Quoting R.S. McCain:
Was Till's killing racially motivated? Certainly, at least in part -- just as Till's initial action toward Carolyn Bryant was racially motivated. Till thought he could impress his relatives and friends by defying the customs of rural Mississippi. He succeeded too well. Roy Bryant returned home to find that Till's insulting behavior toward his wife was the talk of the community. Not merely was this a challenge to Bryant's personal honor, but to the peculiar community standards of that place and time. Roy Bryant either had to do something about Till, or become a pariah and/or a laughingstock in his community.

Now, it is likely that no would wish to return to the community standards and customs that apertained in rural Mississippi in 1955, when the Bryant brothers could kill Emmett Till and be judged not guilty by a jury of their peers. But Emmett Till's insult to Carolyn Bryant was a personal wrong, and the murder of Emmett Till was a very personal murder. He was not a martyr for "civil rights," unless you consider it a civil right to insult women.

------------------

[W]hatever happened in that grocery

Quoting R.S. McCain: "[T]he media now force interracial images into the public mind and a number of perfectly rational people react to these images with an altogether natural revulsion. The white person who does not mind transacting business with a black bank clerk may yet be averse to accepting the clerk as his sister-in-law, and THIS IS NOT RACISM, no matter what Madison Avenue, Hollywood and Washington tell us."

Yes, you read that right: a "natural revulsion" and "THIS IS NOT RACISM."

(Source)

Quoting R.S. McCain: "The day of Southern guilt is over–THE SOUTH WAS RIGHT–and let us not forget that salient fact. NO APOLOGIES FOR SLAVERY should be made. In both the Old and New Testaments slavery is sanctioned and regulated according to God’s word. Thus, when practiced in accord with Holy Scripture, it is NOT A SIN. Our ancestors were not evil men because they held slaves. This issue is our Achilles Heel, and the only way to deal with it is to confront our accusers boldly and without guilt. After all, what we are really upholding is GOD’S WORD. Let us fear Him, and we’ll fear no man."

(Source)

"I am disturbed…by [Jesse] Jackson’s idea that ‘breaking white folks’ rules’ was somehow inherently just," he wrote on FreeRepublic.com. "If rules were to be broken merely because they were work of white folks, then hasn’t Jackson gone a long way toward explaining the explosion of black criminality that began in the 1960s? This shows how the civil rights movement, to a great extent, represented a direct assault on tradition and law."

(Source)

Here's Steve Gilliard, talking about Robert Stacey McCain, and what his embrace by conservatives means for the Republican Party:

Quoting Steve Gilliard:
Mr. McCain's name was unfamiliar at first. Then I remembered that he was the racist loon who had tried to defend the lynching of Emmitt Till and had real problems with interracial relationships. With a tighter haircut, he'd look like an SS Panzer officer with his sharp features and blond hair. He looks normal, until he opens his mouth, then he's a freak that couldn't make it on Jerry Springer.

He was promoting a book called Donkey Cons, about Democratic corruption in Congress. Which is fine, a losing effort, but fine. Casino Jack reaches into the White House, talking about Marion Barry isn't going to cut it.

But guess where this stone racist prick was speaking? A Klan rally? A meeting of the Sons of Confederate Veterans? The Concerned Citizens Council? Nope. Young Americans for Freedom.

That's right, YAF had him up there to influence young Republicans.

So when the GOP whines about being labeled the racist party, they're the ones who invite open, proud racists to speak before their groups.

(Source)

IOW, "fake - but "accurate". I know R.S. McCain is being an effective conservative when the left calls him a raaaacist and makes up crap about him.

Quoting rcocean: IOW, "fake - but "accurate".

I know R.S. McCain is being an effective conservative when the left calls him a raaaacist and makes up crap about him.

There are a lot of well documented quotes constituting the racism charge against McCain. So far, all of your push-back has amounted to saying "fake but accurate." Who's more credible, do you think?

That's as good an argument against Christianity as I've heard.

Quoting AemJeff: There are a lot of well documented quotes constituting the racism charge against McCain. So far, all of your push-back has amounted to saying "fake but accurate." Who's more credible, do you think?

BS - just the leftwing calling a conservative "Raacist"- AS ALWAYS . Every effective conservative is called racist by the lefties. Rush is a Raacist, Beck is Raacist, Coulter is a Raacist, WFB was a Raacist, every Republican president since Nixon was a Raacist. Just more intellectual dishonesty. If you have quotes, post them and tell me SPECIFICALLY why they are "Raacist". AND link to non-leftwing sites for the source, you lefties make shit up. See the fake Rush quotes.

Quoting rcocean: BS - just the leftwing calling a conservative "Raacist"- AS ALWAYS . Every effective conservative is called racist by the lefties. Rush is a Raacist, Beck is Raacist, Coulter is a Raacist, WFB was a Raacist, every Republican president since Nixon was a Raacist.

Just more intellectual dishonesty. If you have quotes, post them and tell me SPECIFICALLY why they are "Raacist". AND link to non-leftwing sites for the source, you lefties make shit up. See the fake Rush quotes.

Damn dude. Have you read this thread? Or any of the posts I've put up on the topic? There's nothing but links and documented quotes. If you bother to look, this stuff doesn't end at the "left-wing" sites, there's source attribution for every, or nearly every, quote. Unless you think RS McCain is a part of the conspiracy, you're going to have to find another line of attack.

I think it's pretty ridiculous how Matt Lewis was so quick to hate on the liberals for "purging" Lieberman in the 2006 primary while he's so intent on purging Scozzafava this year for essentially the same reasons.

Quoting kezboard: That's as good an argument against Christianity as I've heard.

Very good point. You're so right. The thing about selling your daughter into slavery's a pretty good one, too. Or the scene where the good guy attempts to pacify a mob by offering to let them rape his daughters. How this book ever became the central pillar of Western morality is way beyond me. Well, unless you consider what Western morality has actually meant in practice for the last almost 2000 years.

Every effective conservative is called racist by the lefties. Rush is a Raacist, Beck is Raacist, Coulter is a Raacist, WFB was a Raacist, every Republican president since Nixon was a Raacist.

This is the most transparent argument to shut out any discussion of racially questionable arguments made by conservatives. Nobody's talking about Rush, Beck, Coulter, Buckley, or any Republican presidents. RS McCain's views and connections have been very well documented. If you don't think the things he's said make him a racist, whatever, but others may conclude differently. He certainly has views about the South and the history of the Confederacy that remind me of nothing so much as the kind of martyrology combined with nationalism that you find in the Balkans. This freaks me out, and I don't think I'm going out on a limb to say it would freak out the vast majority of Americans.

Don't read if you're a left-wing ideologue: Here

It may be somewhat strange for me to say this, as I am a minority, but if tomorrow, Beck/Coulter/Rush were to say some things that were to remove all doubt whatsoever that they were indeed racists, that would not turn me off to listening to them to become educated about the issues of the day nearly as much....as actually having to listen to the drivel that they regularly spout. As such, I am not really sure why there is such a fascination with trying to identify who is and who isn't a racist. It would seem to me focusing on there actual arguments would be far more effective in marginalizing them. But who knows, perhaps I am atypical.

I guess it's a pundit thing: ideologism. Pols do what they do because of ideology. It's a great shtick. People just argue in circles over grammar and endless contortions of connotations. And, pundits are the high-priests of spin, like judges and the Law. Joe Lieberman is an insurance industry whore, and whether or not he can take money from and vote impartially on the same industry is an ethical issue with political and economic impact. He's not the only one, but at least someone - and Tim Fernholz at least links to this issue in an article, but does not mention it in the diavlog. Ezra Klein reads like a budding insider in his contribution- lame and not a journo. Readers need more of this journalism, not for talking points, but to seal campaign finance reform and shame other whores from acting so overtly craven as Lieberman does.

I'm glad Conn Carroll is gone, but TWIB is getting really lightweight. It might just be the sign-in - Corn/Pinkerton do it too - but the feature sounds like a robot announcing a baseball game. Scher/Lewis don't miss many of the swings, but there's no color commentary that doesn't occur off-field. Exhibit: NY, NJ, Virginia ballots. No one is beating back the meme, that these are horse-races that determine the "fate" of the Obama administration and two-party insider politics. Instead, these are travesties of campaign finance abuse. I'd like to know how much out-of-district money is pouring into these localities. How were these candidates selected, and by whom? TWIB is likea re-broadcast of the game with a different announcer reading from a script written by another team.

Some great analysis by Rush Limbaugh. An excerpt:

The people of this country are looking at NY-23 and they're saying, it's my district, battleground district. You know, Sarah Palin way ahead of the curve on this. Here's some lessons from NY-23. Hoffman, Christie in New Jersey, and McDonnell in Virginia are all the same lesson: Reagan Republicans win. Christie is not exactly Reagan Republican, but he's a Republican, but Hoffman, Christie, Virginia, all teach the same lesson, that's Reagan Republicans win. Sarah Palin is way ahead of the curve of the media and the party elites here. And Hoffman is a Republican! He's not a third party guy. He is a Republican. Had there been a primary, we wouldn't even be talking third party here.

Quoting rcocean:
Some great analysis by Rush

Why would you even offer the analysis of a Canadian prog rock power trio.
They should be discredited as spokesman for NY or VA politics - or any US races for that matter.

Quoting graz: Why would you even offer the analysis of a Canadian prog rock power trio.
They should be discredited as spokesman for NY or VA politics - or any US races for that matter.

Rush is sexist.

Quoting rcocean: Some great analysis by Rush Limbaugh. An excerpt:

El Lardbo trying to speak as though he weren't at the very pinnacle of the Republican "party elites" is just too precious for words. It's almost as comical as him speaking as though "the media" did not include him.

Is this the beginning of a conservative revolution. Meanwhile, R.S. McCain explains Newt's endorsement of Hoffman.

Quoting rcocean: Is this the beginning of a conservative revolution.

Meanwhile, R.S. McCain explains Newt's endorsement of Hoffman.

Heh. In what sense does the continuing shrinkage of the pool of possible Republican voters imply a revolution? Rush gets what, about 20,000,000 listeners? Who, who doesn't fall into the general class of Rush fan, is going to be left in the party? Good luck staying relevant! Maybe you can join the Whigs? And, keeping to form, (it's important!) RS McCain is a white supremacist, racist SOB who makes Newt look like a reasonable guy. Twin has already supplied the necessary links.

Quoting rcocean: Is this the beginning of a conservative revolution.

Hannity and Coulter gushing over Palin is a "revolution?"

Quoting rcocean: Meanwhile, R.S. McCain explains Newt's endorsement of Hoffman.

That post is by someone named Jimmie Bise. (It is unknown whether he, like R. S. McCain, is a racist.)

Quoting rcocean: Is this the beginning of a conservative revolution.

More coverage of the "revolution." [Added] More coverage from R. S. McCain, also.

My understanding was that Scozzafava was somewhat of a libertarian, did I hear about this wrong? It seems to me libertarians have no place to go: the two major statists parties are fighting over irrelevant issues and use libertarian rhetoric only when they happen to be in the opposition.

On the public option, this new guy is shooting you down without trying and shaking his head - your takes are so brain-dead that he can't even figure out which irrational thing to shoot down first. Every CBO analysis shows that the public option decreases the deficit. You say, with nothing to back it up, that it will add a trillion to the deficit. He comes back with the latest CBO figures. So then you come back and say how can they score it if they don't know how many states are going to opt out. Look Matt - you can't have it both ways. If states opting out reduces the deficit, then it's even better than the CBO says. If states opting out adds to the deficit then why would they opt out? You say it's bad - but when confronted with it not being bad, you say - well, we conservatives will opt out to MAKE it bad. I mean - what the heck is wrong with your brain, dude? You're so obsessed with having the democrats fail that you've completely lost sight of caring about the country. It may be a political power game for

Matt - a huge majority in Maine wants the public option - so you say how can she go out on a limb against the whole republican party. Look - if Maine elected senators who agree with them on the issues, there would only be 38 republicans left. Iowa is another one in that category. Your position is to give money to the insurance companies and screw over Americans - how do you think that's going to work out for you? The polling is burying you. The number of people identifying themselves as Republicans is sinking like a stone. The Republican congress has an obscenely low approval rating and it's been sinking like a stone all year. A huge majority of Americans see McConnell & Boehner in about the same light that Jon Stewart sees them - a joke.

Wow. We need new people for Week in Blog. Matt seems to have given up. He didn't even engage on a few topics and simply said "well, I know we wont agree, so.." I was skeptical of this Tim Fernholtz guy at first, but he knew how his stuff. Matt looked like a deer in front of headlights.... he even cut it short (23min!!) to stop the brutal beating. I don't mean for this to be harsh, but I try and watch most bloggingheads and I cringe at the prospect of listening to another mind numbing episode of "week in blogs". Bill Scher is a nice guy, but this Tim Fernholtz's got the energy I like. Now bring a good, strong conservative against Tim and we just might have a good weekly segment.

Quoting rcocean: Don't read if you're a left-wing ideologue:

Here

Heh. Scozzafava Back Owens.

Quoting AemJeff: Heh. Scozzafava Back Owens.

Fascinating short segment on Meet the Press this morning with David Plouffe,on the significance of Palin, NY-23, and the purging of moderates from the Republican Party: — Plouffe on Palin "I think we should thank John McCain for picking her, in terms of how it helped us win in 2008," -- Obama campaign manager David Plouffe, on Meet the Press, discussing Sarah Palin.