Now, I would certainly say this one of Rice is one of the most racist things I've seen in current politics.

jerseyhoya wrote:Is big teeth a black stereotype?

You learn something new every day.

No but they really gave him a pignose and his lips sure look quite large

TenuredVulture wrote:Now, I would certainly say this one of Rice is one of the most racist things I've seen in current politics.

Yeah, that's certainly racist. Strange stereotyping too. Sort of your right wing stereotyping of black women combined with a left-wing anti-war, anti-corporate message. The liberal stereotype would have her as Auntie Thomasina or something like that.

The second Obama one as loving and crappily done. Look, when you do a characterture of someone you are supposed to exaggerate their features. Obama's obvious exaggeration is his ears (and W., though his "fans" also decided he was short), for Rice it's her gap tooth, for Carter it was his goofy smile, Reagan it was all wrinkles, etc. I don't think that's the issue here (for example, a characterture of Obama with big lips or something would be ridiculous and almost certainly racist, because he doesn't have big lips). Showing him with a giant shit -eating grin isn't. I guarantee that editorial boards are sweating their balls off over every Obama characterture that comes across their desk - they have to.

It comes down to Biden Syndrome. If he says something outrageously racist, lets make him Vice President! It's okay because he's a "good guy" and certainly didn't mean it "that way" (and after all, the black guy picked him). If someone from the other side (like your tea-bagger) does anything that can even be remotely construed as racist, well, it absolutely is because we all know they're all racists anyway.

I think this is the most "famous" Condi one (at least, it's the one I was thinking of):

jerseyhoya wrote:Is big teeth a black stereotype?

You learn something new every day.

Yeah, it is. It's dated, but I remember my grandmother going on and on about black folk's teeth.

TenuredVulture wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:Is big teeth a black stereotype?

You learn something new every day.

Yeah, it is. It's dated, but I remember my grandmother going on and on about black folk's teeth.

Those racist Chinese.

Do you know what I would find hilarious? If Blanche Lincoln kills health care, then gets beat in a primary by MoveOn.org, then the generic Republican we nominate beats the nutter that won the primary 62-38%.

Because obviously only the Republican party has civil wars

jerseyhoya wrote:Do you know what I would find hilarious? If Blanche Lincoln kills health care, then gets beat in a primary by MoveOn.org, then the generic Republican we nominate beats the nutter that won the primary 62-38%.

Because obviously only the Republican party has civil wars

the bill currently being kicked about may or may not pass, but health care reform was dead months ago.

but the important thing is teams keeping score, so please continue.

jerseyhoya wrote:Do you know what I would find hilarious? If Blanche Lincoln kills health care, then gets beat in a primary by MoveOn.org, then the generic Republican we nominate beats the nutter that won the primary 62-38%.

Because obviously only the Republican party has civil wars

Blanche Lincoln may not be especially popular among liberals in this state, but even in the Democratic party, there aren't enough of us to beat Blanche in a primary. And because "generic Republican" in this state is likely to mean someone like Jim Bob Duggar (of the 19 kids and counting fame) Blanche is a good bet to hold her seat. If Gilbert Baker gets the Republican nod, and manages to persuade people that 1) he's not far right and 2) he somehow was completely innocent in a small scandal involving University of Central Arkansas and 3) The Green Party runs a competent and reasonably funded campaign that peels off enough of the left then maybe Blanche could lose.

Bill Halter could possibly mount a challenge to Lincoln in a Democratic primary, but he'd lose and piss off a lot of people in the process.

Now, if the Republican Party in this state got its act together and nominated someone like David Bisbee, that might change the dynamic considerably. But that has almost no chance of happening.

It's unclear why when I got home from the bar that I decided to continue drinking, watch Enemy of the State, and post about Blanche Lincoln getting primaried, but I did.

I think I was reading some article about how the Republicans are getting shit for this civil war thing, while Democrats are threatening to purge the party over this healthcare thing without too much of a peep.

For some reason the later into the night it gets, the more I gravitate toward the partisan, Red State type sites for my reading materials. Probably because of the lower reading levels required.

John Adler, my rep, is voting no on the health care bill. Odd, really. It's not that Republican of a district, and I thought he was of a more liberal persuasion.

Maybe it just isn't a good bill.

So the Dems have 258 members. They need 218 to pass this. I don't know if any Republicans will vote yes. So far 24 Dems are hard noes, so 17 more would need to defect to kill passage. I doubt that happens.

The undecideds

A lot of the undecideds are pro-life Democrats who leadership is trying to placate without losing too many progressives.

The noes

The House just passed a rule that will let them move forward with the debate 241-192. There were defectors, but not all of the noes voted no on this.

VoxOrion wrote:Maybe it just isn't a good bill.

I don't have much faith in my Camden County machine Dem representative that whether or not it's a good bill plays much importance in his voting decision.

Why else vote no, then? If some kind of "integrity" isn't possible, what's the angle? Pharma company in his district? Virtua headquartered there? Or the AMA or something?

VoxOrion wrote:Why else vote no, then? If some kind of "integrity" isn't possible, what's the angle? Pharma company in his district? Virtua headquartered there? Or the AMA or something?

I think he thinks it'll make him less of a target this cycle.

That's pretty bad if it's true. I have trouble imagining a true Republican threat in this area, outside of the Florio/Corzine type "vote the bum out" retaliation.

Well it's a district that is fairly swingy nationally. Gore won it in 2000, Bush won it in 2004, Obama won it in 2008. I'm sure Christie won it on Tuesday, probably by a lot. But it's definitely not as tough to defend as a ton of the other districts where Pelosi and Hoyer are looking for votes. Also what's the point of getting elected if you don't help carry out the agenda?

Adler has more than a million bucks in the bank and no opponent so far.

VoxOrion wrote:That's pretty bad if it's true. I have trouble imagining a true Republican threat in this area, outside of the Florio/Corzine type "vote the bum out" retaliation.

as currently constituted the health "reform" bill means more jobs for your local hospitals.

Doesn't seem you would want to vote against a bill that is pro-health care jobs when several of your district's main employers are hospitals & health systems.