happen you know.)

In that case, the answer Barbour can offer up is "that's a fucking lie".
Perfectly acceptable.

Posted by: Dave in Texas at December 21, 2010 12:02 PM (WvXvd)

66 What's Barbour's stance on legalizing weed, brah?

Posted by: Empire of Jeff, Libertarian Hyper-Intellect at December 21, 2010 12:02 PM (9Qxlb)

67 While one can't pull a "third world" state like Mississippi...

Wow.

Just. Wow.

Posted by: Rob Crawford at December 21, 2010 12:03 PM (ZJ/un)

68 Some of our candidates are racists, some are too stupid.

We should just give up now (unless Bob Dole is still available).

Posted by: jwest at December 21, 2010 12:05 PM (qeYI9)

69
two words: Jason. Blair.


Posted by: Soothsayer at December 21, 2010 12:06 PM (uFokq)

70
My concern is still the Mississippi factor -- and not because of the
Gregory Peck fed racial stereotypes. My concern is over the economics
and general success of the state. If it has a growing economy, people
are getting decent educations (secondary ed), and poverty statistics
aren't bad, then ok. People will want a governor who's run a strong
state. But if it's a place where the economy is weak, there's little
high tech industry but instead purely agricultural, people are living
at/below the poverty line, and the kids can't read... then why would
someone vote for that?

Jeesus. It's not like it's another GD country.

Wait... maybe it is, for some of you.

And what's with the requirement for a "high-tech industry"? Who gives a rat's ass? The supposed heart of the high-tech industry is Cali-fucking-fornia; does that mean Arnold (excepting Constitutional limits, which, honestly, mean nothing anymore) should be our candidate? Or Gray Davis?

Posted by: Rob Crawford at December 21, 2010 12:06 PM (ZJ/un)

71
In that case, the answer Barbour can offer up is "that's a fucking lie".
--

Well, maybe he already did.

I guess my question is, what did he say 28 years ago when this charge was leveled during his Senate campaign? Quoting the hit piece, but not showing us what the follow up was isn't helpful. Maybe we can find it on our own, but it's easier if the folks with the media and political connections do the research.

As for his response now, I'm not sure it's worthy of a response. It's an old, hearsay allegation. Unless his citizens want him to address it, he has bigger fish to fry as Gov of MS.

Posted by: Y-not at December 21, 2010 12:07 PM (IDL9N)

72 If you believed everything the MFM said about Republicans or conservatives, you'd have to believe there wasn't a single one that was a good person or mentally sound, let alone electable. Why should we take political advice from our opponents?

Posted by: shillelagh at December 21, 2010 12:08 PM (Oz4Bj)

73 OK now, has anyone forgot the controversy over Coach Nick Saban referring to the bayou-folk of Louisiana as coons? Check this to refresh your memory: http://tinyurl.com/27qt8kb

That it refers to people of a certain skin color seems a fabrication of the left's imagination.

Posted by: Chairman LMAO at December 21, 2010 12:08 PM (9eDbm)

74 It's like we got to be above any minor shadow of suspicion but the dims get a completely free pass.

We have to have pure-white togas while the Democrats wallow if filth. They elect criminals and the corrupt, over and over and over, and we can't even bring ourselves to object when they lie about us.

But, hey, if that's what keeps the blue-state "conservatives" from being ostracized, then that's what we have to have, right?

Posted by: Rob Crawford at December 21, 2010 12:09 PM (ZJ/un)

75 I really like him but we need no further stains on Republicans character.
Way to show backbone for people you 'like.'

Posted by: Soothsayer at December 21, 2010 12:09 PM (uFokq)

76 In that case, the answer Barbour can offer up is "that's a fucking lie".
Perfectly acceptable.
Posted by: Dave in Texas at December 21, 2010 12:02 PM (WvXvd)
Or he could say "every word is true."
Either way, no big deal. I'm not letting the totality of a man be judged by one line like that.
I will God damn guarantee that you, Dave in Texas, at some point in your life, drunk, stoned or sober, made some sort of similar comment. Whether seriously or in jest.
Big deal. Perfection isn't attainable by man or women. Except for maybe LauraW. What can I say? I have a sick fetish for hygenically challenged hunchbacks.

Posted by: ed at December 21, 2010 12:10 PM (QLhy5)

77 And what's with the requirement for a "high-tech industry"? Who gives a rat's ass?

That usually implies high-paying jobs that require an educated work-force.

People like high-paying jobs. Employers like educated work-forces.

Look at Indiana's economy. The reason it is surviving relatively well is that they're shifting from heavy manufacturing and ag to high tech.


But if you'd rather get all defensive and think that an 18th century economy is the way to go, go right ahead.

Posted by: Y-not at December 21, 2010 12:10 PM (IDL9N)

78 Maybe we can find it on our own, but it's easier if the folks with the media and political connections do the research.

That wouldn't be helpful to the Romney campaign, or whoever's "turn" it is.

Posted by: Rob Crawford at December 21, 2010 12:10 PM (ZJ/un)

79 Posted by: ed at December 21, 2010 11:57 AM (QLhy5)

Ok, change it exactly how you suggest.

Now tell me, do you really think Kwame Killpatrick was a viable candidate for President before he was arrested?

If you don't think people form opinions of candidates based on things other than policy, you're not paying very much attention.

You know who does this too? Republicans. Remember guys like Dukakis and Kerry who were slammed as effete, Northeastern egg heads? It's called...politics.


Posted by: DrewM. at December 21, 2010 12:12 PM (HicGG)

80 I dunno, Dukakis and Kerry are demonstrably effete, Northeastern egg heads.

Posted by: Luca Brasi at December 21, 2010 12:14 PM (YmPwQ)

81 >> Whether seriously or in jest.
Then the answer would be "I did it, it was stupid and I'm sorry".
Also acceptable, as mentioned above.
I started this by saying I'm gonna wait and see. I'm not discarding the man. Nor would I based on one isolated account, which is right now nothing more than hearsay.

Posted by: Dave in Texas at December 21, 2010 12:15 PM (WvXvd)

82 Remember guys like Dukakis and Kerry who were slammed as effete, Northeastern egg heads? It's called...politics.

Maybe that's because they were effete NE eggheads, and stupid too.

Posted by: Vic at December 21, 2010 12:15 PM (e4sSD)

83 Well ... I guess a major movie by a black director called, "The Watermelon Man" in 1970 was a whole 12 years before Barbour's alleged highly insensitive joke (that's the charge, right?) ... "Carbon Copy" came out in 1981 ... so Haley should have understood the moving language allowances. That's what happens when you're not hip.

Posted by: iknowtheleft at December 21, 2010 12:15 PM (G/MYk)

84 That usually implies high-paying jobs that require an educated wo1rk-force.

So Arnold and Gray Davis are your candidates for 2012? Governors of the state that holds Silicon Valley!But if you'd rather get all defensive and think that an 18th century economy is the way to go, go right ahead.

If you'd like to keep electing progressives and big-state fetishists, go ahead. Unless you think Barbour somehow either kept "high-tech" industry out of MS, or should have somehow magically created the sector. Was he governor or dictator?

I'm not saying he's who I'd support. I'm saying you're judging on the wrong criteria.

Posted by: Rob Crawford at December 21, 2010 12:16 PM (ZJ/un)

85 #79 Someone accused Kerry and Dukakis of being eggheads? As in smart? Other than the NYT?

Posted by: shillelagh at December 21, 2010 12:16 PM (Oz4Bj)

86 While one can't pull a "third world" state like Mississippi...

Have you ever been to Mississippi? There's paved roads and everything there.

Posted by: toby928 at December 21, 2010 12:16 PM (S5YRY)

87 Screw this crap.
I'm not a Barbour supporter - at all - but Democrats revered and elected - a high Klan official for years ...whom voted against qualifiedblack jurists years after he was "sorry" for his Klan services, and "wrong" for voting against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (so much for some sorry-ass "pattern" being important to Democrats).
How are we supposed to worry about anything they say on a subject like this?
Screw Ben effing Smith and screw the NY effing Times.
And screw everyone who thinks this is an issue.**
28 fricking years?
Jeezus.
...we shouldn't be posting and commenting with taciturn gravity on this: we should be laughing our asses off at the dickweeds on the Left who are trying to seriously argue that three fricking decades ago is Gotcha Time in the present, and just reiterate Byrd-Byrd-Byrd to every fricking nonsensical and fabricated expression of faux outrage. Throw it back in their effing faces.
...Byrds of a feather.
...glass houses and all that.

------
**You're helping make it an issue.Stop.That.Now.

Posted by: davis,br at December 21, 2010 12:17 PM (uCShA)

88 #79 Someone accused Kerry and Dukakis of being eggheads? As in smart? Other than the NYT?

Posted by: shillelagh at December 21, 2010 12:16 PM (Oz4Bj)
One of the funniest things ever was finding out that Kerry actually did worse than Bush at school (they both sucked, frankly).

Posted by: iknowtheleft at December 21, 2010 12:18 PM (G/MYk)

89 You know who does this too? Republicans. Remember guys like Dukakis
and Kerry who were slammed as effete, Northeastern egg heads? It's
called...politics.

No. With Dikakus and JFKerry it was the truth. They were both such milquetoast spineless twats that Dikakus wouldn't commit to wanting to punish someone who raped a family member. JFKerry was a traitor for his entire political career.

But, hey, an unnamed someone says they heard something that could be taken as racist (or could be taken as a sarcastic rebuke to a racist), so let's just stone the MF'er! That'll teach him to be born in the GD south!

Posted by: Rob Crawford at December 21, 2010 12:18 PM (ZJ/un)

90 Jim Geraghty's opinion is about as valuable as a pile of dog shit.

Posted by: booger at December 21, 2010 12:18 PM (9RFH1)

91 If you'd like to keep electing progressives and big-state fetishists, go
ahead. Unless you think Barbour somehow either kept "high-tech"
industry out of MS, or should have somehow magically created the sector.
Was he governor or dictator?

I'm not saying he's who I'd support. I'm saying you're judging on the wrong criteria

--

You ignored my comments about Indiana. That's fine, but I think if you can't entertain the possibility that governors can (and do) take credit for transforming their economies, then we really have nothing to discuss. It seems to me the whole push for us to run governors for POTUS is because they are perceived as being more versed in economic issues than someone from Congress, for example.

(Frankly, I should have also mentioned Utah where our governor is also kicking ass.)

Posted by: Y-not at December 21, 2010 12:20 PM (IDL9N)

92
I'm not a Barbour supporter - at all - but Democrats revered and elected - a high Klan official for years...

How many times have they returned an impeached federal judge to Congress?

Barney Frank?

Maxine Waters?

Their party wouldn't exist without corruption, which we abet by holding them to a lower standard while expecting our politicians to be able to harness unicorns.

Posted by: Rob Crawford at December 21, 2010 12:20 PM (ZJ/un)

93 I don't remember anyone saying that, but, then again, I don't know
anyone who voted for McCain in a primary so maybe that was the claim.

Gabe you don't remember it very well then. It was a common refrain of the media AND some supposedly conservative pundits.

Posted by: Vic at December 21, 2010 12:20 PM (e4sSD)

94 And of course Robert Byrd is lionized by the Dems, and he did a hell of a lot worse - fillibustering the civil rights bill on the floor of the Senate!

Double standard is an understatement.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at December 21, 2010 12:20 PM (9Cooa)

95 I'm as outrageously outraged by this revelation as I was when I heard Obama yammering about how the Selma march is the reason for his existence.

Posted by: Fritz at December 21, 2010 12:21 PM (GwPRU)

96
But pretending what he said was racist, rather
than a mockery of racism, and denouncing him publicly, over and over and
over againeach and every one of you!will surely win over the
"GOP=KKK" crowd and get black people voting Republican in droves.Because every time you guys do that, that's exactly what happens.Isn't it.

Posted by: oblig
---------------
There is no winning those voters over.. ever. ever. The only thing you can hope to do is not rile them up so bad they will go out and vote en masse.

The fuck-up in chief has manged to screw up the lives of poor black voters just as well as wealthy white voters.. Dem voter apathy should remain at an all time low. Don't fuck that up would be my mantra..

Posted by: Chitown Jerry at December 21, 2010 12:21 PM (Do528)

97 23 Mississippi ranks 42nd in unemployment @ 9.9%.Watch out Ohio @ 9.8%!
Posted by: toby928 at December 21, 2010 11:37 AM (S5YRY)
Pikers, the both of ya

Posted by: Michigan at December 21, 2010 12:22 PM (FIDMq)

98 I think if you can't entertain the possibility that governors can (and
do) take credit for transforming their economies, then we really have
nothing to discuss.

Certainly they can. It's meaningless, but if you want to actually treat it as if it has meaning, well...

Let's just say I'm *really* beginning to understand why Republicans are known as the "Stupid Party".

Posted by: Rob Crawford at December 21, 2010 12:22 PM (ZJ/un)

99 Ok, change it exactly how you suggest.
Now tell me, do you really think Kwame Killpatrick was a viable candidate for President before he was arrested?
Dave in Texas
Re-read what I'm pissed about. I'm not pissed about the totality of a man's life work making him unviable.
I'm pissed that simply being a black man or a white man makes you unacceptable based off of some fucked up pre-judgement in some peoples eyes.
You show me a black man who is doing a bang up job of re-vitalizing Detroit and I'll show you a black man I'm gonna get very interested in supporting. Even if at some point in his life he made some petty ante comment like, "You gotta watch it. The white man, he can be cold..."
And no, Kwame Kilpatrick was NEVER a viable candidate for President before he was arrested since we don't elect people to President right from running a city. Guilliani is the closest we ever came.

Posted by: ed at December 21, 2010 12:25 PM (QLhy5)

100 99
I think if you can't entertain the possibility that governors can (and
do) take credit for transforming their economies, then we really have
nothing to discuss.

Certainly they can. It's meaningless, but if you want to actually treat it as if it has meaning, well...

Let's just say I'm *really* beginning to understand why Republicans are known as the "Stupid Party".



Posted by: Rob Crawford at December 21, 2010 12:22 PM

---

OK, so I mention that a candidate, in this case a governor, will be judged by the effectiveness of his time in office - but you say that the state's economy is not a measure of that. What are the measures of a governor's effectiveness?


And, where in hell did you get progressive statist out of my mention of Indiana's economy?

Posted by: Y-not at December 21, 2010 12:26 PM (IDL9N)

101 No. With Dikakus and JFKerry it was the truth.
Posted by: Rob Crawford at December 21, 2010 12:18 PM (ZJ/un)


Which is exactly what every liberal would say in defense of their tactics.

Come on guys, Republicans play hardball politics too. Maybe not as hard as some would like but they aren't pure as the driven snow either. There's nothing wrong with it, that's how the game is played.

Posted by: DrewM. at December 21, 2010 12:26 PM (HicGG)

102 Once, just once, i'd like to see a democrat, any democrat, called out for their blatant racism towards whites. Go on any liberal blog and it's rampant, democrats support laws that discriminate against whites for fucks sake, they're literally using the power of government to enforce their racism towards whites, when is anybody going to call them on it? How many lives have been destroyed over the past four decades becuase of democrats racist laws? How many kids never got to know the full potential of their lives because of democrats racist laws? Fuck this bullshit of cowtowing to the usual accusations of racism from the media and the Geraghty's, dems are the racists, cal them on it or shut the fuck up.

Posted by: booger at December 21, 2010 12:27 PM (9RFH1)

103 1. I don't think he was running anyway.
2. Are we to actually believe the NY Times now, or then?
3. Isn't it convenient that as soon as the election is over the MFM is drudging up old bad media from repub hating hacks on potential presidential candidates?
4. But if the libs want to go back decades, fine, lets talk about Odumbass and his pot smoking, coke nosing, socialist conference attending, racist church attending, low grade point averaging (prove me wrong prez), little class attending, commie favoritism grooming life.

Posted by: Guy Fawkes at December 21, 2010 12:27 PM (xQAv5)

104 Is it just me, or is the GOP, in the aftermath of a big win in November, even wimpier than it has ever been?
AH, hahahahaha!

Posted by: Dirty Harry Reid at December 21, 2010 12:29 PM (K/USr)

105 You know who does this too? Republicans. Remember guys like Dukakis and Kerry who were slammed as effete, Northeastern egg heads? It's called...politics. Exactly. You know who DOESN'T do this to Democrats? The media.

Posted by: CJ at December 21, 2010 12:30 PM (9KqcB)

106 Mississippi ranks 42nd in unemployment @ 9.9%. Watch out Ohio @ 9.8%! ...Posted by: toby928 at December 21, 2010 11:37 AM (S5YRY)
Pikers, the both of ya ...Posted by: Michigan at December 21, 2010 12:22 PM (FIDMq)
HAHAHA. Try living in Cali-fricking-fornia. Only Nevada's keeps us from being mudscraped from the barrel's bottom(and the Central Valley county I live in is worse, at 17.8% ...and this is NOT the worst county in CA).
...it would be grand to be at "only" 9.something percent. Especially now, at Christmas. Sucks to be us.

Posted by: davis,br at December 21, 2010 12:33 PM (uCShA)

107 Is it just me, or do righty bloggers fall all over themselves to be first to declare their own side toasted?
AH, hahahahahaha

Posted by: Dirty Harry Reid at December 21, 2010 12:34 PM (K/USr)

108 Hell, even the Willie Horton "attack" against Dukakis was started by Al friggin' Gore.

Posted by: Luca Brasi at December 21, 2010 12:34 PM (YmPwQ)

109 #87 Correct. When you take a story like this and give in prominence on a conservative blog and commence with the hand-wringing, you are doing a variation of the "I am not a witch" ads of the O'Donnell campaign.

The New York Times MAKES STUFF UP! ALL THE TIME!

I consider them a useless source. The only time they tell the truth about Republicans is accidentally or in obituaries (and even then they insert snark).

This type of story needs to mocked, along with copious examples of current elected democrats who have said equivalent or worse things witin the last 3 years (and there are a boat-load of them).


Posted by: Miss Marple at December 21, 2010 12:37 PM (Fo83G)

110 Is it just me, or are the Republicans petrified to mention Rev. Jeremiah Wright and Father Pfleger?
AH, hahahahahaha! Its too easy, I swear, ahahahahahahaha

Posted by: Dirty Harry Reid at December 21, 2010 12:37 PM (K/USr)

111 So the left is starting to ramp up againstthe rightfor the next election. Shocker. They start early with the bottom rung of the candidate ladder and start working their way up over time, damaging them one by one. The activecandidate(s) they go afterless harshlyis their pick for us to run.
(Unless you're Palin, then you're going to be constantlycatching hell.)

Posted by: Annabelle at December 21, 2010 12:40 PM (Zeljq)

112 Fact is, any white male from the South who doesn't show the requisite amount of "white guilt" is going to get flogged in the media. As a native Mississippian I am thoroughly sick of it. And I'm sick of "progressive" Mississippians flagellating themselves about how backward/racist/generally awful we are. Just today I have had to block a couple of people on Facebook for their stupid hand-wringing over Haley Barbour.

And Mississippi actually has managed to attract manufacturing and industry during Barbour's term. The Nissan plant in Canton is the most prominent example, but there are others, like the Nucor steel mill in Columbus. When I moved away two years ago, the big thing was the Toyota plant opening up near Tupelo, but I think that's been put on hold due to the crappy economy. Yeah, the economy is still primarily agriculture based, but if your mental image of Mississippi consists of barefoot sharecroppers tilling the Delta fields in misery, you should really rethink that. There is a lot of potential there for companies that would like to get away from the Rust Belt and the stranglehold of the unions.

Posted by: Angry Beaver at December 21, 2010 12:41 PM (Asd8/)

113
Holy shit, you guys might be right. Haley Barbour would be a bad choice because in 2012 he'll lose us CA, WA, MA...



Posted by: Soothsayer at December 21, 2010 12:43 PM (uFokq)

114 Yo Harry. Sean Hannity, for all of his faults, was the only media person on our side who took on Wright and Pfleger. He brought them, to light a year before Zero even announced his candidacy.I guess the subject matter was too dicey for anyone elese to help him out.

Posted by: Luca Brasi at December 21, 2010 12:45 PM (YmPwQ)

115 DrewM. at December 21, 2010 12:26 PM (HicGG)
Whatever dude. Unfairly throwing out the race card is toxic and bullshit. It is as bad as calling people "n*ggers" and whatnot.
Calling Barack a "tax and spend accademic egghead liberal" is harsh, but within bounds. Calling him a "n*gger" is not.
Calling Haley Barbour a "rich man who wants to cut taxes on the filthy rich while cutting poor childrens lunch and school programs" is harsh but withing bounds. Calling him a racist this quickis not.
But anyway in the Christmas spirit of good natured ace of spades vulgarity, I'd like to offer the following closing...


Hey! If any of you are looking for any last-minute gift ideas for me. I have one..Id like DrewM, Ace of Spades poster, right here tonight.
I want him brought from his happy holiday slumber over there on Hobo Lane with all the other drunken, smelly loveable morons and I want him brought right here, with a big ribbon on his head, and I want to look him straight in the eye and I want to tell him what a..

cheap
lying
no-good
rotten
four-flushing
low-life
snake-licking
dirt-eating
inbred
overstuffed
ignorant
blood-sucking
dog-kissing
brainless
dickless
hopeless
heartless
fat-ass
bug-eyed
stiff-legged
spotty-lipped
worm-headed
sack of monkey shit HE IS!
..Hallelujah! Holy shit! Wheres the Tylenol?

Posted by: ed at December 21, 2010 12:45 PM (QLhy5)

116 Yes, the case will be made that Democrats, including Barack ("typical
white person") Obama, get away with murder on this score. But that
doesn't mean Republicans should give a pass to people with views of race
that are questionable at best.

I agree that people who have racist points of view should not be given a pass. The problem is that the fricken MEDIA will do all the heavy lifting to excuse the worst excesses of a Democrat, and mal-interpret the most innocuous statement of a Republican. In other words, we cannot win at all, ever, as far as the people who still rely on the MFM are concerned.

If we had an honest media interested in informing the public, no Democrat would ever be elected, and electing Democrats is the first priority of the US Media.

Posted by: BeckoningChasm at December 21, 2010 12:46 PM (bvfVF)

117 @Gabriel Malor
TPM has a post in 2007 about the McCain campaign sending out an email about how only McCain could beat Hillary.

Posted by: Matt at December 21, 2010 12:47 PM (ecpMe)

118 DrewM, don't take this personal, but Ace brings the funny. You? You bringthe equivalent ofa years membership in the Jelly of the Month club.
;-)

Posted by: ed at December 21, 2010 12:48 PM (QLhy5)

119 My proposed GOP Rule: Unfounded Accusations of Racism Shall be Treated as Racism Themselves. Period.
Don't know yet if the Barbour accusations fit this. But time to hit back hard in cases where it does.

Posted by: CJ at December 21, 2010 12:50 PM (9KqcB)

120 I still think he should run as GOP Chairman. He is still light years ahead of Steele.

Posted by: Wyatt Earp at December 21, 2010 12:53 PM (mM7dK)

121 I despair of Republicans ever learning how to wage politics.

Look, you have staring you in the face how democrats handle crap like this. They either ignore it, laugh about it, or find eleventy-seven examples of something worse the other side did, and then bang the drum about that.

What they NEVER do is admit that their candidate is flawed. They NEVER turn on them right after a primary (ahem) or ditch them when they are impeached (see Clinton, William Jefferson). They go right on supporting their felons, thugs, miscreants, and ne'er-do-wells, regardless. Baarney Frank, Charlie Rangel, Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, Chris Dodd, Robert Byrd, on and on and on. Heck, they will not even admit that Sheila Jackson lLee is challenged on space issues.

But what do we do? Why, we take everything bottom-feeders like the NYT and POlitico say from a third party, then we wring our hands and say "Oh noes, they are saying he's a raaacist!" (Like the media doesn't assume that all of Mississippi is one big Klan Fest.)

Damn it! If the GOP had stuck with Bush instead of disintegrating into 100 separate "my way is the only way" factions, we might not have lost Congress in 2006.

Man up and figure it out! Fire it right back at them! Tell them, "WHO said this? Where is the tape? Where are the eyewitnesses? What does Barbour have to say? How about some FACTS rather than a third party supposed quote from a 28-year-old New York Times hit piece!"

Posted by: Miss Marple at December 21, 2010 12:55 PM (Fo83G)

122 At least Barbour didn't say "macaca". It's the non-word, racist utterances which are the worst, you know.

Posted by: iknowtheleft at December 21, 2010 12:55 PM (G/MYk)

123 I still think he should run as GOP Chairman. He is still light years ahead of Steele.

He did well the first time he was chairman.

Posted by: toby928 at December 21, 2010 12:57 PM (S5YRY)

124 #123

And if George Allen had just looked at them and said "So what?" instead of doing multiple apologies and the GOP pundits had said look over here at this democrat scandal instead of wringing their hands, we might be talking about Senator Allen today.


Posted by: Miss Marple at December 21, 2010 01:01 PM (Fo83G)

125 and this is why we lose. Liberals need the truth shoved up their ass like the BCoS.Posted by: toby928 at December 21, 2010 11:28 AM (S5YRY)

+10,000.

We are Teh Party of teh Stoopid because so many of our "leaders" refuse to fight back (see Bush, George W., and his 30% approval rating because he bent over and took every inch of it every fucking time). And the ones who do fight back are labeled "thin-skinned" by the worthless fucking cowards who don't. They. Still. Do. Not. Get. It. The reaction to this nonsense is a great example. For all we know the NYT made up this "watermelon" shit out of thin air. We're talking about the newspaper that never returned Duranty's Pulitzer even after it was revealed that he was a Stalinist shill and useful idiot who covered up the Soviet genocide in Ukraine because he was a fucking commie symp. Zero credibility. The fact that it's reported in an anecdotal manner and not as a real quote (another one of their countless weasel-tactics) is another clue.

Posted by: ol_dirty_/b/tard at December 21, 2010 01:03 PM (IoUF1)

126 I'm still trying to figure out what the problem is, even after reading this non-quote quote. I don't see anything "racist" in what Barbour said to his staffer. And this came from where? Politico? The New York Slimes? I wouldn't believe the Slimes if they printed that the Sun rises in the East, then or now, and likewise Politico. I've caught both lying and/or spinning stories leftwardfar too many times.
But having said that, I'm not inclined to think Barbour would have much of a chance, alleged remark or not, in 2012. Remember; the Commicrats have the MFM in their pocket, and they will say or do anything to promote whomever the D-rats put up. And I'm not just talking about the '08 election, but pretty much everything the MFM put out throughout the past decade.

Posted by: Cave Bear at December 21, 2010 01:08 PM (uMihF)

127 Has no one mentioned Jimmy Carter and his time on one of Georgia's school committees?


Posted by: someone2 at December 21, 2010 01:09 PM (/hia0)

128 And if George Allen had just looked at them and said
"So what?" instead of doing multiple apologies and the GOP pundits had
said look over here at this democrat scandal instead of wringing their
hands, we might be talking about Senator Allen today.

Posted by: Miss Marple at December 21, 2010 01:01 PM (Fo83G

Exactly. Never apologize to liberals, for anything, and ESPECIALLY not for things which don't call for an apology, at all. But, we have too many squishes on the right who are just waiting for the opportunity to open up on conservatives, to show everyone else what morally superior people they are, even if it is only the morality of a fantasy world ...

Speaking of delusional squishes ... is Krauthammer's latest "he's a genius" crap about the retard-in-chief bothering anyone else to no end? How about some "conservatives" opening up on that prick in a blog post? Krauthammer is truly embarrassing and stupid.

Posted by: iknowtheleft at December 21, 2010 01:10 PM (G/MYk)

Posted by: slac at December 21, 2010 01:11 PM (MiOtx)

130 >> I'm pissed that simply being a black man or a white man makes you unacceptable based off of some fucked up pre-judgement in some peoples eyes.
Not in mine. Who are we yelling at?

Posted by: Dave in Texas at December 21, 2010 01:12 PM (WvXvd)

131 Dave in Texas at December 21, 2010 01:12 PM (WvXvd)
I was arguing with DrewM about a paragraph in his post.

Posted by: ed at December 21, 2010 01:15 PM (QLhy5)

132 #110. Robert Byrd is the verymirror of the Democrat Party soul.
He didn't vote against Thurgood Marshall and Clarence Thomas years after his dark past in the Klan, and his vote against the Civil Rights Act of 1964, for any of his vaunted and publicly proclaimed "principles".
Bullshit.
His proclamations of regret and sorrow were purely and obviously political cover.
He remained a racist sonuvabitch to the core. Whenever he could get away with it. Few 60 year olds don't change their core beliefs ...and his come-to-Jeezus facade was as transparently obvious and revealing as it was disgusting and deeply despicable in his votes against Marshall and Thomas.
And Democrat racists elected him; and they re-elected him. They reverehim to this day.
I feel nothing but sorrow for our nation and for the blackconstituencies who writhe under the bondage of the political yoke of the Democrat party with the knowing complicity oflying black hucksters whose one true goal is their own self-enrichment ...a Party whose only purpose is to keep them enslaved on the political plantation ...destroying the core dignity and the future hopes of free men with baubles and enticing words.
Shame on Democrats. Shame on them.
...blind, ignorant,prevaricatin', two-faced, grasping bastards steeped in evil intent and practice, the lot of 'em.
They've long since passed the point of being able to effectively hide behind a facade of faux equality.
Use their own words and deeds. Laugh at them. Make fun of them.
Don't ever, ever take them seriously.
They don't deserve any respect at all when it comes to their racism. No one does, but them least of all.

Posted by: davis,br at December 21, 2010 01:16 PM (uCShA)

133 My proposed GOP Rule: Unfounded Accusations of Racism Shall be Treated as Racism Themselves. Period.
I strongly agree.

Posted by: ed at December 21, 2010 01:18 PM (QLhy5)

134 shit, sorry for the blank post. On to the substance:

Gabe: For reals?! McCain wasn't pushed on us as the most "electable?" Go back and refresh your memory. Gads. Of course he was!

DrewM (and Geraughty for that matter): This is fucking ridiculous. A watermelon reference from 30 years ago (assuming its true) is fatal? Are you fucking kidding me? Ditto post 116 above. Holy shit, with friends like you, who needs fucking enemies. And yes, politics is hard-ball. That's why you shouldn't be handing out freebies like this disgusting post to the enemy. Fucking lame a thousand times over.

Barbour has a long record as a political operative/elected official. If you have to rely on a 30-year old watermelon reference (again, even assuming its accurate!) in order to show that he's got the black heart of a racist (no racial reference intended), then you are pretty fucking empty-handed. You, as a supposed conservative should be pointing this shit out, rather than nodding and agreeing that he must be a racist mother-fucker.

God, you make me sick!!!

Posted by: slackmac at December 21, 2010 01:18 PM (MiOtx)

135 BullShit.

Posted by: Journolist at December 21, 2010 01:21 PM (LwLqV)

136 seriously, take a minute and think this through. are you sure that off-color remark about watermelons (again, assuming it's true), dooms a guy as a racist even though he has a proven track record as a relatively successful governor of a southern state with a sizable black population? REALLY? Holy shit, I'd love to take you out of a snipe hunt. Fucking idiot.

Posted by: slackmac at December 21, 2010 01:22 PM (MiOtx)

137 I hear you, Drew, and sadly, I agree. Still, however, a Republican makes a couple of remarks almost 30 years ago and we're ready to toss him under he bus, not too many questions asked.
A Democrat makes a questionable remark currently, when things are far, far more politically correct. After a brief hubbub during which numerous liberals and Democrats insist the remark is irrelevant, he's given a pass, and he absorbs no damage other than perhaps a quick footnote from time to time when his name is brought up.
That is TOO much of a double standard.

Posted by: RM at December 21, 2010 01:23 PM (GkYyh)

138 the Civil Rights Act of 1964

That legislation overstepped in its grab of federal power and started the US on the road to judicial Hell with the etablishment of federal protected classes of people (with even non-citizens being protected against citizens, purely by physical class!), which goes against everything this nation and its government was built to do. That perversion, that our system was never built or meant to deal with, has seriously destabilized our whole legal and judicial system, which is what we have to contend with, today.

But, it's not PC to say that ... I denounce myself!

Posted by: iknowtheleft at December 21, 2010 01:24 PM (G/MYk)

139 Racial jokes end political careers, supporting the dismemberment of the unborn makes many political careers. What progress we've made!

Posted by: ccruse456 at December 21, 2010 01:25 PM (yNoT1)

140 I'm sure that the left is pointing out this post as the epitome of fucking cluelessness and gullibility. I'm pissed because this type of post validates their baseless accusations and advances the unfair stereotype that Republicans (and ONLY Republicans) are racists.

Posted by: slackmac at December 21, 2010 01:25 PM (MiOtx)

141 A savvy political operative on the right would have laughed this off as a weak attempt to smear an upstanding governor of a southern state who has worked hard for all americans, regardless of color. If they have to dig up a 30-year old non-quote, quote, of dubious reliability to attack the honor of Mr. Barbour, they should be laughed at as the silly ankle-biters they are.

Holy shit, where's the eggnog!

Posted by: slackmac at December 21, 2010 01:29 PM (MiOtx)

142 And so it begins. The MFM willpick off our candidates oneby one. They will either try to discredit them, or turn us againstthem, and each other. They are good at it and by the time 2012 rolls around they'll have the GOP candidate of their choice running against the Greatest President Ever.

Posted by: Ken James at December 21, 2010 01:29 PM (w91MW)

143 There is a reason it isn't in quotes. Howell Raines knows how the game is played and didn't quote Barbour for a reason.

Barbour was a Republican in the South at a time when the only reason to do so was to oppose racism.

There will be more to this story, mark my words.

Me, I think Barbour should sue. He'll lose, sue anyway. Time to use lawfare against the bastards.

Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2010 01:29 PM (dajAk)

144 Drew, critical thinking requires more than playing snare to anNRO drum major.

Posted by: Journolist at December 21, 2010 01:30 PM (LwLqV)

145 At this rate, we'll be left with McCain as our nominee, again, because he's all "reasonable" and "electable." Holy shit. Some of us can be played like a fucking banjo by a stump-toothed, inbred, idiot.

Ohhh noesss... off color remark that may, thirty-years hence be deemed unacceptable. There goes my chances to be elected president!!11!!!eleventy. Denounce me!! Please, sir, may I have another!

Posted by: slackmac at December 21, 2010 01:33 PM (MiOtx)

146 I fucked up my response to Dave in Texas and Drew M. I responded to Drew M's comment #79, but I think I ascribed it to Dave in Texas.
Anyway, I guess I'll have to take a time-out in the corner for bad behavior.
But I'm not wearing that stupid hat. I won't and you can't make me...

Posted by: ed at December 21, 2010 01:35 PM (QLhy5)

147 Watermelon jokes aren't funny. Well, except maybe for the watermelon in Buckaroo Banzai. Should probably stick with the Angry Orange.

Posted by: OCBill at December 21, 2010 01:35 PM (YJvVE)

148 Me, I think Barbour should sue. He'll lose, sue anyway. Time to use lawfare against the bastards.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't you a mathemeticianwho hateslawyers above all else?
Using lawyers in this way...diabolical.
I like the way you think.

Posted by: ed at December 21, 2010 01:38 PM (QLhy5)

149 #139 I actually agree in part (and maybe a large part) with you, iknowtheleft (more: I think that Act, and the Great Society act that followed, all but destroyed the black family, and their hope, for generations, and even yet to come).
...but inside the current Democrat self___, that act was and is Holy Writ, a watershedpolitically and socially ...and so my point stands.

Posted by: davis,br at December 21, 2010 01:44 PM (uCShA)

150 Posted by: Journolist at December 21, 2010 01:30 PM (LwLqV)

What exactly is your point there?

Posted by: DrewM. at December 21, 2010 01:51 PM (HicGG)

151 Amish guy NOT ONE Republican from the South (that being states that were members of the CSA) voted for the Civil Rights Act 1964 The Republicans that did vote for it were not from CSA states.

Posted by: archie bunker at December 21, 2010 01:56 PM (0YS61)

152 reincarnated as a watermelon
Okay, that is some genuinely hilarious shiznat.
If all y'all fags Jews bulldykes at AoSHQ can't laugh at that, then you can just go fornicate with yourselves.

Posted by: Lindsey Grahamnesty licking Rahm Emanuel's salty shaven balls at December 21, 2010 01:57 PM (pfMMA)

153 That legislation overstepped in its grab of federal power and started
the US on the road to judicial Hell with the etablishment of federal
protected classes of people (with even non-citizens being protected
against citizens, purely by physical class!), which goes against
everything this nation and its government was built to do.

Your argument is with judges stretching the Act all out of shape I think. While I agree that the Act does exceed the Constitution, I have a bit of a pragmatic take on it. If it were proposed as an amendment to the Constitution tomorrow, do you have the slightest doubt that it would be ratified, and quickly?

I personally draw a distinction between acts that have overwhelming support, as the Civil Rights Act does today, and acts that have no popular support. It's kind of a Common Law thing.

Posted by: toby928 at December 21, 2010 01:57 PM (S5YRY)

154 Oh and Haley had his dates mixed up. MLK spoke in Yazoo City in 1966. Had he tried it in 1962 he probably would have had a different reception.

Posted by: archie bunker at December 21, 2010 02:01 PM (0YS61)

155 >> NOT ONE Republican from the South
There were eleven of them.

Posted by: Dave in Texas at December 21, 2010 02:03 PM (Wh0W+)

156 So you can be former klansman and be lauded by the senate as a hero as long as you have a D after your name? My how times have changed, guess the byrd flew the coup on this one. Two wrongs don't make a right, but consistency would be nice.




Posted by: Indian Outlaw at December 21, 2010 02:03 PM (7NcLZ)

157 Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't you a mathemeticianwho hateslawyers above all else?
Using lawyers in this way...diabolical.
I like the way you think.

Posted by: ed at December 21, 2010 01:38 PM (QLhy5)
I'm from the "Let's see how they like it" school.I don't oppose using lawyers as cannon fodder -- literally and figuratively.

Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2010 02:06 PM (T0NGe)

158 Amish guy

For heaven's sake, can you at least get my name right? Is it so damned hard?

Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2010 02:07 PM (T0NGe)

159 STFU, dunce. The day you have an original thought your tumor will explode.

Posted by: toby928 at December 21, 2010 02:08 PM (S5YRY)

160 >> NOT ONE Republican from the South
There were eleven of them.

Posted by: Dave in Texas at December 21, 2010 02:03 PM (Wh0W+)
LOLcano eruption

Posted by: Captain Hate at December 21, 2010 02:08 PM (kOMUP)

161 Posted by: Dave in Texas at December 21, 2010 02:03 PM (Wh0W+)

Technically, 11 is "not one" so he's got that going for him.


Posted by: DrewM. at December 21, 2010 02:14 PM (HicGG)

162 The good new is that the KKK never lowered themselves to making remarks which referred to a stereotype regarding watermelons. Egad, what would we have done in that case!?

I dare not dream it.

Posted by: slackmac at December 21, 2010 02:14 PM (MiOtx)

163 ---Your argument is with judges stretching the Act all
out of shape I think.

While that is certainly true, just the establishment of a federal protected class of people is the real damage. THat is the cancer that has spread far and wide. It's interesting that the people in favor of "protected classes" are the same ones who like to argue individual Equal Protection when it suits them. Of course, it's impossible to logically maintain individual Equal Protection AND protected classes at the same time ... but, then again, these are the same folks who wanted racial quotas, and once rebuffed on that (as people began to regain their senses) they turned to fashioning law that didn't mention race but had intentional disparate impact on blacks ... and then those same people decided that any law that has disparate impact is 'racist'!! Except for theirs, whihc were the only ones specifically designed for disparate impact.

These are the malevolent fools we are dealing with and so many on our side just give up these debates, which are such insanely ridiculous arguments.

---While I agree that the Act does exceed the
Constitution, I have a bit of a pragmatic take on it. If it were
proposed as an amendment to the Constitution tomorrow, do you have the
slightest doubt that it would be ratified, and quickly?

I would be 3000% against anything that further formalizes the insidious and insane notion of protected classes of people, no matter what else it said. Aside from all the obvious problems, just the notion that a non-citizen in a protected class has more protection from a citizen of the nation is beyond insane and about as offensive as one can get.

---I
personally draw a distinction between acts that have overwhelming
support, as the Civil Rights Act does today, and acts that have no
popular support. It's kind of a Common Law thing.

Posted by: toby928 at December 21, 2010 01:57 PM (S5YRY)
We are still suffering from the huge mistakes that were thrown up as "solutions", no matter how popular they were or are. Most people looked on Affirmative Action as 'reparations'. Not legally sensible or fair, in any way, but more as, "They have it tough. Give them a hand for a few decades." But liberal programs NEVER have exit strategies.
As I said, I would just concentrate on the problem of "protected classes", which is a legal notion that has is going to have to be done away with. It's just too stupid and goes against American political and judicial culture too much.

Posted by: iknowtheleft at December 21, 2010 02:17 PM (G/MYk)

164 Re: Drew's update:

Walk it back slowly drew. Maybe nobody will notice that you sold us out. Coward. You could have pointed out the ridiculous double-standard/dubious source/who-gives-a-shit-about-a-thirty-year-old-statement aspect of this story up front, but no, you concede that this is a serious matter and may reflect upon Barbour's racist tendencies.

Fucking coward. Glad I don't have to rely on you to have my back.

Posted by: slackmac at December 21, 2010 02:28 PM (MiOtx)

165 Well, if the traitors on the left and the squishy metrosexuals like you and Geraghty who pretend to be on our side until the going gets tough are against him, I'm all in.

Barbour 2012!

Posted by: Adjoran at December 21, 2010 02:36 PM (VfmLu)

166 >> Technically, 11 is "not one" so he's got that going for him.
Just providing some context is all.

Posted by: Dave in Texas at December 21, 2010 02:40 PM (WvXvd)

167 Nothing a little bowing and scraping can't fix.
Eek! Someone made an off-color joke!
Eek! Someone said something that could be construed as insensitive!
My God! Someone did something that offends someone else!
Good lord, people need to toughen up a bit.

Posted by: Fa Cube Itches at December 21, 2010 02:44 PM (xy9wk)

168 Posted by: slackmac at December 21, 2010 02:28 PM (MiOtx)

Fuck you.

You might want to try reading...the update with Barbour's comment was in response to yesterday's story.

At no point then or now did I go after Barbour. Yes, I said if the watermelon thing pans out he's done but that's a statement of fact, not necessarily preference. In fact, I defended him in both spots.

But because I didn't come out guns blazing against the Democrats or the media, I'm a coward. Oh wait, in both posts I DID attack the Democrats and the media.

So what exactly is your problem with me asshole?

One other thing...fuck you.

(I went with the double fuck you since you obviously have reading comprehension problems and I didn't want you to miss it like you missed all the other stuff in my posts. Try not to have shiny things around when reading, you're obviously easy to distract)

Posted by: DrewM. at December 21, 2010 02:48 PM (HicGG)

169 Drew M.
You pick up the story from the Washington Examiner which links in an extensive screed by NRO's Geraghty and then you simply parrot Geraghty's verbose on the one hand, on the other hand approach; an approach which fails to adequately examine Haley Barbour's record.A record that suggests anything but an indictment of racism.
Mr. Barbour's recollection was from indeed his point of view and took into account the integration efforts made in his home town's council.These comments were made in a Weekly Standard interview and have been parsed by the liberal intelligentsia as the basis to charge Governor Barbour as a racist. A charge that is politically expedient for liberals to drone in the public domain.
You have advanced nothing on the subject matter other than to obtain a liberal batton unwittingly, in the liberals' strided attempt to isolate, threaten and beclown their political enemies.Racism is in part defined by Merriam Webster to be the belief that, "racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race."
Nothing Haley Barbour has done or stated would place him in the category as a, "racist." In fact, Mr. Barbour became a member of the Republican party in order to embrace it's ideals of equality as opposed to the gentrified party of the south i.e. the democratic party that fomented race politics.
And then Drew you tack on the following pablum to your comments, which are simply astounding. Lets take a look and then lets examine them:
. . . And if the evidence is that they are racists, throwing them under the bus is just the right thing to do regardless of what Democrats get away with. To be clear, I'm not talking about Barbour personally here, just the principles involved.
That said, Barbour was always going to be a tough sell nationally. He's a big, gruff, heavily accented guy from a state that conjures certain images for a lot of people nationally (racism and poverty to put it bluntly). I'm not saying any of this is true or fair. I'm just saying it's the reality.
The above comments from your post are a disgrace on account the very nature of your postattenuatesGovernor Barbour's character due to yourfailure to discuss Mr. Barbour beyond the weight of1) afactually correct statement he made and 2) a reference that was supposedly made by himwhileadmonishing a subordinate.
Should we thus construe from yourcongnitive prowess that you must be a proponent ofslitting throats? Should that be the headline that Drew M. supports slitting people's throats? Seriously. Isn't that factually correct? Isn't that the rubric of the AOSHQ site?
We need to grow up here and stand for reasoned debate for we are men not parrots.

Posted by: Journolist at December 21, 2010 02:56 PM (LwLqV)

170 @144: "Me, I think Barbour should sue. He'll lose, sue anyway. Time to use lawfare against the bastards."
Um, just to clarify - you, who think attorneys are the worst things in the universe, in part because of filing garbage lawsuits, are now advocating that Barbour should retain an attorney to file a non-viable lawsuit simply for the purpose of inflicting legal fees on the other side?

Posted by: Fa Cube Itches at December 21, 2010 03:01 PM (xy9wk)

171 Tammy Bruce is hammering any pukes that would let the left get away with this character assassination of somebody that dealt effectively with Katrina when the real racists in a neighboring state didn't do a fucking thing for any of their citizens.

Posted by: Captain Hate at December 21, 2010 03:05 PM (kOMUP)

172 @164: "Most people looked on Affirmative Action as 'reparations'. Not legally sensible or fair, in any way, but more as, "They have it tough. Give them a hand for a few decades." But liberal programs NEVER have exit strategies."
Erroneous! Untrue! Sanda Day O'Connor herself said that Affirmative Action would not be necessary 25 years from now (less a couple since she said it in the past).

Posted by: Fa Cube Itches at December 21, 2010 03:09 PM (xy9wk)

173 Finally, DrewM is willing to push back. Too bad it isn't directed at the deserving party. Oh, and fuck you asshole. Barbour may be a dirty racist for all I know, but what I do know is that nothing presented so far establishes that fact, and that you went along with the character assassination. Fucking coward.

Posted by: slackmac at December 21, 2010 03:15 PM (MiOtx)

174 Governor Barbour's had some experience with the GWOT. The 155th Separate Heavy Armored Brigade, "The Dixie Thunder", is coming off it's second deployment since the war started. The 155th was the round-out brigade for the 1st Cav back before the 48th Georgia ruined that concept forever. Mississippi used to have an artillery brigade, but FA is dying out in the Army. Lots of engineers and aviation, too.

The Navy Seabee school is at Gulfport.

As for the high-tech sector in the Magnolia State:

Pascagoula has some of the major shipyards for smaller naval vessels. The USS New York came out of the Northrup Grumman yard there.

UH-72 Lakota production is at Columbus, Mississippi.

Very large Toyota plant in Madison, just north of Jackson.

L3's Vertex Aerospace, Raytheon, and Lockheed Martin all have facilities there. Some are production facilities, some are facilities that deal with the NASA Stennis facility on the coast (rocket tests, also is the coastal swamp training facility for Navy SpecWar and Special Boat) or maintenance support for Naval Air Station Meridian or Columbus AFB.

Posted by: SGT Dan at December 21, 2010 03:18 PM (dqSmk)

175 You have advanced nothing on the subject matter other than to obtain a
liberal batton unwittingly, in the liberals' strided attempt to isolate,
threaten and beclown their political enemies.
Posted by: Journolist at December 21, 2010 02:56 PM (LwLqV)



I'm not paid to be Barbour's or any politicians spokesman. It's not my
job to make their case for them. As a blogger (another 'job' I'm not
paid for) here at the HQ, my charge is to find newsworthy stories to post, summarize
them and give my opinion.



What you seem to be upset about is that my post didn't track what you
would have written. I have two thoughts about that...tough shit and I
don't care.



You and others are conveniently ignoring the fact that what I wrote both
days was sympathetic to Barbour in giving him the benefit of the doubt in interpreting his comments about the Citizens Council and the veracity of the "watermelon charge".

I also actually went on to layout the case why the liberals charges on the Citizens Council comments were bullshit and try to frame the issue in a way that helped Barbour.

I guess that's not enough for you. Again...tough shit and I don't care.



You can take issue with my analysis of the fallout of these
stories but the fact that I didn't shade them to fit your worldview or
what you think will happen doesn't represent faults with my choices.



Your complaint that I parrot Gerghty rings a bit hollow for two
reasons...one, I think we need to withhold judgment before going to far
on the watermelon story. He jumped right into it. I think that shows a
different take on its weight as it stands now. That doesn't mean it's not worth linking and discussing.



Second,, you seem to want me to parrot your take on the story. So it's
not parroting you are worried about, it's disagreeing with you.



You say my call to throw racists (a charge I specifically say doe not
apply to Barbour at this point) under the bus "pablum". Are you saying
that if a Republican is shown to be a racist we shouldn't throw him
under the bus?



Or are you saying my prediction that Barbour, even before this
series of stories would be a tough sell in parts of the country is
"pablum"?



If it's the latter, then you simply know nothing about politics.



It would be unremarkable and uncontroversial to say that John Kerry with
his Brahman accent, pseudo-intellectual affectations and Senatorial
bearing will be a tough sell in places like Virgina, Ohio and Florida (history actually shows it wasn't possible to make that sale).



But because I apply similar reasoning to a Republican, I'm a sell-out?



I remember when we conservatives used to laugh at liberals for their
desire not to hear bad news or be confronted with points of view they
don't like. Good times, good times.



If you want only happy talk, stick to bedtime stories for kids.

















Posted by: DrewM. at December 21, 2010 03:21 PM (HicGG)

176 Drew M. Thank you for the response.
Simple question. Do you believe a compelling argument can be made that Governor Barbour is a racist?
Yes or No response please.

Posted by: Journolist at December 21, 2010 03:25 PM (LwLqV)

177 Barbour may be a dirty racist for all I know, but what I do know is that
nothing presented so far establishes that fact, and that you went along
with the character assassination.
Posted by: slackmac at December 21, 2010 03:15 PM (MiOtx)

Would you have felt better if I had written:

Does Barbour's romanticized version of events fail to convey the whole
picture and give some people more credit than they deserve? I'd say so.
But that's not exactly news either. The profile makes it clear these are
people Barbour grew up around and admired. The fact that he cuts them
slack the rest of us wouldn't does not exactly shock me. It's a pretty
human reaction. Does this mean Barbour is a racist? Of course not. Does
it mean Barbour supported segregation then or supports it now? Of course
not.

Or this:
My one caveat in this (which Geraghty also seems to share) is the
accuracy of the statement. The watermelon anecdote is not in quotes and
Ben Smith, who published the tip, describes the original article in the
NY Times as "almost sneering about Barbour".

Or this:
Barbour comes from a period of time where you could say the things he is
accused of and still be considered a moderate in someways on race.

Oh wait, I DID write all of those things.

Now let me quote all the times I said Barbour was a racist....




See the difference?

Why don't you run along and try and find a quote of mine where I, "went along
with the character assassination."

Oh one other thing...fuck you.

Posted by: DrewM. at December 21, 2010 03:29 PM (HicGG)

178 Simple question. Do you believe a compelling argument can be made that Governor Barbour is a racist?
Posted by: Journolist at December 21, 2010 03:25 PM (LwLqV)


Can a case be made? I guess it could if more comes out but not on what we know at this point.

Has it been made? No.

You may notice that I SPECIFICALLY said that yesterday and today.

I don't mind people disagreeing with me but I do really get pissed when they either put words in my mouth or ignore things I've written.

Posted by: DrewM. at December 21, 2010 03:31 PM (HicGG)

179 DrewM:

you wrote (in re: watermelon comment):

if it's true and/or there are more such quotes out there...he's done.

In other words, you accepted that the purported watermelon comment rendered him racist to such an extent that he could not possibly be elected president. Parse it how you like, but you accepted the racist premise.

Oh, and since it seems to be our mutual sign off, fuck you.


Posted by: slackmac at December 21, 2010 03:32 PM (MiOtx)

180 In other words, you accepted that the purported watermelon comment rendered him racist
Posted by: slackmac at December 21, 2010 03:32 PM (MiOtx)

First, note the conditional nature of "IF it's true", I accepted nothing.

Now, IF he says, "Yeah I said that" then yes, he's done as a candidate. That's not a judgment on whether or not I think he's a racist. It's a judgment that in 2012, we will not nominate to run against the first black President, a Governor of Mississippi with that kind of baggage (something can be baggage without being racist or even true), nor if we did nominate him, America would not elect him.

As I said in the fucking post, that's not a judgment on the fairness of the situation, it's a judgment on the political reality of America.

As I said in an email to someone, in normal life you can get away with this stuff but running for President isn't normal life.

Posted by: DrewM. at December 21, 2010 03:40 PM (HicGG)

181 Drew M. I did read your entire post and the background and I do apologize if I missed that. I think it can be a point of agreement as well that great lengths were not made either to indelibly underscore the fact that nothing entered into the record to date, nothing, would remotelysuggest, prove or otherwise confirmGovernor Barbour is indeed a racist.
That my friend is what everyone is so upset about. The fact the left can walz in and character assasinate a sitting Governor and the continued subject matter being discussed is NOT Governor Barbour's established character but two comments the liberal media want's triangulated in the public domain under the "racist" microscope.
This is a travesty.

Posted by: Journolist at December 21, 2010 03:43 PM (LwLqV)

182 DrewM:

I would refer you to each of my posts and point out that I have repeatedly said that EVEN IF TRUE, the remark is not significant (or could not be overcome by pointing to his substantive actions as governor) see posts 135-42 above. I've been on your case because I don't believe that his comment, even if true/accurate, should doom a run for the president (read: is not necessarily racist). Especially so in light of his thirty fucking years of being engaged in politics/governing.

Please re-read/reconsider. And guess what, I'm not paid by Barbour either. I just think that, as a Republican/conservative, he deserves a fair shake. Especially on an influential conservative site such as this.

Oh, and fuck you!

Posted by: slackmac at December 21, 2010 03:56 PM (MiOtx)

183 for the record, although I rarely comment, I read have read almost everything posted on this site since 2004 and enjoy it very much. The guys get shirts! Even DrewM.

BTW, where did bbeck go (if anyone knows)? Haven't seen her for ages. Remember arguing with her in the old days.

Posted by: slackmac at December 21, 2010 04:04 PM (MiOtx)

184 Oh, this is rich. Just fucking rich. Instead of countering the accusations of liberal shitbags, repeat the accusations and push the bullshit along. Nothing like propagation of a story to help dirtbags take down one of our own.
Welcome to the palinization of every one of our own. Then have the audacity to wonder why they are defended so vigorously. We shouldn't have to be defending our own from within. Use your self righteousness to help us defend our friends instead of helpingour enemiesto tear down.
Some of you have no fucking idea how to fight a slimeball enemy.

Posted by: Steph at December 21, 2010 04:08 PM (kOSds)

185 I would refer you to each of my posts and point out that I have
repeatedly said that EVEN IF TRUE, the remark is not significant (or
could not be overcome by pointing to his substantive actions as
governor)
Posted by: slackmac at December 21, 2010 03:56 PM (MiOtx)


That's great, it won't bother you. That doesn't change the fact that I think it will bother a lot more people than won't be bothered by it.

I'm going to stick with my position that a difference of opinion with you isn't an act of cowardice or treason to conservatives the world over.

Posted by: DrewM. at December 21, 2010 04:18 PM (HicGG)

186 Posted by: Journolist at December 21, 2010 03:43 PM (LwLqV)

I get people are upset over the raw deal Republicans get, I really do. As I said yesterday, the media take on this and the double standard was the most interesting part of the story and one I took on in my post yesterday.

I think people often want to see their anger and raw emotions reflected on the front page posts. Sometimes they are (usually by Ace) but for the most part the front page is too introduce a topic, provide background, context and analysis.

Remember, the number of people who comment on any given blog is a fairly small subset of the total readers. The front page needs to draw attention, give people a reason to come back and generate traffic. It's just a different dynamic than a comment.

When I started writing here, it was a much smaller group. I felt I was writing for my fake-internet friends, just like the comments were. Then you start seeing your stuff in other places, traffic grows and you don't "know" the readers like you did at one point because their are so many. So the posts become more formal, add sourcing, etc.

We're not a news generating blog, we don't have the resources to do original reporting (yet), so were always going to be looking to other sources and do more analysis than breaking news. If every front page post was "LIBERALS ARE TEH SUX" it would be boring and we'd have nothing new to say. It would be true but boring.

Posted by: DrewM. at December 21, 2010 04:27 PM (HicGG)

187 Oh, this is rich. Just fucking rich. Instead of countering the
accusations of liberal shitbags, repeat the accusations and push the
bullshit along.
Posted by: Steph at December 21, 2010 04:08 PM (kOSds)

So if we ignore it, it will go away? It won't show up in other outlets? Really?

Did you read my post from yesterday? You know the one that attacked the double standard, that pointed out that Barbour's comments prove nothing about his feelings on race, that view in proper context they are a non-issue and that Democrats have a far larger problem with segregation tainted pols than the Republicans?

How about Ace's post today attacking the double standard?

No, you are right, we're just stenographers for the DNC and out to screw Republicans.

Do you even read this blog?


Posted by: DrewM. at December 21, 2010 04:30 PM (HicGG)

188 With all due respect, we are commenting on this post Drew, not yours from yesterday nor ace's from today. This post. And it does us no favors while planting the seeds for destruction down the road. To be sure, you couched your analysis in terms of "if"--that is, IF Barbour spoke the watermelon word, he is done for. In other words, you accepted the liberal premise--that his watermelon comment thirty years ago renders him an irredeemable racist.

That is what is not helpful. That is the point that the liberal side would like to promote. That is the point you validated here, before all and sundry. Take a step back and think about what you are saying. Barbour, who may have used an off-color stereotypical reference to watermelons (that may have been contemporaneously acceptable, see ace's post above!), perhaps even in a sarcastic or condescending tone, is unelectable as an irredeemable racist (even if you don't necessarily believe that should be the case, it is what it is man).

What's that, you don't think Barbour's a racist? You find that hard to believe? Won't take my word for it? Look, here is a front page post on the very conservative and smart military blog, Ace of Spades, acknowledging as much!!! (courtesy of the pragmatic, reality-based, nay truth-sayer, DrewM). He wouldn't tell you something that wasn't true, see, he says so! If you can't take that to the bank, what can you?

Awesome. Makes debating the point much easier in the future.

Carry on comrade! Tell us like it is (not what it should be, not as you would judge it, but the cold stark reality... that is, be sure to embellish your bona fides)./sarcasm

A proper response, not mine, necessarily, mind you, but a proper conservative response would be to laugh at the underlying premise (watermelon comment circa. 1980s, with unknown intent/context = irredeemable racist) and point out that one does not have to divine Barbour's racial bona fides from a long ago unquote, but could instead evaluate his actions as a governor over the past X years (or the policies he has supported over the intervening thirty years) to see whether he is a person of character that could be supported politically.

But no, if true (NOTE THE "IF"!!!), he's done for. Not that I necessarily agree with that, I'm just giving it to you as I see it, straight-shooter.

Awesome. Wonderful in fact. If you wanted to cement the Republicans=racists now-always-and-forevermore meme.

Otherwise, unhelpful. To understate it.

Posted by: slackmac at December 21, 2010 05:06 PM (MiOtx)

189 Do you even read this blog?
Posted by: DrewM. at December 21, 2010 04:30 PM (HicGG)
Yeah, every day. All day long. For 2 years.
I was commentiong on this post. This. one. And I stand by every word I said.

Posted by: Steph at December 21, 2010 05:11 PM (kOSds)

190 I confess to an overstatement above, suggesting that this post (meaning Drew's front-page post, not my mere comment mind you), alone and by-itself, sowed the seeds of our future destruction. Alas, I plead that you will give me a little literary leeway.

Posted by: slackmac at December 21, 2010 05:13 PM (MiOtx)

191 Posted by: slackmac at December 21, 2010 05:06 PM (MiOtx)

You vastly over-estimate the influence of this blog. If you think national Democrats are going cite this post as part of their anti-Barbour efforts you nuts.

First, it's not a big enough blog.

Second, this blog is poison to politicians. It's too unreliable in terms of blue content. Do you really think the DNC is going to cite for authority a blog that has a running bit a masturbating Ewok?

Most importantly however, they can't cite this post as critical to Barbour since it wasn't. I don't see how quoting a post that says Barbour isn't a racist is going to serve as proof he is.

Finally...I don't care. As I mentioned, I don't get paid by Barbour. He made a mess. If he wants to pay me to clean it up, we can talk. Until then...not my job.

This is a major story in politics and to say that this blog should ignore it because it's just darn inconvenient for a Republican is insane.

Closing your eyes, putting your hands over your ears and shouting "I CAN"T HEAR YOU" is the strategy of a six year old.


Posted by: DrewM. at December 21, 2010 05:20 PM (HicGG)

192 slackmac and Steph

If I or this blog had the kind of power you think we do, you do realize McCain never would have been nominated, right?

Posted by: DrewM. at December 21, 2010 05:22 PM (HicGG)

193 did anyone suggest that this blog should ignore the story?

No.

Handle it with the deftness it deserves, nay, as others have suggested above. And saying that you owe Barbour nothing because your not on his payroll makes you seem petty and small.

You may not care. I do. I don't want to end up with nobody but McCain again. That said, a conservative (or any fair-minded person) should point out that the underlying premise (watermelon equals racist) is unfair, regardless of whether the person being accused is paying you for comment. Do you defend other candidates/politicians when they are unfairly maligned absent a remunerative agreement between you?

Posted by: slackmac at December 21, 2010 05:30 PM (MiOtx)

194 Handle it with the deftness it deserves, nay, as others have suggested above.
Posted by: slackmac at December 21, 2010 05:30 PM (MiOtx)


So what it comes down to for you is that I and other posters should write what some commenters want us to write. Failing to do that makes me a sellout?
Do you defend other candidates/politicians when they are unfairly maligned absent a remunerative agreement between you?

Yes I do but absent payment, I will write what I think and about what interests me, not what a candidate would want me to write.

BTW- I DID defend Barbour. I didn't do so in terms you would have but that's not my problem.

Posted by: DrewM. at December 21, 2010 05:36 PM (HicGG)

195 Anyhow, Obama has proven that the stereotypists were right all along. Or at least in the ballpark.

BTW, what brand does he smoke? I'm guessin' Koolz.

Posted by: J. Moses Browning at December 21, 2010 06:30 PM (1H3e9)

196

Hello,



Send Christmas Gifts. Buy more to send. On this site==== == http://www.1shopping.us/ ,



good place for shopping, fashion, sexy, personality, maturity, from here to begin. Are you ready?



===== http://www.1shopping.us/ ====



Air jordan(1-24)shoes $33



Handbags(Coach l v f e n d i dg) $35



Tshirts (Polo ,ed hardy,lacoste) $15



Jean(True Religion,ed hardy,coogi) $30



Sunglasses(Oakey,coach,gucci,A r m a i n i) $15



New era cap $12



accept paypal and free shipping



====== http://www.1shopping.us/ ====

Posted by: shopping at December 23, 2010 09:11 AM (nqMEz)

197 The Personalized lifestyle of Tory Burch Tory Burch was given birth throughout Pit Forge,Tory Burch Flip Flops, Pennsylvania, Burch ended up being increased along with her several siblings (Robert,Tory Burch Wallets, James along with Leonard) in a Pit Forge farmhouse wherever the woman's mom, Reva Robinson,Tory Burch Handbags, still existed with '08. The property can be a 250-year previous Georgian at the Area Forge Countrywide Famous Park. Your ex mummy is a an old actress exactly who dated Steve McQueen in addition to Marlon Brando. The girl daddy, Buddy Robinson, who was your affluent opportunist, is currently deceased. Her dad handed down a stock exchange harley seat and also a report mug company. They was involved with Acceptance Kelly along with Joan Bennett. Tory's daddy had been fourteen a long time are over the age the woman's mom. Burch inside Porto Ercole, Italia, sporting your Tory Burch Wallets tunicTory functioned because captain from the tennis games staff as well as rode horse with the Agnes Irwin University. Tory i went to the particular College of Pennsylvania,Tory Burch Heel, where by your lover majored with skill background, as well as graduated throughout 1988. Through 1997 by means of 2006,Discount Tory Burch Boots, your lady was married to help Christopher Burch, the entrepreneur with World-wide-web Budget Team, a new angel investor organisation built through Walter Buckley in addition to Ken Monk. Earlier your lover had been married to Bill Macklowe, youngster regarding real-estate tycoon Harry B. Macklowe. Your lady was involved with Lance Armstrong with TWO THOUSAND AND SEVEN. Famously, she's also been connected to Lyor Cohen. Immediately after divorcing by Burch,Tory Burch Boots Sale, your woman continued to live having your girlfriend youngsters within their San francisco Metropolis condo. Burch possesses about three son's along with several stepdaughters. Adjusted March 2010,Tory Burch Flats, the girl infants ended up twins babies Henry in addition to Nicholas, grow older 16, as well as Sawyer, 7 and also her move youngsters had been Alexandra, TWENTY FOUR; Elizabeth, 23, as well as Louisa, SOMETHING LIKE 20. This is actually the personalized lifestyle of Tory Burch.

Posted by: Tory Burch Reva Flats at December 24, 2010 02:44 AM (MJyoq)

198 About the Haley Barbour you told,so this is good to read and i will say tha the Haley Barbour,gained a national spotlight in August 2005 after Mississippi was hit by Hurricane Katrina. Barbour won re-election as Governor in 2007,have some of great and brilliant services.Good to see some of the useful details.
Dissertation

Posted by: Dissertation at March 18, 2011 06:00 AM (iyUhC)

199 Wall, wood and tile; furthermore discounted wall decals it could be removable and re-usesable.When you use our website, you are responsible for
keeping secrete of wall vinyl decals your account information and password wall stickers kids and restricting the
entry to your computer and you also approve to respond all the activities with
your quotes stickers for the wall account and charms thomas sabo North Carolina let nearly all of a 15-point, second-half lead slip away,
but the Tar Heels recovered and held on for a 86-74 wall decals murals victory From political pundits to college
diaries. Everyone seems to be keeping over
Kentucky cheap tiffany jewelry UK in the second round of the NCAA women's basketball tournament over
Kentucky in the second round outhern wall decals on A blog is basically a journal or diary that is available on the net. Web
blog is the new media of the world. a Blog nowadays.password.The tiffany engagement rings comment is not there. I go ahead and click off on accepting comments and trackbacks on the older ones.

Posted by: Tiffany and Co jewelry at March 22, 2011 06:12 AM (LPc9b)

200 We provides hundreds of cheap
jerseys and authentic
jerseys.free and fast shipping NBA jerseys,NFL jerseys,MLB jerseys,NHL jerseys.In our store,you can
chase after every kind of chase after Football jerseys,college jerseys and basketball jerseys.
http://www.goodlucky-jerseys.com

Posted by: NBA jerseys at March 31, 2011 05:06 AM (om1Op)

201









100














IraqI Directory

Iraqi CHat



















Posted by: at May 14, 2011 09:10 PM (w5fEI)

202 Welcome to our Coach Bags outlet to enjoy the cheap Coach handbags and 100% service. All kinds of Coach Handbags On Sale in our Discount Coach Handbags store which price are much low then the same competitors. You may ask these handbags are so cheap that the quality must be very poor. You do not have to worry about the quality of these handbags, because these handbags all made of classy material. So you can rest assured when you Buy Coach Handbags. At the same time, our online shop also supply the Coach Wallets and Coach Sunglasses. They are all the most recognized and popular brands in the world. If you want to buy durable and low price products, then come to our Coach website will not let you regret.gucci watches
CHEN

Posted by: skyxxxxx at June 08, 2011 10:29 PM (+cyRZ)

203

Normal
0

7.8
0
2

false
false
false














MicrosoftInternetExplorer4






/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:ͨ;
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0cm;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}










Launched within yr 1980 from the eyewear giant De
Rigo, reduce price law enforcement cheap
oakley sunglasses the major branded assortment
of law enforcement sunlight shades. This brand name derived its name by getting
inspired from the design and oakley
sunglasses the glasses.Most of us use fake discount
oakley sunglasses purchase to shield our eye
from damaging sunrays. utilization of sunlight shades can be medially advised
as sunlight shades have proved to acquire effective in blocking damaging ultra
violet rays and blue lighting present within sunlight. many different designs
of eyeglasses have been completely produced for people nowadays of all walks of
existence but keeping in mind. this type of type is law enforcement sunlight oakley
sunglasses outlet sunlight shades are also
recognised as law enforcement sunlight shades chiefly generally because this
type has gained immense acceptance between law enforcement officials. on this
type of sunlight shades, a specific mirror coating is utilized concerning the
lens to make certain the fact that lens appears like a mirror. Besides, this
coating even more blocks the lighting from reaching the consumers eyesight and
therefore may possibly be utilized even although operating in all oakley
sunglasses online broad variety of law
enforcement sunlight shades introduced in for the newest market is becoming
sporty with casual borders in them representing the common French look. These
frames have been completely produced to fit and flatter a broad variety of find
shapes. Most concerning the frame styles are unisex and therefore they visual
element beautiful on the two guys and oakley
sunglasses sale law
enforcement sunglass is becoming produced targeting male people but increasing
acceptance and appreciation between guys and ladies have encouraged this brand
name to begin its products and options for ladies also. However, in contrast to
other providers of sunlight shades law enforcement sunglass for ladies are not
girly and go properly with people nowadays who crave for that tom boyish look.The
flash coating concerning the contacts facilitateslawenforcement officers. oakley
sunglasses wholesale how? The suspects whom the
business office is managing will not possess the ability to visual element in
for the eye concerning the officer. not just this, the mirror concerning the
lens safeguards the eyesight by reflecting the glare and therefore improves
clarity of vision



Posted by: cheapoksunglasses at June 16, 2011 08:45 AM (cMbyd)






Processing 0.02, elapsed 0.0457 seconds.
15 queries taking 0.0194 seconds, 212 records returned.
Page size 157 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.7 alpha.

MuNuvians
MeeNuvians
Polls! Polls! Polls!
Frequently Asked Questions
The (Almost) Complete Paul Anka Integrity Kick
Top Top Tens
Greatest Hitjobs

The Ace of Spades HQ Sex-for-Money Skankathon
A D&D Guide to the Democratic Candidates
Margaret Cho: Just Not Funny
More Margaret Cho Abuse
Margaret Cho: Still Not Funny
Iraqi Prisoner Claims He Was Raped... By Woman
Wonkette Announces "Morning Zoo" Format
John Kerry's "Plan" Causes Surrender of Moqtada al-Sadr's Militia
World Muslim Leaders Apologize for Nick Berg's Beheading
Michael Moore Goes on Lunchtime Manhattan Death-Spree
Milestone: Oliver Willis Posts 400th "Fake News Article" Referencing Britney Spears
Liberal Economists Rue a "New Decade of Greed"
Artificial Insouciance: Maureen Dowd's Word Processor Revolts Against Her Numbing Imbecility
Intelligence Officials Eye Blogs for Tips
They Done Found Us Out, Cletus: Intrepid Internet Detective Figures Out Our Master Plan
Shock: Josh Marshall Almost Mentions Sarin Discovery in Iraq
Leather-Clad Biker Freaks Terrorize Australian Town
When Clinton Was President, Torture Was Cool
What Wonkette Means When She Explains What Tina Brown Means
Wonkette's Stand-Up Act
Wankette HQ Gay-Rumors Du Jour
Here's What's Bugging Me: Goose and Slider
My Own Micah Wright Style Confession of Dishonesty
Outraged "Conservatives" React to the FMA
An On-Line Impression of Dennis Miller Having Sex with a Kodiak Bear
The Story the Rightwing Media Refuses to Report!
Our Lunch with David "Glengarry Glen Ross" Mamet
The House of Love: Paul Krugman
A Michael Moore Mystery (TM)
The Dowd-O-Matic!
Liberal Consistency and Other Myths
Kepler's Laws of Liberal Media Bias
John Kerry-- The Splunge! Candidate
"Divisive" Politics & "Attacks on Patriotism" (very long)
The Donkey ("The Raven" parody)
News/Chat