politicalpartypoop.com

Well since the major news media outlets can’t say what I’m about to say, nor can the NAACP, Black Press USA, Oprah, Ebony and remember white folks you can’t say it either or you will be branded a racists!
I’ll consider myself the OTHER representative view of niggas behaving badly.

I hope that you peeped the tired piece of bullshit above, although written 3 years ago you will see similar pieces in black publications in the weeks to come. Consider what we are seeing on TV today. Fucken black (police officers!) going into Walmart in plain view of network cameras stealing shoes, televisions, FUCKEN SAINTS JERSEYS!
A city that continues to fill up with water and thousands of people likely trapped in attics of homes and badly in need of assistance for able bodied individuals and these crazy bastards are carting baskets full of shit that they cannot possible use.
One clip I saw was a dude carting off a TV on his shoulders. In stunned amazement I was trying to comprehend the utter stupidity of this dude. Just what the fuck did he think he was going to be watching on that TV tonight, tomorrow, next week, next month! YOUR TOWN IS FLOODING, THERE IS NO, NOR WILL THERE BE ANYTIME SOON ELECTRICITY YOU DUMBASS!!

All of these fucken chickenheads scrambling to grab goods and possessions that are now meaningless in the grand scheme of things. What makes it worse these are the fucks who will be screaming at President Bush and the Federal Gubment to HELP THEM!
Firefighters, National Guard members will leave their homes and families and risk their lives trying to save some of these bastards and I guarantee you the black establishment will sweep this ridiculous behavior under the rug and excuse it like the fucken idiot above did.
They will say if whitey would have put more money in the hands……(NOTICE I SAID PUT, GIVE, HAND OUT WHATEVER), the looting would not have occurred. BULLSHIT!
Want to know why black incarceration rates are so high, unemployment, dropout rates, teen pregnancy, just fucken name it you are watching it unfold in New Orleans.
In a time of such terrible tragedy and the need of assistance e from our fellow man these niggas resort to the lowest common denominator of human behavior.
Kids that are watching their parents, relatives or if I can use the term adult role models loosely will almost certainly guarantee another generation of under achieving, lazy, selfish fucks who will sit on their ass cry to the gubment for assistance and say whitey made me do it.
Check out what is already being circulated as an excuse:

Why the neglect? Though it is best known as a tourist destination, New Orleans is one of the poorest cities in the U.S., with a population that is 67 percent African American. In the parish, or county, of Orleans, 34 percent of households live below the federal poverty line–an issue that was the focus of a new community coalition at a meeting just a few days before Katrina hit.

“Affluent white people fled the Big Easy in their SUVs, while the old and car-less–mainly Black–were left behind in their below-sea-level shotgun shacks and aging tenements to face the watery wrath,” activist Mike Davis wrote of the evacuation plans for Ivan. “New Orleans had spent decades preparing for inevitable submersion by the storm surge of a class-five hurricane. Civil defense officials conceded they had 10,000 body bags on hand to deal with the worst-case scenario. But no one seemed to have bothered to devise a plan to evacuate the city’s poorest or most infirm residents.”
AFFLUENT WHITE PEOPLE! ARE YOU FUCKEN KIDDING ME!?

I’m a bit embarrassed and ashamed. These lack of priorities is what Bill Cosby has been ranting about for years. The black press, the Jessie Jackson’s, Al Sharpton, NAACP and every other black organization will stay silent, they won’t say shit. They won’t offer assistance they will only bitch and complain about Bush and whiteys screwing them over. Putting these people in a position to loot and behave badly. FUCK THAT!
How many times will I have to read the “400 years of oppression” shit?
Its bullshit and we all know it.
However, the black liberal establishment has a stake in keeping these people poor, ignorant and helpless.

We shall count this as a Snoopitorial.

Liberal Traitor said… On Profile of Deceit ; Administration Suppresses Racial Profiling Report
We seem to be in agreement that this is pretty fucked up. And you seem to not have a whole lot of trust for the administration. Yet you also seem to be in support of them much of the time. Or is it just that your dislike for liberals is greater than your distrust of the administration?

I’m not an individual who follows an individual or a party line blindly. There is mistrust, deceit, racism in both political parties.
However, yes I have a far greater dislike of liberal ideology.
Here is an old response that I posted on Lawrence.com basically sums up how I feel.
Keep in mind one of my favorite TV shows was All in the Family and while everyone concentrated on the stuff Archie use to say nobody paid attention to Meathead and his ridiculous clichéd liberal rants. Even as a young kid, I saw then how condescending and racists liberal ideology was, and yes I have held on to that.

Posted by Snoop on September 12, 2004 at 6:07 p.m. Lawrence.com

Snoop, from now on, I am no longering replying to your comments. Who gives a shit, Damm!!!

Cause when you respond to me you have to deal with what you see when you look into the mirror.
I had you pegged 2 months ago……..

Clevergirrrl

Liberal is a hollow term, and basically I dont think anything of the term in general. People simply state that they are Liberal because they say they are open minded, flexible in their thinking and understanding of the world around them. Open to new ideas and tolerant of other cultures, thoughts and mindsets.
Being open minded is not evil but the term does not accurately describe the true mindset.
Compassionate liberalism is a scary thought.
TRUE liberals are ultimate elitist, they are only tolerant of other cultures as to tap into the meaning of them or understanding them. Like visiting the zoo and gawking at the animals.
TRUE liberal believe that their intellectual superiority and supreme understanding of the world around them entitles them to micro manage the world around them.
TRUE liberals insist on telling you why YOU should not buy from a particular store,
Where you can and cannot smoke, drive a certain type of car, eat certain foods, why you should not eat meat, why YOUR kids should not play video games or watch TV.
TRUE liberals throw money into the ghettos because they don’t want the Negros out of the ghetto they just want to make it more comfortable for them.
TRUE liberals believe that dark children learn better when surrounded by pigment challenged individuals. Poor kids SHOULD go to public schools but THEIR kids are entitled to quality education.
TRUE liberals say if Johnny does not know that 2 plus two equals four we should get him to come to grips with his answer of five and make him feel good about it.
People throw out liberal and conservative and we automatically come to basic conclusions about what it’s suppose to mean.
TRUE liberals will actually have a meeting to discuss the plight of the non-whites in a given community and not invite the very people they are discussing.
TRUE liberals may even have a blog, discussing cultural diversity without asking varied multi-pigmented individuals what they feel is the cultural climate of a given community.
TRUE liberals are far more racists, xenophobic, govern out of pity and are just as class centered than many so called conservatives. Yes, that includes the confederate flag waving, gun rack, camouflage, and card carrying NRA, 700 club-watching folks.
So the term “compassionate liberalism” is frankly a frightening term to me.

Great Post, Comparing that hack Cindy Sheehan and Sally Goodrich a mother who TRULY dedicated her time to improving the world instead of bitching about something she know nothing about and pimping herself to the media.
She was recently featured on ABC News did a feature on her. This blog does her justice.

Two Mothers

We’ve all heard of Casey Sheeehan’s mother. She’s everywhere. A Google News search for “cindy sheehan” turns up almost 16,000 references. But I’ll bet you’ve never heard of Sally Goodrich.

A North Adams educator whose son died in the World Trade Center attacks will leave for Afghanistan this weekend to see the completion of her yearlong project to build a 16-classroom school for more than 500 children ages 6 to 13.
Sally Goodrich said workers are striving to finish construction before she arrives in the country, on a trip she is determined to take despite the increase in violent incidents occurring at the Afghanistan and Pakistan border. …

The school project evolved from the Goodriches’ correspondence with U.S. Marine Maj. Rush Filson, a childhood friend of their son, who described the needs of Afghan schools. … At this point, the Goodriches’ school project is undergoing the finishing touches, which includes a protective wall around the building, at its undisclosed location in a quiet village. The school also needs furniture, landscaping and other necessities that the Goodriches hope to provide through the Peter M. Goodrich Memorial Foundation. Over the summer, an anonymous donor contributed $10,000 and more than $6,000 came from other donations.

They are building the school according to the Afghan Ministry of Education’s guidelines and funding the project through donations from American citizens.

Read the whole article for the details. Sally Goodrich took her grief and channeled it into something positive. She hasn’t prostituted the death of her son. She hasn’t attached herself to publicity whores like Code Pink, Michael Moore, or MoveOn. She chose her task, and went about it with a quiet dignity. When you go a Google News search for “sally goodrich”, guess how many references turn up.

READ FULL BLOG ENTRY

By SHAILA DEWAN
New York Times

Mutilated is the word most often used to describe the face of Emmett Till after his body was hauled out of the Tallahatchie River in Mississippi. Inhuman is more like it: melted, bloated, missing an eye, swollen so large that its patch of wiry hair looks like that of a balding old man, not a handsome, brazen 14-year-old boy.

But if the lynching of Emmett Till was, as the historian David Halberstam called it, the first great media event of the civil rights movement, it became so largely because of the photographs of that monstrous face.

Today (August 28) is the 50th anniversary of the killing, an occasion for a new documentary film, re-examinations of the story in the news media and updates on the progress of a reopened investigation. The Clarion-Ledger, a newspaper in Jackson, Miss., reported last week, for example, that the body federal agents exhumed from Emmett’s grave near Chicago in June had been positively identified through DNA.

But little has been said about the photographs of Emmett taken at his open-coffin viewing, which were first published nationally in Jet magazine and shunned by mainstream news organizations but have since become iconic, textbook images of the Jim Crow era. In “Eyes on the Prize,” the PBS documentary on civil rights, Charles Diggs, a former congressman from Detroit, called the Jet photographs “probably one of the greatest media products in the last 40 or 50 years, because that picture stimulated a lot of anger on the part of blacks all over the country.”

Chris Metress, the editor of “The Lynching of Emmett Till,” a book that includes contemporary news accounts of the killing and trial, said: “You get testimony from white people coming of age at the time about how the case affected them, but you don’t get them testifying, like countless blacks, that the Jet photo had this transformative effect on them, altering the way they felt about themselves and their vulnerabilities and the dangers they would be facing in the civil rights movement. Because white people didn’t read Jet.”

In the summer of 1955, Emmett left his home in Chicago to visit his relatives near the Delta town of Money, Miss. Unaccustomed to the timid attitudes of his cousins toward whites, Emmett whistled at a white woman, Carolyn Bryant. Four days later, the woman’s husband, Roy Bryant, and his half-brother, J. W. Milam, showed up at the house of Emmett’s great-uncle in the middle of the night and asked for “the boy that did the talking.”

Three days later his body, beaten and shot with a .45, was found in the river with a cotton gin fan wired around his neck. Weeks after the killing, Mr. Bryant and Mr. Milam were brought to trial but were acquitted by an all-white jury. The foreman said that the jury had accepted the defense argument that the body was so distorted that it could not be recognizable as Emmett Till and that it was, instead, a plant by civil rights groups. Mr. Bryant and Mr. Milam later admitted their guilt in a paid interview with a magazine writer.

Emmett’s mother, Mamie, insisted on seeing her son’s body. Then she decided to have an open-coffin viewing. Thousands of people attended. The image of young Emmett in a straw hat was taped to the coffin for comparison. She called her later book, co-written with Christopher Benson, “Death of Innocence.”

Gus Savage, editor and publisher of The American Negro: A Magazine of Protest, said he had been the first to print a photograph of Emmett Till’s body, taken by a schoolteacher named Lester Davis before the public viewing, when the corpse was on a slab in the funeral home. After the magazine hit the stands and sold out, Jet followed suit, publishing two photographs in its Sept. 15, 1955 issue - almost two weeks after the open viewing. The Chicago Defender followed two days later.

No mainstream publications, even those that editorialized against the acquittal, printed the photographs, Mr. Metress said. He said the difference in coverage in the white Southern papers and black papers was obvious from the headlines: “Were never into meanness, says accused men’s mother,” The Commercial Appeal in Memphis reported. “Mother’s tears greet son who died a martyr,” The Chicago Defender replied.

When Jet’s publisher, John H. Johnson, died this month, many remembered the decision to publish the pictures as one of his greatest moments.

Lawrence Aaron, a columnist for The Record, of Hackensack, N.J., recalled seeing the Jet issue in a waiting room: “On every trip to the dentist’s office, we’d go through the same routine: Yes, it is for real. No, it’s a Martian. Yes, it is fake. No, it can’t be fake if it’s printed in a magazine. Yes, it’s human. No, it can’t be - nobody would ever do that to a kid.”

Simeon Booker, 87, the reporter for Jet, said David Jackson, now dead, had taken the coffin photos used by that magazine. “I thought at first it was a horrible looking picture.” But, he said, it was the first time Jet had to reprint an issue to meet demand.

The challenges of covering the trial were so great that an editor who came to Mississippi collapsed and was sent home, Mr. Booker said.

“The first day we got there we went over to Till’s grand-uncle’s house and men in a car with guns forced us to stop,” he said. After the trial, he said: “The first thing we had to think about was getting to Memphis and getting out of there, because we were marked men. And they put us all on one plane, the reporters and witnesses and everybody.”

Mose Wright, the grand-uncle, and other blacks who testified for the prosecution left Mississippi for good.

The new documentary, “The Untold Story of Emmett Louis Till,” credited with helping persuade prosecutors to reopen the Till investigation, is rooted in the reporting of the black newspapers at the time, tracking down witnesses originally named by reporters like L. Alex Wilson and James Hicks, who continued to investigate long after the trial was over. The filmmaker, Keith Beauchamp, 34, remembers seeing the coffin photographs when he was 10, and says their effect was indelible, just as it was for blacks in the 1950’s. His parents sat him down and told him the story.

“It was an educational tool that was told to many African-American men, to teach us about the racism that exists in society today,” he said. “This has been a major part of our makeup growing up in this country.”

What continues to be increasingly funny is all of the liberals blogs that I read on a regular basis NOT ONE, even mentions the issue of the black voters and their impact on the next election. This is an example of how liberals are remarkably blind to the issue of millions of what was deemed as “guarantee” votes potentially slipping through their fingers.
You libs just keep writing about how Bush and the republicans are in trouble, all of this shit on Iraq, and giving Cindy Sheehan all of this meaningless attention.
Some of you white people don’t pay attention. Black folks don’t give a fuck about Sheehan.
They don’t give a fuck about the war either because they are busy dodging their own bullets, struggling to get by and watching on TV crime drama cases like Holliway receive obscene amounts of attention while folks in the hood are ignored.
Young black women go missing all the damm time but they don’t receive daily coverage on the Today show and CNN.
The more you Democrats give people like Sheehan all of this bullshit attention, millions of dollars going to promote this fucken media circus and the more you liberals continue to ignore the issues that are important to Black Americans and other minority groups, health care, job opportunities, educational opportunities you will lose a valuable base of support.

Bloggers are suppose to be the grass roots of 411, but you liberal bloggist just regurgitate the same crap on each others blogs. The only thing you know is what the Daily Kos tells you.
Which frankly Snoop is counting on.

By Brian DeBose
The Washington Times

WASHINGTON — Blacks in both major political parties have felt “marginalized” for decades, but Republicans hope a new strategy will help them reach out to black voters and politicians.

Ken Mehlman, chairman of the Republican Party, formed the “Give Us a Chance and We’ll Give You a Choice” strategy after the 2004 election showed gains for President Bush among black voters.

More than a dozen black politicians are running on the Republican ticket in 2006 for Senate and House seats, governorships and other statewide races.

It could turn out to be the most diverse Republican slate since the mid-1990s, said J.C. Watts Jr., chairman of GOPAC, a Republican political action committee. Mr. Watts won a House seat in Oklahoma in 1994, becoming the first black Republican to reach Congress since Sen. Edward W. Brooke III, Massachusetts Republican, who served from 1967 to 1979.

“I’ve often said that most black people don’t think alike, most black people just vote alike, and if Republicans understood black people better, you would have 70 to 75 percent of black people voting Republican,” Mr. Watts said.

Mr. Mehlman’s mantra that “the party of Lincoln will not be whole until more African-Americans come back home” has created a movement that black Republicans said they will use to make significant gains in the largely monolithic, Democratic-voting base.

“The black vote is the most marginalized in the country” because Democrats know that no matter what their candidates look like or say, blacks will vote for them, and Republicans will find a way to win without them, Mr. Watts said.

Black Democrats said the change would be welcome.

“I think it is a great thing that both Democrats and Republicans are going to compete for our votes,” said Rep. Melvin Watt, North Carolina Democrat and chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus.

He said as long as both parties are willing to “substantively” address the disparities between blacks and whites and virtually every other minority, “it is good for America.”

Retired Army Lt. Col. Frances P. Rice, chairwoman of the National Black Republican Association (NBRA), said her group aims to “enlighten” black voters about the Republican Party and make the black community one that supports two parties.

She said the Democrats’ insistence that blacks rely on socialism — welfare, public housing, public schools — is destroying the community.

“Blacks after 40 years of Democrat control are complaining about the same things: poorly performing schools, dilapidated public housing,” Col. Rice said. “Socialism has not worked anywhere it has been tried. Why should we do it here?”

Groups such as NBRA are getting their message across with candidates like Richard Holt, a 25-year-old Republican who is running for the House seat in Ohio being vacated by Rep. Ted Strickland, a Democrat.

He said the time for black diversity in both parties is now and that the movement will be successful despite attacks by Democratic activists.

“It is difficult because of people like Harry Belafonte and Dick Gregory calling us ‘whitey’ and tyrants when all we want to do is make sure that our families are strong, that we own our own businesses and that our children get a good education,” Mr. Holt said.

A victory for Mr. Holt would be historic on several fronts. He would become the youngest man ever elected to Congress. But more important, Mr. Holt said, is an opportunity to be a role model for young black men.

“Typically, black men my age are not politically involved and not Republican, and I am. More blacks are moving from the inner city to the suburbs. We have a good education, we have good jobs and we can see now that we can succeed, and socialism is not the answer,” he said.

Mr. Watt said he would welcome any new black Republican congressmen into the CBC.

“I just hope it is not a public relations game. … The issue is how we address the issues facing black Americans, not putting up a public face or what someone looks like,” he said.

Ok, I feel like shit and I’m up WAY too damm early and I’m blogging. Oh well.
Lets kill some time shall we………..

The other evening I’m on the Lawrence.com Blogs
and there is a lively discussion about the content of the article I posted below Woman Files Complaint After Doctor Tells Her She’s Obese
Misty does it justice on her blog, funny shit, must read, unless you are FAT then you might want to head to Lawrence and try and beat her down……just kidding, fat people are not violent. OH NOTE HER AWESOME PHOTO….EXCELLENT PHOTOGRAPHY!
Blog entry
Well the discussion turned to folks cracking on fat people in general and how it was mean yada, yada.
And then this dude posted the following:
Posted by bennyoates

When I saw Misty giving her readers the finger in that blog photo, I knew I was in for something outrageously original and so cutting edge as to be positively lacerating.

In a simpler time, Misty’s malevolence would be called what it is, just plain rude. In these times, some will ennoble Misty because she’s striking a blow against political correctness. Thank goodness for the blogosphere; now folks like Misty, who otherwise would have a hard time finding an audience outside their housepets, can communicate 24/7 with similarly bilious bloggers around the globe.

THEN MISTY REPLIES
Posted by mitzibel
I was going to respond, but. . . ah, fuck it.
Snoop, bennyoates, may I have your attention?
Gentlemen, I would like to introduce you to your nemesisses. . .nemesi. . .what’s the plural of “nemesis” again?
Anyway, Snoop, you gotta check out this guy’s collection of past comments (especially the one about how you can’t call me white trash anymore because it’s an insult to YOUR people). I believe we’ve met your evil twin.
Enjoy. . .

Ok, being the crazy right wing Negro on the Lawrence blogs I like to have fun with these pseudo intellectual types.
So I had to find his (bennyoates) “White Trash” comment:

I agree with the criticism of using the term “white trash.”

That term originated in the south among white people who didn’t consider themselves to be trash, i.e., middle class and above, to describe whites whom they thought were on the level of black people. They thought of the term “white trash” as an oxymoron, except when applied to certain whites.
If you didn’t know that, now you do; if you knew it and you still use the term, why?

This response was in reference to a Mike Rigg (former Lawrence.com blogger, sportscaster)
blog entry about a former Kansas University Basketball player J.R. Giddens. Dude was in a fight when he was cut with a knife by this racists white dude where Rigg calls him “white trash”

HERE IS THE STRING:

In reality, here’s all we know about Giddens’ fight on May 19:
1. There was a fight.
2. Giddens’ leg was cut.
3. White trash lives in Olathe.
4. Self may punish Giddens.
After three weeks of intense “reporting,” these are the only undisputed facts from this whole mess. Everything else that you read and hear is just pure speculation.
THEN:
Posted by jahawker2005
Who is alleging the Creswell punk is a racist, besides you? Do you have anything to back it up, or is it just name-calling and conjecture?
Are all poor white people who live in mobile homes and have had brushes with the law “white trash”?

What term would you use for poor black people who live in mobile homes and have had brushes with the law? “Black trash”? Have you ever slurred anybody with that term?
Posted by jahawker2005
And the “white trash” reference was not only uncalled for, it was either mean-spirited or just plain ignorance.
Or perhaps both?
I’m sure the lower class, white people living in Olathe are quite thrilled with the characterization.

THIS OF COURSE IS A BUNCH OF WHINING RHETORIC SO I LOOK UP “WHITE TRASH” AND FIND THIS:

White trash
From Wikipedia,
White trash (extended: poor white trash) is a racial epithet usually used to describe certain low income caucasians, especially those perceived as having crude manners or abnormally low moral standards. According to Oxford English Dictionary, “white trash” first came into common use in the 1830s as an American pejorative used by the slaves of “gentlemen” (rich white Southerners, often plantation aristocrats) against poor Caucasians who worked in the field. The term involves both behavioral characteristics (such as mannerisms, lifestyle) and overt racial characteristics (whiteness). The term is probably used most frequently in the Southeast region of the United States.

I DID NOT KNOW WHAT THE FUCK BENNY WAS TALKING ABOUT SO I RESPONDED:

You don’t have “black trash”, because in the black community it is viewed that Negros, Niggas are already at the bottom of the racial totem pole.
When you are white you have a decided advantage in society and if you are so screwed up (white trash) that you can’t even rise to the perceived social level of white mainstream society, dat is how it is determined. Yes even Negros in trailers or in the projects will refer to “white trash”.

SO LETS TAKE A CLOSER LOOK AT WHITE TRASH…..

Following is a list of stereotypes associated with the term:

Poor hygiene.
Unkempt property, with junk in their yards.
Racist attitudes.
Laziness and lack of ambition.
Unstable families.
Promiscuity and illegitimate children.
Lack of education.
Self-centeredness.
Poor health and obesity.
Crooked, discolored, or missing teeth.
Unruly behaviour in public, including drunkeness and brawling.

OR THE FOLLOWING:

Trailer park trash
From Wikipedia, Trailer park trash (or trailer trash) is a derogatory U.S. English term for people who live in trailers or mobile homes, especially in trailer parks. The term is also applied to lower-class whites in general (hence the occasional “white trailer park trash”), regardless of where they actually live.

Because trailers provide housing at a lower cost than conventional foundation-built houses, and in past decades trailers had few amenities, there is a popular cultural conception that those who live in trailer parks are usually only those who are too poor or lazy to afford anything else. Because trailer parks require a large amount of space, they are found mostly in rural areas or on otherwise undesirable land in the suburbs. These factors combine to make “trailer trash” equivalent to “poor, rural and white”.

EVEN A WEBSITE DEVOTED TO DEM:White Trash World

Are you white trash? Do you know someone who is white trash? Should all white trash be moved to West Virginia and a big brick wall be wrapped around the state to keep em in?

OK I JUST KILLED ABOUT 45 MINUTES…..I THINK I CAN GO BACK TO SLEEP NOW!

IF YOU READ ALL OF THIS, THEN YOU ARE CRAZIER THAN I AM.

Goodnight…….I mean Good Morning, Snoop

Record, The; Bergen County, N.J

FIRST A SNOOPITORIAL: Some of these black websites are just hammering this issue to death and I fail to understand why.
Being a Negro Yes, I have been pulled over by the police on several occasions (when it was NOT warranted, i.e. speeding, traffic violation). I have NEVER been treated unfairly (in terms of police conduct towards me). Why? Because I did not act like an idiot.
What fucken good is it to go into hysterics over WHY you were pulled over?
Conduct yourself in a courteous manner, respect dudes job and know his boundaries.
If you act nervous or act like an ass of course confrontations will result.
After a Super Bowl party (49ers Victory ALL DAY DRINKING) on the way home some young dudes in a sports car, cut me off and almost caused me to run into another car. When I caught up to them at the traffic light they gave me a fucked up look, flipped me off and took off. I being a hothead took off after them. I was in a Toyota Van so U know that chase did not last long. However a policeman who apparently noticed us caught up to me and pulled me over. The other car was long gone. I immediately got out of the car and told the officer point blank that I had been drinking, I had just come from a Super Bowl party, but I chasing after a car who cut me off, I had the license number ect. He told me to calm down and take a deep breath and I then went into more details.
Hell I smelled like alcohol, but the officer figured if I could recall that much detail I was relatively ok to drive. He asked how much further I had to go, I told him a couple of miles. So he said if you promise to go straight home all would be cool. (BTW, yes this was a white cop). When I got home, I called the department and told them to call the officer and thank him for his assistance.
My point is of course not all officers are assholes and racists. I believe we need racial profiling and it is necessary.
Stories like the one below are strictly partisan and anti-Bush B.S.
Are blacks and Mexicans pulled over more? YES! But frankly there was likely a pretty good reason why they got pulled over. Don’t give the police a reason to pull you over.
Where I lived in Oakland, we were the only black family upper middleclass hood. If some brothas were cruising our neighborhood, yes I’m thinking what the fuck are they doing around here? You don’t just “find” your way where we lived.
Black folks need to get over this shit and these black publications need to “get real”.

THE ARTICLE:
The Bush administration is once again displaying its penchant for distorting public information.

This time, it has pushed a respected Justice Department official from his post because he refused to play down the disturbing findings of a study on racial profiling.

The Bush people, you see, don’t like unpleasant facts, especially on problems that the administration has absolutely no intention of addressing.

The unpleasantness here came from a major study by the Justice Department’s statistics bureau.

As reported by The New York Times this week, the study found that police stop white, black and Hispanic motorists at about the same rate. But during the stops, officers use or threaten force against black and Hispanic drivers more often than against whites. They are also far more likely to slap Hispanics with tickets rather than give warnings.

And Hispanic motorists in the study either were personally searched or had their vehicles searched by officers 11.4 percent of the time. For blacks it was in 10.2 percent of stops. For whites - just 3.5 percent.

As deeply troubling as these statistics are, the police bias that they suggest is unfortunately no surprise. Evidence abounds that racial profiling in traffic stops around the country is common.

But when Lawrence Greenfeld, director of the Bureau of Justice Statistics, presented the report to his superiors, he was ordered to tone down its summary of findings.

He refused and was summoned to the White House, where personnel officials urged him to resign just six months before he was scheduled to retire with a full pension.

Ultimately, Mr. Greenfeld was instead demoted.

Administration officials never did announce the findings of this major study or share it with Congress.

Probably they were afraid of giving ammunition to civil liberties advocates who are rightfully questioning the use of racial profiling in terrorism investigations and law enforcement in general.

But controlling information is what this administration is good at.

Previously, administration officials changed wording in government reports to downplay the risks of global warming. And they have altered health Web sites to distort facts on the effectiveness of condoms in protecting against AIDS.

They never let truth get in the way. And who gets hurt, after all?

Just the public.

Lawyer for couple targeted in lawsuit by former Smithtown family says they didn’t send hate mail (to couple in photo), as experts say it’s a fuzzy case
BY THERESA VARGAS
STAFF WRITER
New York Newsday

The lawyer for Karen and Salvatore Rizzo GUILTY yesterday adamantly denied a federal lawsuit’s allegations that the couple targeted a Smithtown neighbor with hate mail, forcing the interracial family out of the neighborhood.

“They’re not racist,” said the Rizzos’ attorney, Peter Stein of Hauppauge. “They’re good people.”
Archie Bunker was a good guy too huh?

The Rizzos were named Monday in the lawsuit filed in Central Islip by former neighbors Lois and Mitchell Fuchs. The suit claims the Rizzos violated their civil rights, including the Fair Housing Act, a federal protection against discriminatory housing practices, through “hateful conduct.”

It is a case, legal experts said, that falls on the blurred line between free speech and overt threats.

“It’s a very gray area,” said fair housing attorney Robert Schonfeld, of Garden City. “You don’t just go around calling people racists or bigots. You have to have a good basis to say so.”

He’s not sure he would have taken the case.

“It probably ends up being a swearing case between the people who thought they needed to leave their home and their neighbors,” Schonfeld said.

This swearing, in essence, began yesterday as two versions emerged.

Stein described the Rizzos as opposed to racism, a couple who has “friends that are African-American and other minorities.”
(THE) some of my best friends are black defense, classic. Anytime some white person makes that statement YOUR GUILTY. Just because you go bowling with a negro, or hang out at a bar, maybe a dinner or two does not mean you are not a racists fuck. It only means you tolerate an ocasional sprinkle of pepper in your life

The $20 million suit came a week and a half after the Fuchses and their seven children moved to North Carolina to escape what they say was racism aimed at Lois Fuchs because she is black and her husband because he is Jewish.

The suit says that since March, the Rizzos had mail containing racial epithets sent to the Fuchses’ home in an attempt to “coerce, intimidate, threaten and/or interfere with the use and enjoyment of their residence, and to cause them to sell their residence.”

Racial slurs were in place of the couple’s last name, including a misspelled derogatory word for blacks and a slur for Jews. But according to the suit, the name-calling started shortly after the Fuchses moved to Smithtown in July 2002.

Stein, however, said he wants to see the documentation. “I don’t feel they have a case at all,” Stein said of the Fuchses. “I feel they have nothing.”

He said the Rizzos had minimal contact with the Fuchses except for a day two years ago when Salvatore Rizzo asked Mitchell Fuchs to stop his cat from defecating in neighbors’ yards. He said Rizzo then called police.
ARE U FUCKEN KIDDING ME!? A CAT???

“He didn’t go over and burn crosses on their front lawn. He did it the legal way,” Stein said.

The Fuchses’ lawyer, Robert Kronenberg, said they would not have filed the suit if they weren’t confident they had a strong case against the Rizzos.

Even so, legal experts said that cases citing the Fair Housing Act can be difficult, especially if there were no criminal charges. The Suffolk County Hate Crime Bureau investigated the mailings with the help of the FBI and the Postal Service, but found that because there was no explicit threat, a crime had not been committed. Det Sgt. Robert Reecks said police interviewed the Rizzos in the course of the investigation but had no legal basis to name anyone as a suspect.

“No lawsuit is easy to prove,” real estate attorney Lita Smith-Mines of Commack said. “But when you have a criminal case that went no place and when you have a harm but it’s not documentable harm, it does make it more difficult.”

Ok so I’m predictable. Not sure how many folks watch the Today show in the A.M. but if there is a piece that is just plain weird yes Snoop will post about it.
Now some of U tough guys who blog about the war in Iraq, evil republicans and all of that crap I Snoop can on occasion get in touch with my feminine side. FUCK YOU….
I know what you are thinking…
Anyway I will admit that saying I have a feminine side is not necessarily a good thing the more stories I see like this, hence this “Girl Crush” story. Yes being the typical guy you use this girl crush thing as a headline and well……U know.
However, seriously people, if this is a serious deal then no wonder some of you women are so jacked up. You complicate the most basic things as a simply friendship into this wonderland of emotional thoughts and giddiness. “I’m immediately nervous around her” nervous about what?!
Guys don’t have girl crushes. I personally think guys are repulsive. I am not a homophobe in the least, but having sweaty palms, and nervousness over meeting another guy is ridiculous. I do not give a shit what another guy drives, the clothes he wears or any other aspect of his being.
I might be wrong and slightly out of line, but admiring another woman is a problem of “lack of” self-esteem in my book.
Anyway, here is the article.
Mrs. Snoop is still laughing at the number of responses from the Can Guys and Girls be “friends”.
All the crap about Iraq, liberals, race issues, Da gubment, nobody comments on that shit unless they totally agree with the blogger, which is chicken shit to me. But talk about sex crap and people for some strange reason feel more comfortable. Now this is not “sex” related, but the very idea of a “Girl Crush” does have those overtones…….does it not?

STEPHANIE ROSENBLOOM
New York Times Style Section

THE woman’s long black hair whipped across her pale face as she danced to punk rock at the bar. She seemed to be the life of the party. Little did she know that she was igniting a girl crush. Susan Buice was watching, and she was smitten.

Ms. Buice, 26, and the dancer (actually a clothing designer) happen to live in the same Brooklyn apartment building, so Ms. Buice, a filmmaker, was later able to soak up many other aspects of her neighbor’s gritty yet feminine style: her layered gold necklaces; her fitted jackets; her dark, oversize sunglasses; and her Christian Dior perfume.

“I’m immediately nervous around her,” Ms Buice said. “I stammer around her, and it’s definitely because I think she’s supercool.”

Ms. Buice, who lives with her boyfriend, calls her attraction a girl crush, a phrase that many women in their 20’s and 30’s use in conversation, post on blogs and read in magazines. It refers to that fervent infatuation that one heterosexual woman develops for another woman who may seem impossibly sophisticated, gifted, beautiful or accomplished. And while a girl crush is, by its informal definition, not sexual in nature, the feelings that it triggers - excitement, nervousness, a sense of novelty - are very much like those that accompany a new romance.

This is not a new phenomenon. Women, especially young women, have always had such feelings of adoration for each other. Social scientists suspect such emotions are part of women’s nature, feelings that evolution may have favored because they helped women bond with one another and work cooperatively. What’s new is the current generation’s willingness to express their ardor frankly.

“Historically, talking about these kinds of feelings has gone in and out of fashion,” said Paula J. Caplan, a sociologist who this fall will teach a course about the psychology of sex and gender at Harvard. Women have not been this blunt in expressing their crushes for several generations, Dr. Caplan said.

The phenomenon has been little studied, but some social scientists say they are glad that it is being discussed more, because it can be a window into how women mature emotionally.

“It’s a little bit like when you’re in elementary school and you first fall in love with someone,” said Leslie Hunt, 34, who manages an arts internship program in New York and who once had such a potent crush on woman that she became sweaty in her presence.

Still, a crush is a relatively mild form of infatuation. People have killed themselves over true love, said Helen Fisher, an anthropologist at Rutgers University who has written extensively on human love. Think of Romeo and Juliet. With a girl crush, Dr. Fisher said, “you won’t kill yourself if she doesn’t want to jump rope with you.” For that reason, girl crushes can give women safe and valuable experience in the emotions of love.

Dr. Fisher, the author of “Why We Love: The Nature and Chemistry of Romantic Love,” said girl crushes are as natural as any other kind of love. But they are romantic without being sexual. Love and lust are distinct urges, Dr. Fisher said.

This was one of the findings she and colleagues from the Albert Einstein College of Medicine and the State University at Stony Brook made when they analyzed brain scans of people 18- to 26-years-old who were experiencing new love. Love and lust, it turned out, could be mapped to several separate parts of the brain.

“The brain system for romantic love is associated with intense energy, focused energy, obsessive things - a host of characteristics that you can feel not just toward a mating sweetheart,” Dr. Fisher said, adding that “there’s every reason to think that girls can fall in love with other girls without feeling sexual towards them, without the intention to marry them.”

Wendy Lim, 26, a student at Harvard Business School, experienced such feelings about a year ago when she met another young woman in a Boston bar. The woman was open and outgoing, and when the evening was over, Ms. Lim very much wanted to talk to her again. “I remember at the end of the night wanting her phone number,” Ms. Lim said, who felt awkward about asking. “I wouldn’t ask a guy for his number.”

As it turned out, the woman asked Ms. Lim for her number. The two saw each other again, and Ms. Lim’s crush quickly blossomed into friendship, a friendship the women now cherish.

Crushes are typically fleeting, and infatuation often turns to friendship in this way. Lisa Lerer, a journalist, and Laila Hlass, a law student, both 25 and both of New York, started their friendship several years ago with a mutual crush. “We’re still in love,” Ms. Lerer said, “but the wooing period is over.”

Tammea Tyler, 28, assistant director of child development services at the Y.M.C.A. of Greater New York, has a crush that looks as if it soon will make the change. The object of her infatuation is a colleague, Denise Zimmer, senior executive for government operation, who is 48.

Ms. Tyler said she admires Ms. Zimmer’s intellect and her inner strength. “She really knows her stuff, and there’s something almost sexy about that,” Ms. Tyler said. “There’s just something really sexy and powerful.”

Ms. Zimmer, when a reporter told her about Ms. Tyler’s feelings, said: “I was very surprised. Sometimes, when you don’t have a direct relationship with someone, you don’t really understand how they’re observing you.”

And while Ms. Zimmer did not say she had a reciprocal crush, she did say that she considers Ms. Tyler talented and grounded and that “it’s exciting to work with someone who has shown that kind of interest.” She added, “It’s a mutual respect.”

Once a crush is revealed, it can change the dynamics of a relationship. “I think that I will be more sensitive and more focused on sharing things with her that I think will help her achieve some of the goals that she has,” Ms. Zimmer said.

Sometimes, though, a girl crush is so strong it makes the object of affection uneasy, killing the possibility of friendship.

Jane Weeks, 44, a freelance art and creative director in Truckee, Calif., knows what it is like to be the object of another woman’s crush. She has encountered a few women who have eagerly adopted her tastes in food and interior design, her favorite colors, even her hairdresser. “At first it’s flattering you’re inspiring them,” she said. “When they parrot back parts of yourself, it’s extremely uncomfortable.”

Ms. Weeks, an outdoorswoman who has hiked through the Andes from Argentina to Chile, said some women are more enamored with what she represents - “some National Geographic chick” - than with who she is. “When you’re on a pedestal, there’s no way but down,” she said. “And it’s lonely up there. You can’t share your weaknesses.”

Pepper Schwartz, a professor of sociology at the University of Washington and the relationship expert at PerfectMatch.com, said she also has been a frequent subject of girl crushes - from her students. Some have made it obvious by bringing gifts, including earrings, flowers and even poems. But Dr. Schwartz does not encourage her students to look at her with starry eyes. She would rather they look to her for guidance on developing their careers.

“You’re a hero because they think you’ve done something unimaginably powerful,” Dr. Schwartz said. “Your job is to show them that they own something equally special.”

Perhaps the last time that young women were as willing as they are now to admit to their attraction to each other was in the 19th century. “Back when Louisa May Alcott was writing, women were writing these letters to each other,” Dr. Caplan said. “They wrote: ‘I miss you desperately. I long to hug you and talk to you all night.’ ” Referring to another woman as a girl crush, she said, is not dissimilar to that 19th century behavior.

But such impassioned expressions of affection were uncommon, for instance, in the 1960’s and 70’s, when homophobia was even more rampant than it is today, Dr. Caplan said. Women were often uncomfortable admitting to strong feelings for other women, fearing that their emotions would seem lesbian, she said. And those same women, older now, can still be shy about expressing their emotions for each other. “Women my age are more likely to say ‘I adore’ or ‘I value’ my women friends,’ not girl crush,” she said.

As for men, to the extent they may feel such emotions for each other, Dr. Caplan said they are less likely than women to express them. They are not reared to show their emotions. “A man talking about emotions about another man? Everybody’s homophobic feelings are elicited by that, and that’s because men aren’t supposed to talk about feelings at all,” Dr. Caplan said.

Susan Malsbury, 24, who lives in Brooklyn and is a booking agent for bands, said that because a girl crush has the potential to become an important part of one’s life, she cannot help but feel a tinge of excitement whenever she meets a fascinating woman to add to her collection of crushes.

“They’re better than boy crushes,” Ms. Malsbury said, with more than a hint of mischief in her voice. “You don’t have to break up with them after two weeks.”

Neoconservatism 101 — Politics of the Wolf
It’s funny how some of the right wingers get all loopy when they hear somebody speak the truth. They can’t handle hearing it. (i.e., Cindy Sheehan, Ambassador Joe Wilson, Scott Ritter, Sen. Max Cleland, Richard Clarke, and Hans Blitz) Nothing bothers these people more than the truth. It drives them up the friggin’ wall. They will smear anybody who speaks the truth. There is a reason for this, and it comes from the very foundation of the Neoconservative belief system.

The Neoconservatism movement is built upon the notion that its better to get people to believe in “noble lies” than have them unsettled by the truth. The father of Neoconservatism, Leo Strauss, argued that:

WHO CARES…….
I love when liberals prove my point. This is a portion of ANOTHER Neocom post

You see, neoconservatism is a political school of thought that suffers from an elevated ego. The proponents of the theory believe they know “what’s good for the rest of us”. These people believe that the American people are better off ignorant and blind, than with actual freewill. In their view, freewill can lead to nihilism. And to them, nihilism will lead to the end of civilization………

C’mon do U give a shit, plez! I think some people just write shit to pat themselves on the back. TAKE THAT, you conservative bastards. Remember Batman when the POWS!, KABOOM!, ZOWEEE! whatever use to come on the screen. Kinda like that.

If you care the Neocon stuff

Thanks to Bloggers like El Borak he can do justice to more serious topics..
El Borak’s Inflation Update

HEY I KNEW THIS MUCH!!

In economics, inflation is an increase in the general level of prices of a given kind. General inflation is a fall in the market value or purchasing power of money within an economy, as compared to currency devaluation, which is the fall of the market value of a currency between economies. General inflation is referred to as a rise in the general level of prices. The former applies to the value of the currency within the national region of use, whereas the latter applies to the external value on international markets. The extent to which these two phenomena are related is open to economic debate.

Sue me! I saw this on the Today Show. This is a no brainer. The answer is Hell no! The only way this works is if the two individuals are not physically attracted to each other in any way. The other is if the two for the most part are usually in-group settings, for example sports league or church activities. Another way is if the woman is on a higher financial or social standing and SHE looks at the guy in a purely platonic manner she simply views him as a friendly voice. But don’t go thrashing your hair around or wearing low cut sweaters around dude, c’mon ladies get real! ON THE OTHER HAND, IF THE GUY IS GAY, YUP THAT COULD WORK!
Let us not be delusional people. Men are pigs, yes there are exceptions but we are talking about a very simplistic species. Note the second prayer.

FEMALE PRAYER
Before I lay me down to sleep, I pray for a man, who’s not a creep, One who’s handsome, smart and strong. One who loves to listen long, One who thinks before he speaks, One who’ll call, not wait for weeks. I pray he’s gainfully employed, When I spend his cash, won’t be annoyed. Pulls out my chair and opens my door, Massages my back and begs to do more. Oh! Send me a man who’ll make love to my mind, Knows what to answer to “how big is my behind?” I pray that this man will love me to no end, And always be my very best friend. Amen.

MALE PRAYER
I pray for a deaf-mute nymphomaniac with huge boobs who owns a liquor store and a bass boat. This doesn’t rhyme and I don’t give a shit. Amen

by Les & Leslie Parrott
The Center for Relationship Development

For many people, the idea of a man and a woman being friends is charming but improbable. “It always leads to something else,” they argue, meaning the relationship eventually becomes romantic or soon fizzles out. Perhaps they are right. After all, in contrast to the countless love stories we see in the movies, male-female friendships are rarely acclaimed or depicted as an ongoing, freestanding bond. How many stories can you think of that richly portray or endorse the lasting, devoted friendship of a man and a woman as an end in itself? Even the acclaimed film When Harry Met Sally, which got a lot of people talking about cross-gender friendships, ultimately proved to be another tale of romantic love. Billy Crystal and Meg Ryan’s tumultuous and endearing friendship is only a stage in the development of the more celebrated attachment of falling in love.

On the other hand, there are those who are surprised by the question and argue that of course male-female friendships are possible; why wouldn’t they be? These people’s persuasiveness almost makes the romantic pull of such relationships seem unusual. They seem to ignore romantic possibilities in these friendships altogether. “One of my best friends is a woman,” the male proponent of this perspective insists. “And it’s never crossed my mind to consider her in a romantic way.” Well, that takes care of that. “My friendships with men are far less complex than my friendships with women,” a female with this position might say. “My guy friends and I can play sports and just have fun.”

In our informal survey of people who are “just friends” with someone of the opposite sex, we heard a number of positive remarks, mostly stemming from the unique way God wired men and women. Over and over, men spoke about how a woman’s friendship provided them with a level of nurturing not generally available in their relationships with men. They said things such as, “I don’t have to play the macho game with women. I can show my weaknesses to a female friend and she’ll still accept me.” When we asked women about their friendships with men, we heard comments such as, “He is a good sounding board for getting the male perspective, the kind I can’t get from my women friends.”

Interestingly, women do not report the same level of intimacy as men do with their cross-gender friendships. Even women who count men among their close friends feel barriers between them. Women will say things such as, “I have fun with men, and they can even be supportive and helpful about some things, but it’s just not the same. If I try to talk to my male friends the same way I talk to my female friends, I’m always disappointed.” At first glance the payoff for men seems to be bigger than the payoff for women in cross-gender friendships, but that’s not necessarily true. Women report great enjoyment from the diversity their friendships with men bring to their lives.

So, does all this mean the answer to the question about men and women being friends is yes? Few relationship issues are that plain and simple. The real answer is “it depends.” So, you say, let’s cut to the chase: What do these relationships depend upon? They depend upon how much each person in the relationship is willing to stretch and grow. These friendships, you see, require both men and women to call upon parts of themselves that are usually less accessible when relating to their typical same-sex friends. For a man, a female friend allows him to express his more emotional side, to experience his vulnerability, to treat himself and his friend more tenderly than is permissible with male friends. What is typically missing for him in this cross-gender relationship, however, is the kind of rough camaraderie he can have with another man. For a woman, friendship with a man helps her express her independent, more reasoned, and tougher side—the harder edge that’s kept under wraps in relationships with women. The downside for her is the relative absence of emotional reciprocity and intensity she normally shares with a female friend.

So, okay, twist our arms for a yes or no answer to this question and the answer will be yes. But we will quickly qualify it: Men and women can enjoy friendship together, but not at the same level they do with friends of the same sex.

Liberals are in attack mode. I know some of these liberals are reading my shit because I have seen several post in blogland defending the angst in the liberal community.
There are articles spouting up referring to the “angry conservative”.
I find this amusing. In the blog Journalists Against Bush’s B.S. (JABBS) there is an article “Conservatives Love to Discuss Mythical “Angry Left,” But Rarely Refer to Actual “Angry Right”.
(SAME STORY, DIFFERENT BLOG).I keep telling you they have marching orders and post the same rants)
Mythical angry left is amusing to me. Folks I have said so many times read the liberal blogs on my sidebar, read the hysteria, the drama, the anger. Now you have the Rolling Stones getting publicity for a song chanting about “NeoCons”.
Liberals feed off anger, hysteria. They have yet to figure out that you cannot scare people into voting for you. You cannot call people stupid and expect them to vote for you. You cannot malign their faith and make fun of their “god”, and expect them to see your point of view.
Go back to this website” The Living Room Candidate, Reagan vs Mondale (This site has video of all campaign commercials since the 50’s) Look at the contrast in the difference in how Reagan and conservatives portrayed America and how liberals viewed America.
In Mondale’s campaign commercials his basic point was if you elect Reagan, YOUR GOING TO FUCKEN DIE!

Yes our world has changed since then. But the personalities of the two parties has not.
This is why you liberals get such a rush by Cindy Sheehan types. There was NOTHING special about this woman, she had no message, she had no insight but you people rallied around her utter nonsense.
I want to see the President. she had no fucken RIGHT to see or visit with him AGAIN!But you liberals rode that pony.

Liberals NEED something to rally around. They NEED to be angry about something. Bush is the perfect target for them. This is also, why the anger does not translate in the polls.
All of you angry pissed off leftist bloggers do nothing but theorize.
I would bet that many of you are not active in your local school board meetings, city council meetings, and neighborhood associations.
I would bet that many liberal types have never been to a local zoning hearing, planning commission meeting, park board, CDBG, Board of Zoning Appeals, Traffic Commission.
Yep, your thinking what the fuck is that shit, and what does that have to do with the NeoCons and Bush destroying America!?
If your asking that question, then that is the problem. This country does not live or die with G. Dub. While you spend all of your time, talent and efforts trying to come up with solving the problems in Iraq………LET ME PAUSE THERE….
We are in Iraq for the long haul. We need to be there, and yes its about Oil so get over it!
………now worry about your communities, schools, kids. Take care of the home front FIRST. I’m not saying ignore what is happening elsewhere, but some of you need to get a fucken grip on yourselves.

HELL SINCE YOU LIBERALS ARE DROWNING US IN THE USE OF THIS TERM, BETTER KNOW WHAT THE HELL IT IS HUH?
by Daniel McCarthy
Washington University

Regular readers of LRC or other right-of-center sites are sure to have seen terms like “neoconservative” and “paleo-libertarian” from time to time. A quick Google search can explain what the words mean, but definitions don’t really answer the more interesting and important question – which one are you?

Naturally you might be neither “paleo” nor “neo.” But for those who’d like to find out I devised a quick quiz during a spell of procrastination a few months back. Here it is. After answering twenty questions it’ll give you my impression of which of ten modern American ideologies is the best fit for you, along with links to sites representing the philosophy of each.

There’s no shortage of political quizzes on the ‘net, but how many others includes “paleoconservative” and “third way” as categories? Not many (or any) that I’ve seen. And to be thoroughly immodest, this quiz is less slanted than most too. I’m a pale-something myself though, so if you find bias that’s where I’m coming from. Other than that the major flaw is that I don’t know modern left-wing ideologies at all well, so the categories of “radical,” “liberal” and “third-way” probably are not how leftists would classify themselves.

The quiz questions are mostly about public policy. An alternative method would have been to ask general philosophical questions, or even to ask for interpretations of historical events. I chose the policy-oriented approach because it seemed most straightforward and clear.

Here, in brief, are the ideologies that the quiz examines. The sketches below aren’t an answer key, but you can probably deduce from the definitions how someone of a given ideology would answer a particular question. That’s the entire principle of the quiz, after all.

Centrist – Just what it sounds like. Someone who doesn’t have any particularly strong ideological leanings in any direction.

Conservative – Specifically a “fusionist” conservative of the National Review - Heritage Foundation mold. Someone who believes in traditional morality and capitalism, and the need for a limited government to allow both to flourish.

Left-libertarian – The quiz uses a mild definition of a left-libertarian, an anti-statist who is somewhat fearful of corporate and religious influence on public life.

Liberal – Supports economic regulation to promote social justice and takes a progressive stance toward moral or cultural issues.

Libertarian – A libertarian opposes most or all government activites. Does not favor much or any government support for either moral or economic systems.

Neoconservative – A “neocon” is more inclined than other conservatives toward vigorous government in the service of the goals of traditional morality and pro-business policies. Tends to favor a very strong foreign policy of America as well.

Paleoconservative – “Paleocons” want less US involvement in foeign affairs than other conservatives and oppose mass immigration. They are also more favorably disposed toward the South and the idea of secession, or at least decentralization, than neoconservatives.

Paleo-libertarian – Similar to other libertarians except for oppostion to mass immigration, and shares the paleocon appreciation of the South.

Radical – Critical of bouregois morality and strongly opposed to capitalism and willing to use state power to achieve desired ends.

Third-way – More supportive of foreign intervention than liberals and less supportive of economic regulation, coupled with more-or-less progressive social views. “Third-way” is to liberal what neoconservative is to conservative.

WIKIPEDIA

Oliver Brown — the plaintiff in the 1954 Brown vs. Board of Education decision — sued a school board, not a public park commission, even though such facilities were also segregated. Within the private sector, discrimination was pervasive.
Yet today, we see marked progress toward racial equality in parks, recreation programs, politics, communications, commerce and industry — but not in schools.
The irony is all the greater, inasmuch as the Supreme Court, in Brown, outlawed only school segregation — on the shaky grounds that such segregation harmed the “hearts and minds” of African American children.
But at a time when the workplace is more often racially mixed than not, Brown’s educational consequences remain ambivalent. On the plus side, most school districts have become as integrated as city demographics allow. But the price paid for this integration has been high — involuntary busing that separated schools from families and communities; large, difficult-to-manage school campuses; white flight; and lowered expectations for students of all social backgrounds.
Worse, the performance of African American students has continued to trail that of whites. Although the gap narrowed in the 1980s, it opened again in the 1990s, a time when the principles of Brown should have been firmly entrenched.
Conventional liberals blame “politicians” for inadequate funding or “society” for its abiding, if now hidden, racism. But money has seldom bought educational progress, and one is hard put to explain the survival of racism in schools when it is on the wane elsewhere.
Conventional conservatives are more apt to “blame the victim,” suggesting that the child-rearing practices of the African American family are the root cause. Yet the disparities in black and white achievement are smallest among preschoolers — the age at which family influences are pronounced and school influence nil.
Closer to the truth are those who blame Hollywood, television and the fashion industry for fostering a drug-infested, anti-learning, “hip-hop” youth culture that burgeoned in the 1990s. But if street culture is the problem, then assigned neighborhood schools are not the solution. Only in rare instances can traditional neighborhood schools suppress the seductions of their immediate environment.
Learning is better fostered when schools draw boundaries that separate classroom life from the street-culture opiates. Because good private schools have discovered this secret, African American students who attend them are much more likely than their public school peers to complete college.
Unfortunately, some still argue against school choice on the grounds that African American families are too ill-informed to pick good schools. But interest, knowledge and commitment will come naturally to all parents, once choice is made available. To claim otherwise is racist in the extreme. School choice is, indeed, the civil rights issue of our time.

By Erin Texeira
The Associated Press

What do you call a minority that is becoming the majority?
News that Texas is the fourth state in which non-Hispanic whites make up less than 50 percent of residents has renewed discussion about whether the term “minority” has outlived its usefulness; critics include both liberals and conservatives.

While some think the complaints are mere nitpicking, others argue the word is increasingly inaccurate, obsolete and even offensive.

“Twenty or 30 years ago, we saw the country as a majority-white country with a black minority, but now you have places where that is a woefully poor description of what is going on,” especially given rapidly growing Hispanic population, said Roderick J. Harrison, a demographer with the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, a black think tank. The word “minority” is “a confusing term as one thinks of today’s population.”

The majority of residents in Texas, California, New Mexico, Hawaii and Washington, D.C., are some ethnicity other than non-Hispanic whites, according to Census Bureau population estimates released last week. Five other states, including New York and Georgia, could make that shift by 2010.

Soon, more than one-third of Americans will live in states where Latinos, blacks, Asians, Native Americans and other ethnic groups outnumber whites. Such demographic shifts have given rise to the term “majority-minority.”

Harrison noted that “minority” refers to more than just numbers.

“The word’s origins are that these are populations that once had the status of minors before the law,” Harrison said. “These are populations that, in one way or another, did not have full legal status or full civil rights.”

When considering doing away with the term, “the question is, how far along the road to full equality have they come?”

Haig Bosmajian, a University of Washington professor emeritus of communications, said that when he researched his book “The Language of Oppression” in the 1960s, “minority” accurately described blacks and other relatively small ethnic groups.

“But by ‘minority’ today we mean a disadvantaged group of citizens. We mean not the privileged at the top, but the underprivileged at the bottom: People who make $10 million a year, we don’t call them a ‘minority,”‘ he said. “There’s power behind these terms.”

Star Parker, who heads the Coalition on Urban Renewal and Education, a conservative black think tank, said the word is “absolutely misused. It’s become an entitlement word, a word for victimization.”

In some cases, particularly regarding affirmative action programs, “minority” often includes women, disabled people and religious groups, said Robin Lakoff, a socio-linguist at the University of California, Berkeley. That’s made the definition murky, in her view.

“It’s now almost too inclusive and not clear enough,” she said.

Still, she added, “sometimes I think we worry too much about semantic hairsplitting. If I had to fight about something, I might not fight about the term ‘minority.”‘

Luke Visconti of DiversityInc, which advises businesses on racial issues, disagreed. He believes that shelving “minority” is important because the word implies second-class status. Modern-day discrimination is more subtle than in years past, he said, and “language is the dominant way today of expressing oppression.”

Whatever the reason, “minority” is already falling from favor in some circles.

“People of color” is often used, particularly in academia. “Multicultural,” “diverse” and “urban” also are common. The University of Michigan has what it calls “minority-cultural lounges” with black, Latino, Asian and Native American themes.

In 2001, San Diego’s city council approved striking “minority” from official usage — and to stop using the term “Southeast San Diego” to refer to neighborhoods that are largely black and Hispanic — to “move away from the pejorative connotations … and move to something that was respectful,” said Danell Scarborough, a human resources manager with the city.

“When I asked people around here about ‘minority,’ they said, ‘Huh? I haven’t heard that in ages,”‘ she said. “There was not a resistance.”

Even the Census Bureau itself is moving in that direction.

Though the bureau has not officially barred its use — last week’s news release on Texas was titled, “Texas Becomes Nation’s Newest ‘Majority-Minority’ State” — many officials avoid “minority” in favor of more specific racial and ethnic labels, said Claudette E. Bennett, chief of the Census racial statistics branch.

The bureau increasingly tries to use specific terms such as “Pacific Islander” and “Mexican-American,” she said.

“If you see the term ‘minority’ in one of our reports,” Bennett said, “there’s going to be a footnote … detailing what exactly it means.”

I HAVE THE OCCASION TO LISTEN TO TALK RADIO AT TIMES THROUGHOUT THE DAY WHILE IN THE OFFICE……EXCEPT TO WATCH JUDGE MATHIS HOWEVER…..
BUT MAYBE IN MY OLD AGE I AM INCREASINGLY ANNOYED BY SHIT PEOPLE DO OVER AND OVER WHEN CALLING TALK SHOWS.
I GENERALLY LIKE TALK RADIO BUT YOU CALLERS FUCK IT UP EVERY DAMM TIME TO THE POINT WHERE I HAVE TO TURN OFF THE DAMM RADIO. IF YOU PLAN TO CALL A TALK SHOW IN THE FUTURE HEED THESE QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS. DON’T FUCK IT UP FOR US LISTENERS. AND GET TO THE FUCKEN POINT! YOUR OPINION IS NOT THAT DAMM IMPORTANT AND NOT THAT DAMM ORIGINAL!!

(Why do so many people say “Thank you for taking my call” when phoning radio talk shows?)
IT’S A TALK SHOW, STUPID! YOU ARE WASTING VALUABLE TIME.
THE QUICKER YOU GET TO YOUR POINT THE MORE LIKELY THE HOST WILL ENGAGE YOU IN CONVERSATION AND TAKE WHAT YOU HAVE MORE SERIOUSLY.

They also always say “first-time caller, long-time listener” which…who cares?
WE DON’T GIVE A SHIT THAT YOU ARE A FIRST TIME CALLER OR LONG TIME LISTENER! STOP TRYING TO KISS THE HOSTS ASS, HE OR SHE DOES NOT CARE.

“How are you?” - “I’m fine, how are you?” - “I’m fine.”
Or “Good morning.” - “Good morning. Nice day, isn’t it?” - “It sure is.”

AGAIN YOUR ON A TALK SHOW JACKASS! YOU DON’T NEED TO ASK THE HOST HOW HE OR SHE IS DOING……..ITS VERY LIKELY SOMEONE ALREADY ASKED THAT….WERE YOU NOT PAYING FUCKEN ATTENTION?

(”turn down your radio,” “keep your question brief,” etc.)

PEOPLE OBVIOUSLY DON’T PAY ATTENTION, YOU CAN’T BE ON THE PHONE AND HEAR YOURSELF ON THE RADIO TOO!!

IF YOU HAVE A BABY OR A DOG IN THE BACKGROUND SHUT THEM THE HELL UP. A CRYING BABY IN THE BACKGROUND IS NOT CUTE.

MY FINAL PET PEEVE…..LISTEN TO THE DAMM SHOW. I DON’T KNOW HOW MANY TIMES PEOPLE WILL MAKE A POINT THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN TALKED ABOUT OR EMPHASIZED, PARTICULARLY BY THE HOST.
IF YOUR NOT ADDING ANYTHING TO THE CONVERSATION, DON’T CALL!!

FYI…..Yes I have called many talk shows, I have been interviewed numerous times for television, I guest hosted radio and TV talk shows.
So I’m ranting from experience.

By David Bauder
Associated Press

NEW YORK — More than a year after a campaign was launched against Nielsen Media Research for fear that a new counting system would shortchange blacks, Nielsen says blacks are watching more television in all six cities that are using the new electronic meters.

Its critics remain unsatisfied, and the Senate held a hearing last month on a bill that would require greater oversight of the company that has a monopoly over measuring TV audiences.

Nielsen, which prefers a low public profile, was thrust into the spotlight when a coalition spearheaded by News Corp. complained about the switch. Participating Nielsen families now have their viewing tracked by an electronic meter instead of relying on memory to fill out paper diaries.

Test runs showed alarming ratings decreases among some shows popular with black audiences. If ratings slip, television stations earn less in advertising revenue and the show’s survival is ultimately threatened.

In May, viewership measured by the new system was up in New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, San Francisco, Philadelphia and Washington over the May 2004 diary results, Nielsen said.

Nielsen had problems a year ago recruiting and keeping families, and in building a sample that accurately reflected a population’s ethnic composition, said David Poltrack, chief researcher for CBS and UPN.

“There has been a real full-frontal attack on this challenge by Nielsen, and that has resulted in significant improvements,” he said.

Nielsen has staunchly defended the accuracy of its numbers throughout the dispute. But Karen Gyimesi, a Nielsen spokeswoman, admitted the critics have “definitely” helped the company improve its service.

Hidden beneath the overall viewership increases are numbers that have some television executives nervous.

The new “people meter” results show ratings higher for smaller networks than they were in the diaries, simply because people are less apt to recall and write down the times they surfed away during commercials. This could hurt the bigger networks.

In Washington, for example, Nielsen last year showed 15 percent of blacks watching TV in its time slot were tuned in to UPN’s “Girlfriends.” This year, that share had dropped to 9 percent. The black audience for “Oprah” also declined 30 percent during the same period in Washington.

LETS PAUSE THERE……..
IF THE RATING SYSTEM REALLY GAVE A DAMM WHAT BLACK FOLKS WATCHED, IT IS NOT DIFFICULT TO FIND OUT.
LET ME BE REAL HERE AND USE A LITTLE COMMON SENSE.
BLACK FOLKS, PARTICULARLY POOR BLACK FOLKS WILL PAY THE CABLE BILL BEFORE THEY PAY THE RENT.
BLACK FOLKS HAVE HIGHER UNEMPLOYMENT, FEWER JOB OPPORTUNITIES, FEWER RECREATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES PARTICULARLY IN URBAN SETTINGS SO WHAT THE HELL DOES NIELSEN THINKS ALL OF THESE BLACK FOLKS ARE DOING WITH THEIR TIME!?

While fast food may not be tied to obesity for blacks, excessive TV watching has been linked to obesity, says Carlos Crespo, an associate professor of social and preventive medicine at the University of Buffalo in New York.
“Television is very powerful,” Crespo says, noting that 60 percent of TV advertising is for food products.
In a study of 4,000 children completed two years ago, Crespo showed that black and white children both take in more calories the more they watch TV. Kids who watch four hours of TV a day eat about 150 calories more than those who watch two hours.

Differences by Race and Ethnicity. For each age group and for each time point of assessment, larger proportions of black students watch television for six or more hours per day than do either white or Hispanic students. For example, among 9-year-old students, 40 percent of black students, compared to only 14 percent of white students, and 22 percent of Hispanic students reported watching television six or more hours per day during 1994.

RESEARCHERS APPARENTLY KNOW, SO HOW COME THE RATINGS ARE SO SCREWED UP?
ITS ABOUT THE DOLLARS. IT DOES NOT PAY TO ADVERTISE TO A BLACK DEMOGRAPHIC, DUH?
ONE EXAMPLE THE SHOW “FRIENDS”, I DON’T CARE WHAT SOME OF YOU THINK. THERE WAS “NOTHING” THAT ORIGINAL OR FUNNY ABOUT THE SHOW. BUT IT SET ALL KINDS OF RATINGS RECORDS. I GUARANTEE YOU LESS THAN 1% OF THE AUDIENCE WAS BLACK. BLACK FOLKS THOUGHT THE SHOW SUCKED! IT WAS A WHITE VERSION OF LIVING SINGLE!
JUST AS IN POLITICS OR TV RATINGS, THEY DON’T GIVE A SHIT ABOUT MINORITIES UNLESS THEY CAN ACTUALLY DO SOMETHING FOR THEM.
IT IS NOT IN NIELSEN’S INTEREST TO CARE WHAT BLACK FOLKS WATCH.

BACK TO THE ARTICLE………

That may partly explain the continued activity of the Don’t Count Us Out Coalition, a group of anti-Nielsen activists whose activities are bankrolled in part by News Corp.

The coalition is concerned that Nielsen results from black families are thrown out of the sample more frequently than those of whites because of problems with the numbers, spokesman Josh Lahey said. Nielsen said its “fault rates” are improving.

“You’ve got a large group of people that we don’t know what they’re watching,” said Tom Herwitz, president of station operations for the Fox television group.

The News Corp.-owned stations are particularly worried that fault rates are very high among young black families, just the sort of audience that would be most interested in UPN’s upcoming new comedy with Chris Rock, “Everybody Hates Chris,” he said.

The coalition is backing federal legislation that would require Nielsen to receive accreditation from the Media Rating Council before introducing new technology like the people meters.

Nielsen is opposing the legislation, arguing that submitting each change for outside approval will limit the company’s ability to improve and make viewership measurements as accurate as possible.

If I only had a brain. FROM “THE ANGRY DEMOCRAT”
Liberal, Conservative, Democrat, Republican.
We throw these labels around a lot in our blogs, as well as in “real life”, trying to trap each other in the broad definitions these terms imply.
But let me ask you this - do all Liberals/Democrats believe everything these labels imply? Do all Conservatives/Republicans?
I don’t think so.
There are people who may be Conservative in nature but still be Pro-Choice, just as there a people who may be Liberal in nature and still be Pro-Life.
And this applies to just about every issue you can name.
But still we rail at each other saying - “You Republicans always going on about your guns” or “You Democrats always saying we must increase taxes.”
There’s a term for this, it’s called The Straw Man Tactic.
The Straw Man becomes the embodiment of everything that side stands for, everything.
Both sides are guilty of this - if you label someone as the most virulent strain of the opposing ideology, then they have to spend all their time defending themselves as not being that. And that takes away their ability to state what they do believe.
I’ve read a lot of blogs the past month or so, both sides, and there seems to be a general feeling that the extremes from both parties are the problem, the Far Left and the Far Right. Everyone is saying that there should be more moderation in our thinking - and I couldn’t agree more.
But while saying this, and writing about their own moderate views, almost invariably they attack the other side’s Far reaches - the Straw Man.
It would be foolish of me to say we should abandon these labels, they’ve been around a long time and will continue to be around, but what wouldn’t be foolish is to actually listen to someone called a Liberal, and see what he or she, as a person, really believes, and the same for Conservatives.
The Scarecrow in Oz only wanted a brain, we have them already, let’s use them.

Addendum - Let’s try a little exercise.
State a Straw Man position the “other side” would use against you and say why it’s not true in your case.
If you’re chicken, feel free to post as anonymous or just make a general comment about what I said.

Ok folks, I know some of you won’t believe me but I do have a sense of humor. I like to read funny stuff. But most of all I pay attention, VERY close attention to liberals not only what they say but how they say it.
Lets face it folks ALL of us here on the web are a bunch or liars and fakes. Did you know my name is NOT Snoop? Yes I’m a fraud, much of the stuff here on my blog is written by someone else. People who are likely paid more that I. The photos were taken by someone else. I just copy and paste. I did not do the template either, some web geek designed it.
But truths about me are, I am black, I did take the photo in the lower left, I have engaged in inappropriate behavior one time or another. I have drank too much on occasion and I am quick tempered and slightly nutz!
Having said all of that more of you who blog need to go to confession. The lying and deceit is rampant.
Take the title of this entry.
Note on the intro (top of the blog) a reply from (underdogdem)
He has a blog called the Underdog Democrat. Its on my sidebar.
I made a statement on another blog in response to a question the host blogger posed to his audience a question something like: What do Democrats/Liberals need to change?
I added a piece from my Snoopitorial
The crux of my post focused around an e-mail I received that prompted the editorial in the first place. The young lady who wrote me stated that “my attacks on liberals are an attack on the very people who try to help blacks and other minorities receive opportunities in this country.”

To which I called them ridiculous and condescending. (underdogdem)
Hence wrote what you see above.
Another reply prompted the following response:

“I wont apologize for logically analyzing what is put in front of me.
In the terms of the whole straw man concept, a better explanation is above, or you can google for straw man. I was using it to a host of comments other than yours.
(AS IF I DID NOT KNOW ANY BETTER)
To a certian extent this can go round and round with your interpretation of what she said vs. mine. Part of the confusion comes from the difference between what you posted on the Angry Democrat originally that I reacted to, and what you posted this time.
As you posted it originally,
“that my attacks on liberals (on my blog, which I don’t do BTW) are an attack on the very people who try to help blacks and other minorities receive opportunities in this country.”
I reacted to that with puzzlement, saying ‘All she said was liberals try to help.’ Classic Straw Man.

Here’s how you made me aware of it today. There is a slight difference. Maybe it was just memory or something.
(CLASSIC ELITIST CONDESCENSION)
“attacking liberals the very people who work to reach out to blacks and other minorities adds to the suffering of black individuals in this country.”
Now I have to admit, the second version is stronger in terms of saying you add to the suffering of black people just by attacking liberals.
But here’s your reaction:
The sheer condescending and elitist and nature of your arguments, making the mistake that all blacks think alike and that all blacks “need” the liberal left to succeed…
Maybe not as much of a straw man, but I still think you exaggerate what she says. It’s not as if she said “liberals are the ONLY ones who can help blacks.” And I doubt this woman would consider that she was an ‘elite,’ as if she was better than anyone else.
(LIBERAL ELITIST PSYCHOBABBLE)
Of course, if you have her contact info you can ask her for clarification. Did she mean to say “liberals need blacks? Is she an elitist?” My guess is she’d probably say no.
With little or no benefit or gains in opportunities, blacks have been pimped and patronized by liberal democrats for 40 plus years.
Wait. Is someone sticking a gun to their heads and forcing them to vote Democrat? If that’s the case, I’ll be the first to stop it. They should be able to vote Republican if they want to.
(MORE CONDESCENSION, BUT I HAVE A SENSE OF HUMOR FOLKS)
(yes, I was strawmanning there)

…Or is it just that they elect to vote Democratic, and in large numbers?
former Klansman Robert Byrd as a “AMERICAN HERO!” Could Democrats be so partisan as to simply ignore the racist soul of this individual
I think the blog is referring to his considerable legislative acheievements and long history of service, not his KKK membership.
(WHAT CONSIDERABLE ACHIEVEMENTS?)
Anywho….so I’m wondering anytime I start to see certain buzzwords on liberal websites/blogs or replies I try to find a recent source that gave birth to it and I find the Molly Ivans piec