Go back to Africa…a little bit if vitriol that should never have survived into the 21st Century.
Go back to Africa…something I wouldn’t be writing about except it’s being re-voiced by supporters of GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump.
Go back to Africa…being said to people whose ancestors have been Americans for generations…in most cases far longer than the familial lines of the racists who are shouting it.
Go back to Africa…go back to what? these people are wholly Americans!
And the response in some of the videos I’ve seen have included Go back to Europe…which often leaves the racists sputtering and only able to shout back F*ck You! But that isn’t equal…not by a long shot…my ancestors came here voluntarily…could settle anywhere they wanted…and could return home if they desired. They weren’t torn from their families and communities and culture and sold to slavers. If they were lucky enough to survive the journey to America they were trapped under institutional slavery. So by no means does Go back to Europe carry the weight that Go back to Africa bears.
The only maybe benefit coming out of the Trump campaign is the nakedness of racism and xenophobia in America being exposed for all thinking people to see. That we aren’t a post racial society…we haven’t yet attained the land of the free and the home of the brave…not by a long shot.
Go Back To Africa…when someone says that: they OWN Slavery.
I distinctly remember any number of brouhahas over the salaries commanded by a very will respected and very successful Bo Black during her years running Summerfest…but while her successor, Don Smiley, who has allowed attendance to drop although overseeing major improvements in the festival grounds, has been paid three times Ms. Black’s salary, not so much noise. THREE TIMES her salary…other than the ridiculous amount Mr. Smiley is pulling down…might there be just a bit of sexism in the plaints against Ms. Black’s salary while generally the largesse granted Mr. Smiley is being pooh poohed? I’d think so!
Two of my favorite liberal women talked with me about my earlier post: What’s the Deal with Progressives and Agism?
I was so tuned into the issue of agism in progressive politics, partly because I am of the generation of Americans being dissed, that I may have overlooked another issue entirely.
But it was pointed out that sexism is also involved and after having these discussions, I agree.
The one person being prominently called out as too old to run for president in 2016 is Hillary Clinton, a woman. As a 69 year old woman she would be too old to run for president? I don’t think so, but…!
Considering how little was made of (although it was briefly brought up) President Reagan’s age and Senator McCain’s age when they each ran for president, I can’t deny that there is a point. And if we had a retired US Congresswoman of the same age and stature as David Obey, would she have been urged to run for governor in the recall or mentioned as a candidate to replace Senator Kohl? Probably not.
(btw: it is my contention that the Secretary of State is the second hardest and second most stressful position in the US Govt…and Hillary Clinton has more than shown her mettle)
Just about a year ago, a candidate for local office visited Drinking Liberally to present a case for being elected over the long term incumbent. One of the knocks on the incumbent was the officeholder’s age put him out of touch with the district. Looking around the room at all of the gray hair and bald heads…many whose support at the doors, on the phones, and with contributions the candidate was hoping to gain…and knowing the incumbent was younger than myself…I commented to the candidate, that although I would accept the position that the incumbent was out of touch with the district and the area…I wouldn’t suggest attributing that to age. Instead of picking up on my hint, the candidate doubled down on the age theme. That candidate did not win and will not garner my support in any future attempts at elected office.
Just following the November 6th Presidential election, a rather premature Facebook discussion posited the question about potential Democratic candidates in 2016. Of course current favorite, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was mentioned. One of my progressive friends suggested that in 2016, Ms. Clinton would be 69 years old…too old to run for president. Senator John McCain was 72 when he was nominated at the 2008 Republican National Convention…and President Reagan was 69 when he started his first term as President (But of course they were Republicans, so we can discount that). So despite the recent lionization of former US Congressman David Obey, who was already over 69 during the protests in Madison or the reverence shown for State Senator Fred Risser who is well into his 80s, Ms. Clinton at 69 would be too old to be President. When I brought up the ‘elder’ statesmen Risser and Obey, I was reminded that the job of President is far more stressful and important than legislative positions. Maybe so…but I would suggest that the second most stressful job in US government…and one that is extremely taxing physically because of the continual world travel involved…is US Secretary of State…which by all accounts Ms. Clinton has filled with energy, grace, and diplomacy! And I think she could work circles around many of her far younger critics.
Is age one way of gauging a candidates fitness for office…well yes…I suppose it comes into play. But we should never dismiss out of hand a fully qualified candidate simply based on when they were born!
Unreal. On Fox & Friends Thursday morning, Steve Doocy interviewed members of the U.S. Navy Band about the band’s recent inclusion of women. In his reaction to the piece, Brian Kilmeade sniped, “Women are everywhere. We’re letting them play golf and tennis now. It’s out of control.” Gretchen Carlson walked off of the set in anger. The self-loathing of Republican women is reaching epidemic proportions. Will nobody on the right speak out against this?
In the aftermath of conservative radio personality Rush Limbaugh’s description of a woman who testified to Congress in support of birth control funding for women as a “slut” and a “prostitute,” a number of advertisers have pulled their ads from Limbaugh’s show.
However, there are still some advertisers who are standing behind Limbaugh’s comments through their continued advertising on his show, and you can read the full list here.
Fresh off the heels of his absolutely vile comments referring to a college student as a “slut” and a “prostitute,” conservative radio blowhard Rush Limbaugh has started to lose advertisers.
After being bombarded on Twitter, mattress store Sleep Train said that it would no longer advertise during Limbaugh’s top-rated show following days of outrage over Limbaugh’s statements about Sandra Fluke, a Georgetown student who was denied a chance to speak at a Congressional hearing about birth control.
“We are pulling our ads with Rush Limbaugh and appreciate the community’s feedback,” the company wrote in a tweet.
Later on Friday, another mattress company, Sleep Number, announced through a spokeswoman that it had also pulled its ads from Limbaugh’s show. So did companies Legal Zoom, Citrix and Quicken Loans.
While I’m certainly happy to see Rush Limbaugh losing sponsors over his positively vile comments, I’d rather see him fired.
I’m back riding that Ron Paul horse… From Matt Bors:
While there there seems to be alot of \"alpha males\" on the right, add Fox News long time host Brian Kilmeade to the list.
Kilmeade is so secure in his manhood. that he does not even mind if his “babe” makes more money than he does. As long as his “skirt” gets him a beer when he asks and keeps the house clean of course…