The American Spectator

Mark| 12.30.08 @ 7:06AM

Mr. Lord's scholarly analysis of the matter of the "Magic Negro" bit is enlightening, but completely misses the point. The mere use by a white man of the term "negro", which blacks disfavor, precludes any intelligent analysis of the reason for using it, and demands denunciation without thought in our politically correct culture. The whole point of political correctness being, of course, to forbid rational analysis and to demonize those who engage in it.

Ryan| 12.30.08 @ 7:58AM

Ummm...may want to double-check some stuff there. I don't think that it was Shanklin, I think that it's Bo Snerdley singing the song, the "Official EIB Obama Criticizer" who is African-American.

OT| 12.30.08 @ 7:58AM

African Americans did not reject Jesse Jackson when he ran for president in the 80s. Both times, he received an overwhelming amount of African American votes but Jackson couldn't build a coalition beyond that base. Sharpton's support--or lack thereof--is more reflective of the reality that he didn't have a chance in hell of winning--not a rebuke of his "racism" as Lord describes it. (And by the way, comparing Sharpton to David Duke is beyond inane, especially since Sharpton was never connected to an organization that murdered, lynched and terrorized people. But I digress.) If Shanklin wanted to offer biting commentary based on Ehrenstein's column, then he should have parodied white people (liberal and conservative, especially since a number of latter voted for Obama and not McCain), not Sharpton.

But the reality is that the GOP doesn't care to diversify beyond its white audience. Republicans should apologize to the nation for the last eight years but more importantly for falsely claiming to represent the nation's ideals.

stephanieanne| 12.30.08 @ 8:03AM

I don't think any of the three that commented on the parody even knew what the song was about.
The just heard "magic negro" and ran with it.
Gringrich is smarter that this and I am disappointed that he didn't research it better.

Gary Wood| 12.30.08 @ 8:06AM

You're right OT, Sharpton was never connected with an organization that murdered, he managed to incite others to do his murdering for him. Lord's point which you managed to miss is that a race-baiting hustler like Sharpton playing the kingmaker to the Democratic party is as incongruous as Holocaust survivors laying wreaths on Hitler's grave.

VinceP1974| 12.30.08 @ 8:15AM

Finally someone writes about this with some logic and sense.

This hits on all the points I made the other day

- If you think this song is offensive.. the song agrees with you! And you should redirect your outrage at the originators of the song.. the LA Times guy and Al Sharpton.

As a conservative I dont deal with people as groups (unless they insist on it. like most Leftists do). I dont view black people as a group. They are indivudals.

Conservatism is truly color blind. We are not preoccupied with a person's minority/victim class. The Left is obsessed with those details.

So when I see things like "the GOP doesn't care to diversify" , I just think that's a tragic misunderstanding of the way conservatives think.

Now perhaps it's someone's job at the GOP party to focus on marketing to this group or that.. but I dont work for a party, so I dont think that way.

In a Conservatives mind, the people involved with civic life are the individual people and the govt. Not groups of people and the govt. Not buckets of similarly interested people and the govt... but individuals and the govt.... that's the framework established by the Constitution.

Individualism is the only way , in the long term , that a community will prosper and maintain Liberty and order. And there isn't anytihng about a person's race that makes that any more or less valid for them. I refuse to pander to someone because of their race. That's what Leftists do.. when they assign everyone thier role in society because they know so much more than everyone else.

And I have nothing to apologize for for the past 8 years. All the things that Bush is condemmed for are areas where he acted like a Democrat. Those aren't conservative principles that steered him wrong.. it was his not adhering to them that went wrong.

That is why Conservatives did not vote in their full numbers in 06 and 08. They are angry at the GOP politicians for not sticking to the principles they give lip service to, but ultimately betray.

The people who should be apologizing are the ones who turned every bank into a predator and then directed all the banks to be sharks in minority areas. That is the root of the economic disaster. Racial Pandering by the Democrats caused the problem.
.

Curly Smith| 12.30.08 @ 9:00AM

The RNC needs to support stem cell research as that's the only hope they have of growing a pair. The last election should have amply demonstrated the folly of the Republican Neutered Committee but the old eunuchs refuse to die. Worse, they seem to have mastered cloning and have rewritten the basis of Darwin's "The Origin of Species" as Gingrich's "Survival of the Feeblest".

Bob| 12.30.08 @ 9:05AM

When I hear Republicans parody Jews, Hispanics, social conservatives, and Asians, I'll know that they are serious about not being seen as old and white. If you can't parody everyone, you should parody no one. That is the problem, it is selective in nature. This is why many of us, who have been lifelong fiscal conservatives and Republicans, are angry about this. Colin Powell was right about Rush Limbaugh, et. al.

J David| 12.30.08 @ 9:10AM

Right on the money! I listened to the whole controversy as it arose, daily, on Rush's show, and you broke it all down very well, Mr Lord. I think that this really highlights the level of perfidy and "fellow traveling" going on at the highest levels of our oligarchy, and how far turncoats like the the Gaia-worshiper and Pelosi-lover Newster have wandered from conservatism just to keep some power.

WE ARE BETRAYED!!

Interloper| 12.30.08 @ 9:17AM

Actually, Jeffrey Lord's picture should be in the dictionary next to "nutty." Inane pronouncements are far from unusual among the far Right, but this is "Twilight Zone" stuff.

• The Ku Klux Klan was founded to promote white supremacy - the domination of people of color and non-Christians by white men in America. From the end of Reconstruction through the 1950s, the Klan and other vigilante groups were responsible for murdering more than 5000 people, usually by lynching them. A large majority of those lynched were African-Americans. The Klan and Southern whites in general enforced rigid segregation and continuing degradation of people of color and Jews. They were and remain domestic terrorists. To compare David Duke, a white supremacist, to Al Sharpton, a black activist, is to fail to grasp the difference between seeking equal treatment and seeking dominance and genocide. Whatever his imperfections, there is no basis for such a comparison between Sharpton and Duke.

• I know David Ehrenstein. His essay was written from two perspectives. As a biracial man (African-American mother, white father) a few years older than Barack Obama, he has traveled some of the same turf. Both have often been the only, or one of a few, black people in white environments. His skepticism arises from what he has observed in those circumstances.

David's other perspective is literary. He is foremost a film critic. In his essay, he placed Obama in the context of the black actor who serves as a plot device, not as a fully realized character. (I offered an example on the previous 'Majic Negro' thread.) However, it turns out that Obama is not a Majic Negro because he is a fully developed person not serving as a plot device for white people or anyone else. He is in control. Perhaps David needs to write another essay explaining that so his initial remarks will not be so easily misrepresented.

• A satire, as I said before, is from the point of view of the person writing it. Saying the satirist is speaking the minds of Revs. Sharpton or Jesse Jackson is ludicrous. He does not know what they think. A sound bite here or there is not enough to understand the complexity involved. I suspect that neither of the two men really wanted to be president. Jackson was obsessed with carrying on the legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., as one of his youngest lieutenants. One cannot be both a determined opponent of the government and a member of it. Rev. Sharpton's focus has been on attaining status as an important spokesman for African-Americans in New York City, a goal he has achieved. Certainly, both largely support the new President-elect. Good enough. People do not have to agree with each other a hundred percent of the same time to be part of the same coalition.

• The Dixiecrats, who gave Southern Democrats a racist taint from the end of Reconstruction into the 1970s, largely decamped to the Republican Party after Brown v. Board of Education and the civil rights acts. The Southern Strategy, developed by the same Lee Atwater cited in the article, relied on Southern whites opposed to change as the backbone of a Republican majority. The best known tactics include the Wille Horton ads, Jesse Helm's racist campaigns and Ronald Reagan's infamous speech applauding "state's rights" on the bloody ground where three civil rights martyrs were slain.

No one with any real understanding of American history doubts that the heirs to the racism of the South, particularly, are the GOP. That is why we see racial meltdown after racial meltdown of its leadership, whether they are applauding Strom Thurmond's segregationist run for president, calling an Indian-American 'macaca,' pretending to resign from an all-white country club they've belonged to for more than a decade to run for party committee leadership, distributing a CD replete with ethnic slurs, or something else. That is who these men are. And, as long as they and their fellow travelers are the bigots they are, the Republicans will be a party of the irrelevant while a multiracial electorate that understands contemporary America moves on.

I salute OT for piercing the veil.

I am embarrassed for the person who referred to this mindless and immoral sophistry as 'scholarly.'

John S.| 12.30.08 @ 9:19AM

The point is, this was a political blunder. Rush is Rush, but Rush is not running to head the GOP. Chip should know better than to hand the MSM a plum like this. It reflects poorly on his political judgement.

Interloper| 12.30.08 @ 9:31AM

True, John. And, ironically, even as these GOP 'leaders' shoot themselves in both feet, they are self-congratulatory. If Lord's suggestion that people speaking out against Chip Saltsman be demonized and made to apologize is acted upon that will be the acme of such smugness.

Michael Roush| 12.30.08 @ 10:11AM

Kudos to Bob and Interloper for countering Mr. Lord's sophistry. Racism in the United States has been shamefully bi-partisan. Fortunately, efforts to redress racism have also been bi-partisan.

Derek P| 12.30.08 @ 10:18AM

What is happening to Newt? At least politically I used to respect his conservatism and knowledge but lately he is turning into McCain. Not that I have ANY problem with the paraody discussed in this piece as I have heard it and it is funny; for that moron to include it in a CD to a large group of people was stupid and shows woeful judgment. He was just asking for the sh!t storm that he is now enduring.

Jeffrey Lord| 12.30.08 @ 10:20AM

Interloper...

The Ku Klux Klan served, according to historian Eric Foner of Columbia University (no conservative he) as the military arm of the Democratic Party. Your description is accurate as far as it goes but leaves out that critical point to understanding Democratic Party culture. Klan members were not only all Democrats, they were the backbone of the Democratic Party once upon a time. In 1924, to use but one example, so many delegates to the Democratic National Convention were members of the Ku Klux Klan the Convention quickly acquired the nickname "the Klanbake." They were a key part of the coalition that elected Grover Cleveland, Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt to the White House. Democratic Party leaders accepted their support in return for votes for candidates and such miodern day institutiuons as Social Security and the Federal Reserve. Political parties have their own culture, and sad to say a party that has vehemently supported first slavery, then segregation and lynching, a party that actively elected Klan members to the US Congress and US Senate and appointed a Klan member to the US Supreme Court (FDR, who proudly boasted of having Klan members as his friends appointed Klan member Hugo Black) has a culture of judging people by their skin color. This culture has been a major factor in the party of jefferson and Jackson, indeed both men identified on the DNC's official web site were in fact slave owners. Witness today's Democrats' insistence on racial quotas, the modern version that springs from the same idea of judging people by skin color.

Sharpton has, by both word and deed, repeatedly left the impression, as has David Duke, that race is the be-all and end-all of life, which it certainly is not. He has played the role of racial arsonist and anti-Semite, as cited above. Worse, others have granted this man a bizarre status as a judge of racism in others, a chicken coop guarded by the fox.

It is true that Southerners defected to the GOP...beginning not with Nixon, who was a strong supporter of civil rights, but with Eisenhower in 1952. It was Nixon, however, who insisted on desegregation of the rest of America's schools in the South and got the job done. I have to say it is remarkable that you skip over the fact - entirely - that the civil rights laws of the 1960's were re-do's of laws passed by the GOP in the 1860's and 1870's. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 - which passed because the majority of Republicans supported it, getting the job done over dissenting Democrats like Al Gore Sr., Robert Byrd, Richard Russell (for whom the Dems named the Russell Senate Office Building) - along with the Voting Rights Act of 1965, were already passed a century ago. Additionally, your Democratic friends actively opposed passage of the 13th, 14th and 15th amendments to the Constitution, the first ending slavery (!!!!!) the second giving blacks the rights the rest of us have in terms of owning property, making contracts etc, and the last providing the right to vote. Likewise they fought passage of the Civil Rights Bills of 1866 and 1875, which provided things like access to public accommodations. Because of the horrific violence and resistance to these things by the Democratic Party's military arm, the Klan, these laws were essentially undone or ignored. Repeatedly GOP platforms called for enforcement, to no avail. Calvin Coolidge asked for a law ending lynching in his inaugural address in 1925 - and got nada from the Dems.

As to Reagan, his philosophy about returning power to the states has zero to do with race and is in fact practiced everyday in this country, popular with governors of both parties. The so-called "controversy" over his appearance in Philadelphia, Mississippi in 1980 begs the question: why was racism so rampant there in the first place? Who encouraged it? Nourished it? benefitted from it? Elected armies of local officials, state offficials, Congressmen and Senators and three presidents using this as a platform? Decidedly not Reagan nor the GOP, that's for sure.

"No one doubts" that the GOP is the heir to racism? That, my friend is a joke. Those "Dixiecrats" (to use your term) who came to the GOP found themselves surrounded by the culture of the Party of Lincoln. Blacks were appointed to the highest positions in the government. Actually, the first blacks in Congress and the US Senate were all Republicans until..ahhh the Klan...took care of that. From Booker T. Washington lunching at the White House with Teddy Roosvelt (over shrieks of protest from Democrats) to aides to Ike and Nixon, Cabinet members for Reagan and both Bushes (the last 8 years which you seem to despise has seen foreign policy run by a black man and a black woman), a Supreme Court Justice (Thomas) etc etc...the GOP has been there. The difference is we don't judge by color. Like that great son of a Republican, Martin Luther King Jr, we go by the content of one's character.

Thus endeth the sermon.

Amen, bro.

Scott| 12.30.08 @ 10:22AM

No it was Paul singing alright. Snurdley did not perform on the tune.

Steveo| 12.30.08 @ 10:26AM

I was enjoying reading these comments until I came across the fellow who says the Dixiecrats in the south "tainted" the Democrats. BS!! If you were KLAN in the South, you were Democrat. One only needs to read Robert Caro's work on LBJ, "Master of the Senate" to see in 1957 the Dems were scared they would lose the black vote en masse. By 1965, Democratic candidates are preaching in black churches. Amazing!! Even my black friends ( who bring the subject up) can't explain why they vote for a party they don't agree with on most issues. With all due respect to the Beatles, money might not buy you love, but it can get you a lot of votes.

JPousson| 12.30.08 @ 10:26AM

Interloper, go play your little games with people devoid of facts to refute your despicable liberal lies.

The Ku Klux Klan was formed as the paramilitary arm of the Democrat Party during Reconstruction, because the racist Democrats (the more things change, the more they remain the same, n'est-ce pas?) hated the fact that black Republicans won elections. Let us not forget that the Democrat Party is the party of slavery, secession and sedition, and that it is the Republican Party that has stood for equality for ALL people, no matter the color of their skin, far more often than the racist Democrats.

"Barack the Magic Negro is HILARIOUS, and I am glad that there are some in the higher reaches of the GOP who can tell Democrats to go pound sand instead of caving in to the double standard the Democrats and their obedient lapdog media cheerleaders attempt to enforce every time a Republican does ANYTHING.

Republicans across the country are chomping at the bit to get anyone at all with the cojones to stand up to the despicable anti-American Democrats (and yes, Bob and Interloper, you are both in that category), and to shove their TRUE sophistry right up their oversized you-know-whats. The Republican Party has bent over for far too long to the Dems and their media whores, and the man or woman who tells them to go and shtupp themselves with their double standards will win BIG time all across America.

Guess you two liberal girly-men need to return to mens room loitering, which your party has fought to institute as a civil right. America trusts Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Palin, and in the long run, both will be laughing at the apoplexy of the humorless Left when the disaster of The Plastic Muslim Messiah is rectified in 2012 and the country returns to reason instead of emotion.

Ammo Guy| 12.30.08 @ 10:26AM

I'm getting so tired of this crap from the left - hey Interloper, say Hi to Senator Byrd next time you see him and take your "real understanding" of American history somewhere else.

Karcarius| 12.30.08 @ 10:34AM

As a former cab driver I picked up lots of black people.And it just confirmed my conservative beliefs.Not all black people are criminals,not all Hispanics are illegal,not all Muslims are terrorists.These are popular stereotypes of our country.But they are just small percentages.But conservatives have our extremist as well.Like people who bomb abortion clinics,which is appalling to me.The problem is when leftist try to categorize all these people by what a very small percentage of them do.And it's mostly hearsay.Most of the people that I talked to who hate Limbaugh have never listened to his show.One guy said that he is racist.I told him that his producer is a black man,which he didn't know.He was going on hearsay.He was believing what the MSM said about him because of the McNabb thing.It's amazing to me how the left seems to see racism in everything.And I'm appalled at Newt for not seeing the humor in this.It seems that making fun of a black person is not funny but it's OK to make fun of a white person.Many black comedians use a lot of race in their humor.I guess they're not smart enough to use anything else.Did you ever hear Bill Cosby use any in his comedy?Of course not because he doesn't believe in it,which is why he's one of my all time favorite comedians.Shanklin merely used something that a black man said about another black man.

J David| 12.30.08 @ 10:38AM

The Democratic Party has been THE place to go for racism and human rights abuses since its first president Andrew Jackson and the "Trail of Tears" crime against the American ally, the Cherokee Nation. Then you have Dred Scott, presaging Bloody Kansas and the formation of the Republican Party(it's first president, Ol' Abe)to counter Democrat pro-slave owner violence that leads to War Between the States, to formation of the KKK by Bedford Forrest after the War, to Jim Crow Laws through the "Solid South" preventing voting by the "freed" slaves, through the hangings through the first half of the 1900s, to the Great Society of LBJ which destroyed the black family, and has kept them on the plantation, to abortion (and Planned Parenthood, by eugenicist Margret Sanger, to control the numbers of inferior races) even reversing racial equality gains behind Latinos, now a larger and more powerful minority, and growing. Democrats have been the NUMBER ONE biggest enemy of blacks in America going back over a hundred and fifty years.

Bob| 12.30.08 @ 11:03AM

Does it really make a difference whether the Klan used to be a Democrat paramilitary arm? Does it make a difference that the Klan are primarily Republicans now? The South used to be Democrat, now it is Republican. The historical argument has no relevance to today's issues. The parties have changed. In fact, Republicans are no longer the party of Reagan.

There is the common saying that actions speak louder than words. There are fewer minorities in the Republican party today than in the past. At the Republican convention, there were fewer blacks than in recent history.

The fact is that no party wants to denigrate its base. Could you imagine Rush or any of you putting up a parody about stupid religious people? That would not even cross your mind because you would know that would alienate your base. For the exact same reason, if you are really serious about expanding the party into the growing segments of our society, namely minorities, then you would not do anything to alienate them.

It's not the reaction of the Republican base that is the issue. It is the reaction of those you wish to attract to the Republican party. While I may be socially liberal, I know that fiscal conservatism will only be realized if the Republican party starts winning national elections. Alienation is NOT a good strategy thereto.

Luonne Dumak| 12.30.08 @ 11:17AM

I happen to enjoy the little songs that Rush plays on his program. It seems to just fine when that the unfunny SNL makes fun of Sarah Palin and other Conservatives. It seems just fine when J Stewart, Cobert, Letterman and all the other idiots make fun of others its O.K. By the way I love the lastest parody ,The Banking Queen. I guess when the songs get to close to the truth the Libs can't handle it.

Bob| 12.30.08 @ 11:26AM

Luonne, you miss the point on a couple of levels. An individual cannot change his/her race, but they can become educated and knowledgeable. When you parody something that one cannot possibly change, you are certainly a bigot.

By the way, I hope SNL also does a parody of Caroline Kennedy's ability to speak well and not vote. That would be comparable.

Secondly, it is the Republican party that is shrinking the the Democrats that are growing with young, black, and Hispanic voters. Alienating them is just not a good idea whether you think it is funny or not.

Nigel Assam| 12.30.08 @ 11:39AM

The reaction by Gingrich, Duncan and Anuzis can also be seen as their way of getting their competition out of the race for the RNC chairmanship. It's all politics.

Driver| 12.30.08 @ 11:41AM

As stated so succinctly by John S at 9:19AM on 12/30/08, the point is that this was a stupid political blunder, and Newt was right to say that it should disqualify Saltsman from RNC chair for sheer stupidity crossing the line into malpractice.

Yes, "Barack the Magic Negro" is hilarious. Yes, Al Sharpton is a shameless huckster who should be running numbers in Harlem instead of appearing on the national political stage. Yes, Barack meets the textbook definition of "Magical Negro" as explained in Wikipedia. Yes, Rush is correct to make all such points, pointedly....in his own venue, NOT as a national wannabe political figure purporting to represent a major political party in an official capacity. As dumb as Arlen Spector telling Polish jokes. As dumb as Jesse Jackson saying he wants to cut Obama's n*ts off. Dumb. People who can't control their mouths or mailing impulses can't make it in politics if they're Republicans. Only Dems can do that.

JPousson| 12.30.08 @ 11:46AM

bob, you are proving, in spades, that liberals are too stupid, and believe far too many of the prevarications of popular urban myth, to be able to debate even the color of orange juice in a convincing manner.

Do you know ANYTHING about the Ku Klux Klan other than the DNC talking point that they are all Republicans? Typical lying liberal. The Ku Klux Klan is a SOCIALIST organization, NOT a CONSERVATIVE one. The Klan clamors for the very same handouts from the "Zionist Occupation Government" that they screech and whine are currently going to minorities. They want guaranteed income for white people plus tons of new welfare for poor whites, and the VAST majority of Klanners are oldstyle Democrats.

Nice try, Bobbie-boy. That crap might work over at PuffingOnePost or in your mutual onanist sessions with Interdoper, but you have the wrong forum for that garbage here.

Bob and Interloper do not belong here, because this website's (and publication's) name is "American" and "Thinker", both parameters being easy disqualifiers for typical Leftist lying racists.

I would bet a dollar to a donut hoel that Bob and Interloper think the New Yawk Slimes is a legitimate news source...

Bob| 12.30.08 @ 11:59AM

JPousson -- I guess "American Thinker" does not apply to you. My point was that it was NOT a party issue on either side, but an issue of being able to expand the party so that Republicans can win national elections. But then again, I wouldn't expect an unthinking ideologue to understand logic.

Mary| 12.30.08 @ 12:31PM

Mr. Lord, I don't think Mr. Saltsman showed much discernment sending out the CD, but I'm beginning to think that while this may not be the hill you'd choose to die on, it might not be wise to tuck tail and run either.

The "soft bigotry of low-expectations" is where the Dems are vulnerable, and with the election of Obama -and his own use of race, from time to time to help his cause- maybe it's time to fight back and not be cowed by people who have their own share of issues.

As Vince says, there may be a need to market to groups so the bean counters might be necessary, but at some point we've got to slap liberals down and slap them down hard. That part of the electorate that recognizes that the gaming of race/ethnicity has been part and parcel of the dem game for a long time now will neither like nor defend this, but they aren't wont to deny the full view here either.

The time to fight back might just be now when already being counted as down and out, there's very little to lose and perhaps something to gain.

The picking off of the parts of the electorate that are not married to the dems can only begin once we're strong. Me too Republicanism won't work. If we're headed for Euro government and sensibilities, let the dems be the ones to bring, carry and establish it as their legacy.

We can really be a loyal opposition. Let's not worry about the acquisition of power. A deep aversion to the kind of national corporatism that the Dems and Repubs have ensnared us in should be what we're feeling, if we're heirs to the immortality of Burkean wisdom, and lovers of his little platoon. This phony economy with its fake money can't continue forever. And those in charge -not to disparage their creds- have no way to solve this if they're prone to treating symptom over and against disease.

When, and if, the Country returns to its roots of liberty and personal responsibility, Republicans ought to be there ready to receive their prodigal and ragged children, and any friends they've picked up along the way.

I think some dexterity here -while not likely or able to make this snafu magically delicious- might at least be able to simultaneously instruct and strengthen Republicans, and to establish the need for everyone to grow some thicker skin.

Appreciate your courage here.

Ammo Guy| 12.30.08 @ 12:36PM

Here we go again - if expanding the party means we merely become Democrat-lite, why bother? Either our principles mean something or they don't...and when I hear "socially liberal", I know that means pro-abortion and the sanctity of life is not something we should compromise just to win an election. If that means 40 years of wandering in the wilderness, so be it. The country could have two more black governors and one more black senator right now if the racist democrats in PA, OH, and MD had simply voted that way in 2006. I wish Dr. Sowell would post on this blog and set some of you straight because I am obviously an unthinking ideologue incapable of understanding some posters' brillant logic.

Jeff| 12.30.08 @ 12:45PM

Wow, Mr. Lord, you are so 'spot on' sometimes, it is scary! :) That is why I enjoy your columns so much. These asinine doctrinaires who have opined so negatively and in such wrong-headed fashion lack the requisite analytical ability to comprehend your erudition much less to comment on it. Nevertheless, as we are enjoined by the Good Book, we should "comfort the feeble-minded" rather than excoriate them. (Sadly, even now, they are probably scrambling to Google the definitions for several of the above words.)

Keep up the excellent commentary 'cuz you are definitely "scalding the dog." :))

Bob| 12.30.08 @ 12:50PM

Actually, Ammo Guy, many of we libertarian leaning Republicans have been pro-choice for decades. Without us, and our conservative Democrat cousins, Reagan never would have won. The party has always been a coalition. Once the leadership forgets that, the party is done -- and 40 years will not be enough.

Marc Jeric| 12.30.08 @ 1:01PM

I escaped from a communist country some 41 years ago; after 5 years in France I was accepted as a refugee-parolee to the US. I was totally race-unconscious - my first dentist was black and everybody in the office wondered "how come - don't I know the blacks are lazy and no-good?" I said - If everybody thinks so then this black dentist must be really and exceptionally good to survive such racism.
Since then I have been changing my opinions; first they call themselves "negroes"; then "colored people" like in the NAACP; then that name changed to "blacks"; and today the name is "African-Americans". There were also "Black Panthers", "Symbionese Army", and several others. Their "leaders" are a shameful collection of misfits and criminals, cheats and agitators, race hustlers and thieves, lyers and prevaricators. Those "Reverends" Wright, Jackson, and Sharpton are a shameful collection of all these attributes. As a mid-level boss in an engineering company I promoted a number of talented and hard-working blacks (or should I say African-Americans?) who had nothing in common with their self-proclaimed "leaders". When I look at people like Cynthia McKinley, Jefferson, Hastings, etc. - is it something about them or am I turning into a racist?

jose goldfinger| 12.30.08 @ 1:02PM

Is this the same "Bob" who doesn't think tax policy is related to revenue? My guess is yes. Here's a tip Bob on your latest great idea about expanding the party - it won't work. The expansion you seek (along with the Governator, Arlen Spector, and other RINOs) will destroy what's left of the GOP.
We had 8 years of compassionate, reaching out, conservatism and a pathetic candidate who was neither Democrat nor Rebuplican and was ever so sensitive about hurting the other sides feelings. That worked well didn't it?
The ditty was funny and on point. No retractions, no apologies. If the gutless weasels (Newt, Duncan and co) weren't sucking up to the race hustlers there wouldn't be an issue.

Jeremiah| 12.30.08 @ 1:07PM

Does the term "Southern strategy" ring a bell, Mr. Lord.

Did you think people wouldn't notice?

Dog whistle politics is weakening the Republican party, as well it should.

The Democratic had (and has) mighty demons in its history to confront. Republicans ought to learn from our mistakes.

Frank Marschino| 12.30.08 @ 1:13PM

We now live in the world where DemocRATs can invent "facts," sell them to the liberal media, and the ignorant among us take it as gospel. Well, now we have a conservative who exposes the hypicrisy that is the DemocRAT party. That drives the Left crazy, and they post here as if they have any clue on the facts, but their igorance is exposed. Such is life in the great US of A these days....

Ammo Guy| 12.30.08 @ 1:26PM

"Conservative Democrat cousins?" I thought all of those bigots left that party and joined ours.

papasri| 12.30.08 @ 1:27PM

The more I listen to Newt , the less I hope he will be rnc chief or run for president. He thinks that the health care costs can be cut just by computerising everything, and that old canard 'cut waste and fraud', he has bought into this global warming nonsense, etc.etc. He will be worse than McCain as apresidential candidate because he has no history of heroic service to the nation, nor does he he have any core conservative beliefs, but he will be anointed as the 'conservative' candidate
The other problem for Newt is that he probably suffers from ADHD, which keeps him from focussing on a small set of important issues. He also like McCain, wants the MSM to love him. He however could be a great 'sacrificial lamb' in 2012, which would end his political career. Newt's negatives probably are higher than Hillary and Palin combined !!!

L. Ross| 12.30.08 @ 1:33PM

I'm fascinated with all the comments about the KKK here on this comment board. I lived in Indiana for years (an historic home of the KKK) as well as Detroit area for years. When some black friends in the Marines moved into town, they wanted to get into an integrated neighborhood. Their realtor told them that if they moved north of 8 mile, the Klan would get them. I've been around quite a bit, and can only think of maybe one guy I've met who could qualify for Klan membership. The Klan has totally evaporated as a force in this country. They are a laughingstock and a bugaboo. No one takes them seriously; no one I've met. However, many of the posters on the board seem to think that they are still relevant in modern life. That said, I, like most Republicans commenting here, find it fascinating that the KKK has come to be associated with the Republican party. For goodness sake, we are the "make money" party. We don't have time to let racism get in the way of our constant quest for filthy lucre!

Bob| 12.30.08 @ 1:49PM

Jose, I see you are still economically disadvantaged into understanding that what I said was that tax policy was related to BOTH demand and supply -- not just supply as was implied by the blog. But that takes reason to understand, not just ideology.

Regarding the expansion of the party, reaching out to the libertarians of the Republican party is the ONLY thing that has worked in the past. We are the silent (except me) part of the Republican party that includes both the intelligentsia and people like Colin Powell. Regan and Bush could not have won without us. Moving even further to the right -- especially on social issues -- and not using reason based argumentation will push the party even further into the wilderness. The numbers of registered Republicans vs. Democrats simply back up this point. The younger generation is far more liberally socially than the old, white guys who run the Republican party.

I know you'd rather have your fantasies about a right wing cabal taking over the world. But at some juncture, you need to wake up and smell reality.

Louis Jenkins| 12.30.08 @ 1:50PM

The whole P. Shanklin thing is parody. Listen to more of his tunes. Somehow it boils down to who has their underwear tied in the biggest knot at the time and protests the loudest. Is Shanklin the only singer/writer/artist/reporter that takes an idea or statement and makes a mockery of it? Consider the whips and chains of outrageous fortune that Bush and staff have suffered at the hands of the political cartoonist, or consider the rough handling of our beloved, at least by the interns, Bill Clinton received. Lord has only pointed out the double standards that exists in our political/media system. Has Al Franken ever been kind with his comments on Conservatives? Need we be reminded that he used to make his living on comedy. Now it is "You called me a bad name, I'll call you a bad name", repeat as necessary is the standard. We've grown so serious about matters that we fail to see Shanklin for what he is, a comedian. Have a laugh and move on.

Ammo Guy| 12.30.08 @ 2:03PM

Well then, pardon me for not being excited about the candidates you propose and not voting for them either. If I'm going to wander in the wilderness for 40 years, I might as well as have some company.

VinceP1974| 12.30.08 @ 2:13PM

Marc Jeric : It's sad , isn't it, what the "Black Leadership" has fostered in their communities?

I have to conclude the Democrat Party is systematically destroying the country.

What else can explain the total failure to improve the situation for a group of people that vote for them over 90% of time?

The Leftist Self-Hating White Elite have enslaved the Blacks all over again and wiht their cultural Marxism they managed to get the Blacks to think someone else is oppressing them.

And only very few are brave enough in this country to speak against it.

I see some people in here saying the reason Republicans dont market to blacks is because of racism. Really now. I think it's because they probably have no idea how to speak the truth without causing the brain-dead to attack them.

The Left in this country , by their control of political language, has made it imposible to discuss these issues in a honest way.

The Left in Europe, which ahead in their tryanny, is beginning to realize what they have done to public debate and how they have damaged thier society because of it. It will be 50 years before the Drones here admit the same. This is from International Herald Tribune about Amsterdam/Netherlands. It's about the immigration problem with Muslims.. and issue that was taboo to talk about in the past because their were way to many Leftists who felt the need to be offended on behalf of other people. Now that their society is falling apart they realize this Thought Police Control has to stop.:
--------------------

Since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks in the United States, the Netherlands had lived through something akin to a populist revolt against accommodating Islamic immigrants led by Pim Fortuyn, who was later murdered; the assassination of the filmmaker Theo Van Gogh, accused of blasphemy by a homegrown Muslim killer; and the bitter departure from the Netherlands of Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a Somali woman who became a member of Parliament before being marked for death for her criticism of radical Islam.

Now something fairly remarkable is happening again.

Two weeks ago, the country's biggest left-wing political grouping, the Labor Party, which has responsibility for integration as a member of the coalition government led by the Christian Democrats, issued a position paper calling for the end of the failed model of Dutch "tolerance."

....

The paper said: "The mistake we can never repeat is stifling criticism of cultures and religions for reasons of tolerance."

Government and politicians had too long failed to acknowledge the feelings of "loss and estrangement" felt by Dutch society facing parallel communities that disregard its language, laws and customs.

Newcomers, according to Ploumen, must avoid "self-designated victimization."

She asserted, "the grip of the homeland has to disappear" for these immigrants who, news reports indicate, also retain their original nationality at a rate of about 80 percent once becoming Dutch citizens.

Instead of reflexively offering tolerance with the expectation that things would work out in the long run, she said, the government strategy should be "bringing our values into confrontation with people who think otherwise

Vernita| 12.30.08 @ 2:27PM

Why can't White people laugh at jokes about Black people? Is it because of slavery? Barack the magic Negro is funny. It actually minimizes his messianic aura. Which as a believer in the real One, I appreciate. When America is truly healed we will all be able to laugh freely at each other, without the automatic racist allegations that accost Whites who dare to be so insensitive as to laugh at us, tell jokes about us that are funny, and do so in public. Not for nothing, but I laugh at everybody. But I'm Black so I can. Yep that is as absurd as it sounds!

Havoc| 12.30.08 @ 2:28PM

Hey, where's Interloper and OT? I guess since they've been properly schooled by Mr. Lord, they crawled back under the rock they came from.
RINO Bob, it's your wing of the party that lost this election, now step aside. The rest of us are preparing for the Revolution!!!

Whatever| 12.30.08 @ 2:46PM

My money says Interloper is a public educator...and therein lies the problem...

John Q Reb| 12.30.08 @ 2:46PM

Mark, comment # 1, nails it squarely. You simply cannot use this kind of lingo today, whether explaining, analyzing, joking, enlightening, makes no difference. Never mind that the purpose was benign, it will not seem so when tThe PC crowd which is waiting to pounce gets through with you. You will be tarred and feathered as a racist when you should really be denounced as a naif. It is simply idiotic to go anywhere near language like this.

Bob| 12.30.08 @ 2:47PM

Havoc, I see you are having difficulty dealing with facts again. Libertarian Republicans didn't lose this election -- it was the selection of an unqualified Sarah Palin that made the difference. An event analysis of the RCP polling data proves this beyond any reasonable doubt.

Interloper| 12.30.08 @ 2:52PM

Jeffrey Lord is obviously a time-challenged person. He is confusing the 1970s with the 1870s. Maybe everyone at his country club is under that impression.

A brief history lesson. The Republican Party of the 1865-1880 was indeed the party that sought to integrate the freedmen into Southern society, economically and politically. That was the basis of its destruction at the hands of the white Southern oligarchy and the Klan. The Southern Republicans never recovered and the South became a place of one-party rule by the Southern Democrats or Dixiecrats.

However, all of that began to change starting around 1948, when the first cracks in segregation opened as a result of integration of the military. Strom Thurmond responded with the white supremacist campaign Trent Lott praised. By the time of Brown, a decade later, the Dixiecrats had developed the Massive Resistance Movement to stop desegregation. Then, after the suffering and successes of the modern civil rights movement in the 1960s, the white Southerners' political world turned upside down. Lyndon Johnson signed the civil rights acts. Courts began to enforce desegregation. Banks were held responsible for red-lining. Etc. The new Republican Party was born. The strategists of the Southern Strategy made the party of bankers and businessmen hospitable to the Dixiecrats. It would not be long before a Republican president was speaking to a cheering white crowd at the Neshoba County, Mississippi, state fair praising "state's rights' in doublespeak quite familiar to these former Democrats and progeny of Democrats. Only during the last decade has the South's hold on the GOP began to loose. That process resulted in the loss of Virginia, capitol of the Confederacy, and my home state of North Carolina to the African-American president elect this year.

The civil rights amendments to the U.S. Constitution were indeed intended to achieve what modern civil rights laws have largely done - end the vestiges of slavery and discrimination. However, once the North lost interest in the fate of the freedmen, lynch law, not constitutional law, ruled the South. Only in the 1960s was the stranglehold of white supremacy finally broken. It is a deeply held belief and people do not willingly release it. That is why it still plays such a significant role in American society.

My more sensitive students often want to know why the white Southerners of the 1860s-70s were so determined to dehumanize and terrorize the freedmen. They rightly note that a century of abuse would not have occurred if the civil rights amendments had been honored. The only answer I can give them is that power over others is too intoxicating to be surrendered willingly by people long use to it.

I haven't had a chance to read all the comments. But, based on skimming, I believe I'm accused of stepping on the toes of the guilty. I'll likely be doing more of that.

Ryan| 12.30.08 @ 3:05PM

John McCain of 2000 wins the race, and it really doesn't matter who his VP was. Americans didn't want another Old White Guy, and every GOP candidate had a fatal flaw.

Interloper| 12.30.08 @ 3:13PM

Shhh, Ryan. Many commenters here think the Republicans won the election. That is why they are filled with self-congratulation.

Bob| 12.30.08 @ 3:30PM

Interloper/Ryan -- Please don't try to use rational and intelligent arguments against the party of Sarah Palin. The natural evolution of a continued emphasis of belief over reason is an ultra-right Republican wing that has lost the ability to think. This is truly non-intelligent design.

Troy Riser| 12.30.08 @ 4:04PM

Any 'Magic Negro' song or comment or snarky aside by any non-African American public figure was bound to be a PR disaster, even more so if delivered by a Republican, and here it is. A Republican, I cringe whenever I see or hear most Republican or conservative efforts at show biz. In case you hadn't noticed, we aren't exactly a magnet for A-list celebrities. Go figure. All that said, it's time to move on. It was, as Jim Geheraty wrote, 'an unforced error'. The whole thing was stupid and indefensible, without even the somewhat redeeming quality of being funny.

I notice Interloper up there claiming to be some kind of toe-stepping watchdog of rightwing shennanigans. News, fail-troll: I read your seemingly endless and patronizing lecture on civil rights, and can only feel boundless pity for your students, poor souls, forced to endure it. Smug becomes you.

Lillith| 12.30.08 @ 4:04PM

After spending 5-10 minutes SKIMMING over this response board, I am left with one thought - don't you guys have jobs or something else to keep you entertained?
L

Todd| 12.30.08 @ 4:33PM

Bob,
Why do you keep pretending to be a fiscal conservative? I know from your former statements that you are a big government liberal so quit the charade. You already told me that you think social security and medicaid are great programs so why are you proclaiming yourself as a libertarian? I really don't know who you are trying to fool.

About your so-called outrage over the parody, the point you miss or choose to ignore is that Conservatives like Limbaugh parody the ridiculousness of liberal thought. If anybody deserves to be parodied, it it Al Sharpton and that idiot writer who coined Obama as the "Magic Negro". It is liberals who want to separate everyone by race and gender, not conservatives.

Are you serious about Caroline Kennedy's ability to speak well? She talks like a 16-year old girl with all her you knows, doesn't speak well for a Harvard Degree but I doubt she worked too hard for that. Somehow I don't see any Harvard professor failing her out no matter how poor her performance was. I actually hope she gets appointed since I would to see her in a debate when she had to actually get elected and everyone can find out how clueless she is.

Jeremiah| 12.30.08 @ 4:41PM

Troy --

I don't know what this will mean coming as it does from an unrepentant tax and spend liberal, but I think you must be the most sensible conservative posting on this thread -- or site.

Alan Brooks| 12.30.08 @ 4:46PM

damning troy with faint praise, eh?

Ammo Guy| 12.30.08 @ 4:49PM

I'm hurt that my buddy Jeremiah doesn't think that I am the most sensible conservative posting on this site...but I digress. Meanwhile, after 8 years, I'm tired of protecting ivory tower professors and their sensitive students so I'm going to take a break whilst you fend for yourselves - after all, you've got the political majority and apparently all the answers, so enjoy yourselves and don't bother me if you find the going a wee bit rough out there in the real world.

Interloper| 12.30.08 @ 4:56PM

I'm on vacation until next term, Lillith. I'm not familiar enough with the site to know whether the regular crew are employed are not. It seems doubtful for the several with anger management issues. I've contributed because so many of the far Right writers and commenters are not knowledgeable about the topics they try to discuss.

Jeremiah| 12.30.08 @ 5:13PM

Ammo --

If I'd known you were around, I would've included you, for certain.

Bob| 12.30.08 @ 5:22PM

Todd, my comments regarding social security and medicaid had to do with budget cuts. Since they represent 53% of the total budget, if you want to reduce federal spending you must cut these programs. I asked the rhetorical question of who would be willing to cut these programs.

I am in favor of raising the age limits and instituting means testing into these programs. How is that liberal? Your definitions escape me. Perhaps your love of Rush and Sarah blinds you.

I am not outraged by the parody, I just believe it is a poor way to expand the party. The fact that you aren't willing to parody Jews, Hispanics, old white people, etc., certainly shows your bias. It is a dumb thing to do if you want to expand the Republican party. However, I'm sure as one of the premier anti-intellectuals here, you'd disagree....

Troy Riser| 12.30.08 @ 5:27PM

Thanks, Jeremiah, although given the current of the times, a sensible conservative would be someone like Kathleen Parker or David Brooks or Christopher Buckley: someone oily slick and smart enough to jump on the Obama bandwagon, but then, unlike Brooks, I could give a damn Obama can discuss at length the ideas of Reinhold Niebuhr. Like many conservatives, my focus is on 2010 and 2012. The GOP is hope-driven right now, stuck in the wilderness, but if we use this time to build and regroup, we can put up winning candidates and we can run smart campaigns and we can beat these guys. McCain's--and Brooks' and Parker's--Dem Lite, soft conservativism is not the answer.

Alan brooks| 12.30.08 @ 5:36PM

Jeremiah is damn praisedly tarring Ammo with Troy's brush.

hope that is no mixed metaphor or that the syntax is too awry,
you see, my libfool parents sent me to publik skools.

William 5| 12.30.08 @ 5:40PM

Ah Mr. Lord and the other 'progressive' conservatives on here...don't hurt your arms patting yourselves on the back about how right your party is (currently and historically) and how wrong the other party is (currently and historically).

Integration and the Civil Rights movement weren't readily embraced by either party. The Dems golden boys, both JFK and RFK had great reservations about it (tho perhaps they didn't voice those reservations quite as dramatically as the Republican governors of the south of that era).

Shall we go back a bit farther? I'm quite sure a great majority of Lincoln's party fully embraced the Emancipation Proclimation and welcomed slaves immediately as equals into society. I'm not quite sure it happened that way.

The understatement of the year... race in this country is complicated as 'ell. Neither party has ever gotten it 'right'... I'm quite sure none of the myriad of races in this country have gotten right either.

I think a great deal of the misunderstanding, at least on my level, is the misconception, on the part of a great deal of the right, is that as of the end of the Civil Rights movement, all races were on equal footing. I recall hearing George Will talk about Obama and his plans to bring 'change' to Washington. And how that was a fundamental misconception. His point was that this country moves very very slowly... it does so on purpose... that was one of the goals of our founding fathers.

Therein lies the problem. The slaves were 'freed' in the late 1800s. The civil rights movement made its gains in the latter part of the 1900s. This country had 200 or so years of development which systematically left out a very specific portion of the population. You can't build something for 200 years, socially, economically (perhaps the most important point), and one day say "ok, we're all equal now, have at it".

Should we coddle any race? No. Should we just give things away to any race? No. Are there those who look to milk that history for ill-advised purposes? Yes. Should I, a young pale person myself, feel guilty about what happened? No. Should any of you conservatives feel guilty? No. Should this stop any of us from getting to the root of the problem and getting us moving forward? No.

Sharpton is at the fringe of the left... Duke at the fringe of the right. Why are we even discussing the lot of them?

Todd| 12.30.08 @ 5:46PM

You are not a libertarian Bob, you are in favor of Ivy League elites running the country with central planning so spare me your nonsense. I don't love Sarah but I respect her for being an accomplished woman. Of course, she is not a great Ivy League intellectual like Caroline Kennedy so she is probably not fit for public service in your opinion.

You said you were angry about the parody so I think outraged is not overstated what you said. What is with you about Jews? You think the Republican party would be better off if we were to be anti-semitic? Call me anti-intellectual all you want but your argument is very poor. Like I said, conservatives don't divide by race and gender like liberals always do. I suppose Republicans should go kiss the Rev Sharpton's ass like the Democrats do, than we could expand our base right? If you had a sense of humor, you would see good parody for what it is. The article is completely accurate, the media will distort the truth to paint Republicans and Limbaugh as racist as they always do but the real racism is on their side, hence the idiot writer calling Obama the "Magic Negro".

DaveS| 12.30.08 @ 6:03PM

Content AND timing are relevant in parody. This title is enough to turn people off - so, if you want people to see the content without being tweaked first, stop with the incendiary titling. Newt found it too hard to defend the content; that's too bad.

Todd| 12.30.08 @ 6:03PM

Willaim 5,
Your last sentence mentions that Sharpton is on the fringe left and Duke on the fringe right but how are both treated within the respective parties? Would any Republican of any worth court Duke like Sharpton is by the Democrats? Al Sharpton has blood on his hands unlike Duke so in one way he is worse and has never apologized for his despicable behavior that led to such tragedy. The author's point is that certain Republicans ala Gingrich feel compelled to apologize when there is no reason to do so but to appease the liberal press. In doing so, they do the party a grave disservice in playing into the liberal media's spin that Republicans are racist and don't want to help minorities.

ruth| 12.30.08 @ 7:32PM

Bob loves idiotic 'you know' Caroline Kennedy because she is Ivy League educated and pro-abortion; his two litmus tests.

Alan Brooks| 12.30.08 @ 7:49PM

Caroline's dad had trouble keeping his trousers on in mixed company.
but thats okay-- unless youre larry craig, because larry craig did the tinkerbell two step in unmixed company, in the can,
and wasnt out of the closet like a gay lecher ought to be.
Libs like honesty, Michael Jackson should just say

I wanna cub scout for christmas!

BJC| 12.30.08 @ 7:50PM

Excellent analysis, Mr. Lord! The RNC Chairman candidates who've entirely discredited themselves, to my way of thinking, are Duncan and Anuzis. The only legitimate ground on which to criticize Saltsman for including this particular Shanklin parody song would be: "Why bring this up?" But that then goes doubly for Duncan and Anuzis taking the Leftist Democrat stance and pounding it to advance themselves to the detriment of the Republican Party. What office, again, are these guys running for, and who are they running to represent?

Interloper| 12.30.08 @ 7:50PM

So, there is someone benighted enough to believe David Duke and other white supremacists don't have blood on their hands. One usually has to monitor Stormfront or American Renaissance to see such brazen bigotry.

Rev. Sharpton may be an opportunist, but he is not a domestic terrorist.

Todd| 12.30.08 @ 8:23PM

Interloper,
I am speaking of Duke specifically, I know of no incident with him where he has incited riots which lead to innocent people being killed. He is a despicable person but I don't see a direct connection unlike the incident the "Reverent" Sharpton is responsible for with his race baiting. If you have any factual evidence that says otherwise, I would like to hear it. That is not bigotry, that is just the facts of the matter. They are both equally reprehensible in my book and will both have a special place in hell that awaits them.

ruth| 12.30.08 @ 8:28PM

Sure, Interloper, Sharpton is only an opportunist: Tell that to the dead employees of Freddy's Fashion Mart. But, as a benighted liberal bigot, you not only hold Sharpton blameless, you actually condone and encourage his arsonist terroism.

Todd| 12.30.08 @ 8:35PM

I will also mention Interloper that the Rev Sharpton and David Duke have one thing in common, they both hate Jews and would love to see the destruction of Israel. I am guessing you are a big supporter of Palestinian rights and how terrible Israel is so you probably have sympathy for those views of Duke and Sharpton like many liberals.

ruth| 12.30.08 @ 8:41PM

Sharpton and Duke are both bigots; difference is Republicans reject Duke while Democrats like Interloper celebrate Sharpton. Typical Liberal hypocrisy.

Roy| 12.30.08 @ 10:57PM

William 5 wrote:
"The Dems golden boys, both JFK and RFK had great reservations about it (tho perhaps they didn't voice those reservations quite as dramatically as the Republican governors of the south of that era). "

In this sentence, "Republican" should be replaced with "Democrat".

Re: Interloper: Most people saying that would be referring to Al Sharpton's making a speech outside a Jewish-owned store filled with raving bigotry such as that the store was owned by "White Interlopers". One of his followers decided to do something about this and burned the place down, killing the owners.

I'm pretty sure if there were recent, comparable incidents involving David Duke he'd be in jail; but go ahead and shoot if you know of one.

And as for calling people here "brazen bigots" well..that comment can of course go directly back into the hole from which it emerged.

Rev Spitz| 12.31.08 @ 12:28AM

You seem to imply there is something wrong if a babykilling abortion mill is burned or bomb. Which do you prefer, a pile of bricks or a pile of dead babies? Innocent unborn babies deserve to be protected just as born children deserve to be protected. You would have no problem protecting born children if they were about to be murdered.
SAY THIS PRAYER: Dear Jesus, I am a sinner and am headed to eternal hell because of my sins. I believe you died on the cross to take away my sins and to take me to heaven. Jesus, I ask you now to come into my heart and take away my sins and give me eternal life.

KC| 12.31.08 @ 12:45AM

Obama himself answered the whole controversy: "Words, just words?"

Greg| 12.31.08 @ 1:17AM

I think everyone here is missing the point of this whole "controvesy." Yes, there will be Republicans who find anything making fun of any liberal to be funny. And there will be limp-wristed pansies who feel they have to apologize anytime a black person is offended. Personally, I didn't find the "Barack the Magic Negro" song to be that funny, atleast not as funny as Shanklin's other songs. That said, it was a satire on white liberals, Al Sharpton, and a black, liberal columnist who first used the term. But what really should be looked at is the term itself.

The word "negro" has hardly been offensive for many years, I wonder why, all of a sudden, it has become a hotbed of controversy. Obviously the term is NOT that offensive, otherwise it wouldn't have been printed in an L.A. Times opinion piece. With black comedians making a living off of joking on white people, the use of the word "cracker", etc. there is enough evidence to point to real racism against whites that makes the Shanklin parody song seem laughable.

Lastly, why is everyone so concerned about the "Barack the Magic Negro" song and NOT about the title of the CD which is "We Hate the USA." (referring to liberals). It's quite funny liberals protest more to the use of the word "negro" (which is pseudo-insensitive at best) than at the stereotype they are non-patriotic, even spiteful of their own nation. Actions speak louder than words.

Interloper| 12.31.08 @ 4:02AM

(Scratching head.) If Shanklin was writing about white liberals, 'pansies' (sic) or the weather, why did he call the song 'Barack the Magic Negro?'

Sure seems like he, and Chip Saltsman, think they're taking a swipe at the President-elect.

I've not seen a single commentary in a mainstream publication that shares the perspective that the media somehow made Saltsman create this scandal. It seems to be a talking point sent to Right Wing and Republican venues by Saltsman himself.

It also does not help that Saltsman resembles a chipmunk with oral cancer. Even if he wins the RNC chairmanship, he will be the source of much mockery to come.

Vince1974| 12.31.08 @ 5:35AM

If Shanklin was writing about white liberals, 'pansies' (sic) or the weather, why did he call the song 'Barack the Magic Negro?'

So you haven't even listened to the song?

You Lefties are so damn ignorant about everything you complain about. It's unbelievable.

No matter the topic.... you people whine and complain and blame and cry and moan

and as usual., you dont even know what the facts are.

What a pathetic waste.

Bob| 12.31.08 @ 8:21AM

Todd, who ever said I liked central planning? Who said that all graduates from Ivy League schools are liberals? Central planning in a basically capitalistic society makes little sense except in longer term venues like energy and infrastructure. You are confusing intellect with central planning -- something I might expect from a right wing radical.

Secondly, I don't think Caroline Kennedy would make a good senator. I am consistent on this one. I didn't think Sarah Palin was qualified and I don't think Caroline Kennedy is either. It has nothing to do with smarts in either case -- it has to do with knowledge.

On this issue, you said that Republicans should not be anti-Semitic and compared that with "Magic Negro". Thank you for proving my point that this action is anti-black and that Republicans would not dare parody any other group. It is proof positive of what I am saying -- that Republicans are a group of old white people who don't want other ethnic groups in the party. That must change if we want to win elections.

John McNeill| 12.31.08 @ 9:30AM

Ummm Bob and Interloper... how many times does this need to be repeated... listen to the song before commentating. It has nothing to do with bashing blacks. It's bashing certain liberals who were accusing Obama of not being "black" enough. LIBERALS. I listen to many of Shanklin's parodies and those are the only target he goes after... LIBERALS.

And Bob, your arguments makes no sense, considering how prior to Duncan the last chair of the GOP was Hispanic, and the one preceding that was Jewish.

John McNeill| 12.31.08 @ 9:41AM

And by argument I'm referring to your claim that the GOP is a bunch of old white men who don't want any other ethnic groups.

Bob| 12.31.08 @ 11:11AM

John, I heard the song when it was first played on Limbaugh. My point is that you will not see similar parodies concerning Jews, Hispanics, old people, etc., since there seems to be some sensitivities with those groups. It isn't that Shanklin targets liberals, it is that the style he chose in this particular case is not appropriate for a party that needs to expand its base.

Regarding blacks, Hispanics, and Jews in the Republican party, of course they exist. And believe it or not, there are some white liberals. But the percentages of the electorate that are minority members of the Republican party is awfully small. For example, out of the thousands of delegates to the Republican convention, only 36 were black. In addition, this was a significant decline from previous conventions.

John McNeill| 12.31.08 @ 11:36AM

Bob, I understand the desire to grow the base, but I don't think it's wise to buy the liberal propaganda about the song, in essence, we are operating on their terms. We need to make it fundamentally clear to people that the song is an attack on liberals and their hypocrisy, that it was an attack on the media and their obsession with race. I think that will have a stronger impact on black conservatives and moderates, rather than repeating the talking points of CNN and the NAACP. The GOP has shifted left enough as it is, we should not give anymore ground.

I think that what's more important than worrying about party demographics is to focus on the actual values of the party, and their willingness to adhere to them. The GOP has done a real lousy job at adhering to their principles, which is why conservatives like me abandoned it years ago. Ron Paul has brought me back to the party but I understand that we are at a crossroads. If we spend more time focusing on restoring true conservative principles to the party and less on political correctness, then I think we can establish a party that will once again appeal to conservatives across the board, regardless of skin-color.

Interloper| 12.31.08 @ 11:55AM

Why would anyone think that hearing the song would help Saltman's case? Like other thoughtful people, I am familiar with all the source material. A white man singing in what he believes to black dialect doesn't do y'all any favors. Instead, it reminds people why radio and television programs such as 'Amos and Andy' and 'Tarzan' are no longer presented, ie., they offer offensive racist stereotypes. The entire 'parody' simply isn't. Instead it is a revelation of the kind of bigotry that white people who still haven't gotten over the end of slavery, not to mention the civil rights movement, appreciate.

Nor will Saltsman stop giving. Name him RNC chairman and he will be involved in another controversy about race, ethnicity or religion within months. Since he claims that distributing the CD was a great idea, maybe Saltsman will have Shanklin perform 'Barack the Magic Negro,' live, in blackface. That will be the media's fault, eh?

Bob| 12.31.08 @ 12:10PM

John, it was not only liberals who objected to the song, but many conservatives who thought the party has a tin ear to anyone who is not white and religious. It is possible you know, to stand for your principles without demeaning the other side. It seems that Republicans are the party of old ideas and "just say no".

The issue, then, is what do we mean with the word "conservative". The part that deals with fiscal conservativism, a strong military, and individual responsiblity is a message that can resonate. The message regarding religion and intolerance to other people's beliefs, just makes the party smaller. If we concentrate on the former message and actually develop conservative solutions to the issues based on reason instead of ideology and belief, I think it is the best message.

Ron Paul was indicative of the notion that we have to be intelligent about what we think and do. But the intelligent people do not do well in this party and that is hurting the cause of conservatism. Furthermore, the rebuke of people like Brooks, Will, Buckley, Powell, etc., during the course of this election only supports the notion that the bulk of the party is not interested in smart, conservative dialog, but wants a pseudo religious leader in the White House.

John McNeill| 12.31.08 @ 12:15PM

Interloper, what's wrong with Paul Shanklin impersonating Al Sharpton? He impersonates every other liberal out there, from Uncle Keg to Bubba; why not go after a liberal who happens to have dark skin?

To me, we only perpetuate the legacy of racism when we create these taboos, like white men can't impersonate black men. If we want a color blind society we need to tear these walls down.

And the Magic Negro song was only one song on the CD. It would have been odd if Saltsman handed out that one song, but he didn't, he gave out the whole CD. And considering how Saltsman is a friend of Shanklin, this really doesn't surprise me. It's a non-issue. Let's talk about real things that matter, like how nation-building, bailouts, and pork spending have really hurt the party.

John McNeill| 12.31.08 @ 12:20PM

Bob, I concur that fiscal responsibility and limited government are what defines true conservatism. While I consider myself a religious conservative, I believe such social issues should be handled on a state level rather than a federal level.

Interloper| 12.31.08 @ 12:49PM

Most, if not all, the songs on the CD are offensive. 'Barack the Magic Negro' attracted the most attention because it is a bigot sneering at the President-elect. That doesn't mean people other than white mossbacks approve of the rest of collection. I've already explained what is wrong with Shanklin's 'parodies,' as have some of the best opinion and editorial writers in the country.

Catching up on the reaction, I happened across a political parody that is funny. It is called 'Rush the Magic Junkie.'

John McNeill| 12.31.08 @ 12:54PM

I think most of the "best" opinion and editorial writers in the country need to get a sense of humor.

And I have no problem with Rush the Magic Junkie. Parody away! We all need to get a few laughs out of the crap and shenanigans that goes on in politics.

John M| 12.31.08 @ 1:19PM

Despite the title "Barack the Magic Negro" the song was more of a well executed parody of Al Sharpton, which like all parodies only becomes really funny if it is able to accurately capture a person's mannerisms and style of speaking, which it did extremely well. It was all done in good fun, and there didn't seem to be anything in it that was intentionally malicious or offensive. One would have to be very dour indeed not to find the humor in it. I found many of the SNL skits of McCain/Palin/Bush also hilarious, but why should the left feel that they have the exclusive copyright on political humor and satire. Most of the expressions of outrage on the left are mere pretense to gain some temporary political advantage. That said, this is Rush's material and it seems very ill-advised to try to put the GOP's stamp on it.

Attilla the Bun| 12.31.08 @ 1:38PM

So... Interloper... how do you feel about the original article that was written about Barack? (in 2007)

After all, you claim to be familiar with the source material...

Oh, and name two other songs on the CD that you "know" is so offensive?

William 5| 12.31.08 @ 1:45PM

Roy, you're right - they were all Dems, that was my error.

This whole thing is quite simple - we're talking about this country's very complicated, very sensitive (obviously, look at the emotions being expressed here) history with race. And more specifically, between two races. Regardless of the song's content, regardless of its intentions, it's bloody called "Obama the Magic Negro". And it was penned by a white man. That's gonna cause a stir. Whether you like it or not, it's gonna cause a stir. This is known. You can argue til you're blue in the face, given this country's difficult history with two specific races, it's going to be interpreted many ways - many interpretations of which will be incorrect.

If any race is going to be overly sensitive let it be the one which had its ass handed to it for 200 years. I don't have a problem with that - why do you?

John McNeill| 12.31.08 @ 2:16PM

"If any race is going to be overly sensitive let it be the one which had its ass handed to it for 200 years. I don't have a problem with that - why do you?"

Well we're never going to progress at all as a country if we become so sensitive over something so irrelevant. We're facing a ten-trillion dollar debt, a broken economy with socialist/fascist "solutions" being offered, erosion of our freedoms, an over-extended military, and the slow dismantling of our national sovereignty. We all need to look at things in perspective.

William 5| 12.31.08 @ 2:40PM

John, regarding your list of current challenges facing our country... I couldn't agree more.

However, this country is long overdue for a very frank discussion about race. It's going to be rather uncomfortable for a lot of folks. And that's fine. Let's have at it.

I'd rather not have Sharpton or Jackson as part of the discussion, they don't represent those I pay attention to (and I'm a lefty). I'd rather get folks like Michael Eric Dyson and Cornell West involved.

John McNeill| 12.31.08 @ 3:03PM

And what will this frank discussion on race include? Will I be blamed for actions committed by people whom I'm not even descended from? Will there will be acknowledgment of complexity, such as Africans selling slaves in the beginning? Or blacks owning slaves in America?

I'm glad that you think that Sharpton and Jackson wouldn't add to any dialogue, but I can't help but feel that any "discussion" will ultimately turn into a blame whitey/demand for reparations.

Nor do I think it will contribute in achieving a color-blind society, only reinforce the social constructs.

William 5| 12.31.08 @ 4:04PM

John, I wouldn't even know where to begin. What the discussion would include is a very good question - one I don't have the answer to.

I've been fortunate to have friends and family of various races, religions, creeds, etc., but my experiences have not been theirs. I'm limited to that which I have witnessed and read.

I'm happy to have found this website - there are very very intelligent folks on here (some far more intelligent than I) who have very different views than I. Not all the posts are constructive, but it's good to have discussions which are beyond "you're a dumb liberal" and "you're a dumb conservative".

John McNeill| 12.31.08 @ 4:19PM

"Not all the posts are constructive, but it's good to have discussions which are beyond "you're a dumb liberal" and "you're a dumb conservative"."

+1 ;)

ruth| 12.31.08 @ 4:59PM

William 5, Barack The Magic Negro was originally penned by a Liberal Black Columnist writing for the LA Times. Shanklin's song is just a parody of it, can you discern the difference? We have a black president now--does that count for anything? I am not afraid of any racial discussions, are you?

Ammo Guy| 1.1.09 @ 7:22AM

"If any race is going to be overly sensitive let it be the one which had its ass handed to it for 200 years. I don't have a problem with that - why do you?" Geez, every freaking race and/or ethnic group has had its ass handed to it at some point in time - many for a lot longer than a mere 2 centuries. I guess I should still be peeved at the English for mistreating my Irish forebears, but I'm not...how many times do you have to dig up Cromwell's corpse and rehang it? As the Eagles sang a few years ago - "get over it!" So, for what it's worth - Happy New Year.

stmichrick| 1.1.09 @ 12:28PM

The fact that Republicans/conservatives are debating this issue tells me we are far from a rebirth.

The timing and wisdom of Saltsman's CD distribution is debatable from a strategic standpoint and will determine his success.

However I have never seen such a display of willful ignorance on the part of those
who state that this parody is disparaging in a RACIALLY offensive way. THE PARODY IS ABOUT THE POLITICAL RESENTMENT SHOWN BY THE OLD GUARD IN LOSING POWER OVER THE CIVIL RIGHTS INDUSTRY!

It disgusts me that certain 'preferred' minorities or political factions are considered by some to be off-limits for parody and criticism. Why do conservatives and Republicans so frequently allow the other side to set the rules for what is acceptable discourse? Why do we assume that all black people take exception to satirizing Al Sharpton?

And to you liberals (Bob): any political movement is eligible for the same level of criticism that has been earned by President Bush.

stmichrick| 1.1.09 @ 12:28PM

The fact that Republicans/conservatives are debating this issue tells me we are far from a rebirth.

The timing and wisdom of Saltsman's CD distribution is debatable from a strategic standpoint and will determine his success.

However I have never seen such a display of willful ignorance on the part of those
who state that this parody is disparaging in a RACIALLY offensive way. THE PARODY IS ABOUT THE POLITICAL RESENTMENT SHOWN BY THE OLD GUARD IN LOSING POWER OVER THE CIVIL RIGHTS INDUSTRY!

It disgusts me that certain 'preferred' minorities or political factions are considered by some to be off-limits for parody and criticism. Why do conservatives and Republicans so frequently allow the other side to set the rules for what is acceptable discourse? Why do we assume that all black people take exception to satirizing Al Sharpton?

And to you liberals (Bob): any political movement is eligible for the same level of criticism that has been earned by President Bush.

Robert Rosencrans| 1.3.09 @ 7:02AM

Political satire is as American as apple pie and a historian like Newt Gingrich should know that and most likely does. Newt Gingrich is part of a an ever growing problem, and one that soon promises to engulf the Magic Negro, Barack Obama.

It is a sad saga, and one that no amount of satire appears able to stop or even slow down. Newt Gingrich and many others came to Washington, D.C. to do good, and stayed to do well.

A new group has sprung up in this country who are neither Republican or Democrat, they are part of a new breed called Washingtonians.

They tolerate the electorate through simple minded but expensive gimmicks like bail outs and stimulus checks, but their real goal is absolute power and continuing paychecks even after they've left elected office.

Bill Clinton is another good example of this new breed. They appear to be everywhere, either behind the scenes or appearing as penultimate experts on just about anything concerning Washington. Whether you observe them or not the cash register is always churning their way.

They are responsible for the dumbing down of the public school systems, affirmative action, out of control spending and the destruction of everything good about corporate America. It was all done under the guise of diversity and multiculturalism, two components of an overall plan to destroy any and all personal incentive.

In the meantime, Washingtonians like Newt Gingrich make sense some of the time, but in reality, they are wolfs in sheep's clothing, pretending to be part of a flock while they have assimilated themselves as part of a larger flock, a Washingtonian.

Their standards are nebulous, a standard which is only determined by wondering aloud if it passes the smell test of a Washingtonian. Climate change, biofuels and the attempt to pass an ill thought out national health care plan are all part of their creed.

The facts and long term effects don't matter. Once you become a Washingtonian you must fit into the cookie cutter pattern of thought and action or you are out.

Those appearances on PMSNBC and MSLSD and even Fox News are out and those lucrative little pay outs are gone. You would no longer be a paid Washingtonian, unelected no more, but always there, trying to hang onto your seat inside the beltway.

To Paul Shanklin and Rush Limbaugh I say thank you. At no cost to taxpayers and without substantial government studies, you cut right through to what is wrong in America. Hypocrisy is rewarded and political correctness must not be violated. Those who do are publicly lynched with much enthusiasm.

I don't mean to pick on Newt Gingrich. He is but one example. Colin Powell is another. How many political hypocrites can one city embrace? The number appears limitless, almost like the public's patience with all this idiocy.

In the meantime, let's not forget Ayn Rand. Here is a quote from the Fountainhead.

"Let's take two parallel lines. I'm inclined to agree with Euclid, I don't think these two parallels will ever meet. . . .No man likes to be beaten. But to be beaten by the man who has always stood as the particular example of mediocrity in his eyes, to start by the sie of this mediocrity and to watch it shoot up, while he struggles and gets nothing but a boot in his face, to see the mediocrity snatch from him, one after another, the chances he'd give his life for, to see the mediocrity worshipped. . . .well, my little amateur, do you think the Spanish Inquisition ever thought of a torture to equal this?"

OCPatriot| 1.3.09 @ 7:01PM

Face it. The word "negro" is demeaning, and to those from the South it is doubly so. The Republican Party, evidently, doesn't understand how much better off it would be if, instead of critcizing and carping, complaining and whining, it adopt a healthy, forward-looking cooperative attitude. We have a crisis here in the U.S., a bad one that affects all of us, those with protfolios and investment accounts, and those of us without them who struggle every day to meet our bills, and the Republican Party has been derelect for too long in (a) promising to work with the party in power in a cooperative fashion to help solve these destructive problems (yes, they affect you, too), and (b) proposing new solutions, innovative solutions, that will solve some of these problems. Standing on the sidelines, starting a "shadow government" (ominous sounding, isn't it?), singing little ditties that criticize the (yes, he was elected and by a majority) new President-to-be, all are stupid childish reactions that impotent people participate in. Be strong, resolute, bring the best minds forward, get some new really effective ideas on the table, talk about cooperation and bi-partisanship, or risk being consigned to the ashheap of history.

Phil| 1.4.09 @ 12:35AM

Why parady Ehrenstein's article in the first place?
"The Magic Negro is a figure of postmodern folk culture, coined by snarky 20th century sociologists, to explain a cultural figure who emerged in the wake of Brown vs. Board of Education. "He has no past, he simply appears one day to help the white protagonist," reads the description on Wikipedia...
The senator's famously stem-winding stump speeches have been drawing huge crowds to hear him talk of uniting rather than dividing. A praiseworthy goal. Consequently, even the mild criticisms thrown his way have been waved away, "magically." He used to smoke, but now he doesn't; he racked up a bunch of delinquent parking tickets, but he paid them all back with an apology. And hey, is looking good in a bathing suit a bad thing?

The only mud that momentarily stuck was criticism (white and black alike) concerning Obama's alleged "inauthenticty," as compared to such sterling examples of "genuine" blackness as Al Sharpton and Snoop Dogg. Speaking as an African American whose last name has led to his racial "credentials" being challenged — often several times a day — I know how pesky this sort of thing can be.

Obama's fame right now has little to do with his political record or what he's written in his two (count 'em) books, or even what he's actually said in those stem-winders. It's the way he's said it that counts the most. It's his manner, which, as presidential hopeful Sen. Joe Biden ham-fistedly reminded us, is "articulate." His tone is always genial, his voice warm and unthreatening, and he hasn't called his opponents names (despite being baited by the media).

Like a comic-book superhero, Obama is there to help, out of the sheer goodness of a heart we need not know or understand. For as with all Magic Negroes, the less real he seems, the more desirable he becomes. If he were real, white America couldn't project all its fantasies of curative black benevolence on him"

How far off the mark is he? Was Barrack elected for who he is or what he is?

Snarky sampleton| 1.4.09 @ 2:41PM

I suppose now you're going to introduce the song to your congregation since some of them voted you in.

ruth| 1.4.09 @ 5:54PM

OC, if the word negro is derogatory, why did a liberal use it in the original article? Talk about racism, you democrats are trying to block a black man from the senate. The only black senator, I might add. How is this the 'change' you promised? Sounds like the same old southern democrat bigotry of the past. Who are you to demand our acquiescence when your own party is in turmoil?

Harden Smith| 1.4.09 @ 9:15PM

I had a racist teacher who used it and she liked to slur the word into Nigra. Which sounded so close to the N word that it was difficult to tel them apart. No wonder it's considered improper to use these days. Sounds like somebody's Maccaca moment here.

ruth| 1.4.09 @ 9:50PM

Yeah, it's a Maccaca moment for that liberal reporter who first said it. Everything is improper to say today--unless it's against a SoCon like Sarah Palin; then it's bombs away.

Jim| 1.25.09 @ 3:21PM

I agree with all the earnest and correct conservative sentiment expressed in this blog, but at the end of the day, it was still tactically STUPID for a white man to use the term "negro" in such a context. It is not a matter of political correctness. It is a matter of speaking to people in terms they will understand.

Jim| 1.25.09 @ 3:24PM

P.S. Regarding my previous comment: Life is not FAIR! Get over it! ...and get to work :-)

air max| 7.27.09 @ 11:21PM

en, thanks for posting,,,,,,,,,,,

nbjknn| 8.19.09 @ 11:22PM

Always leading the avant-garde of fashion without compromising traditional craftsmanship of luxury leather goods
Louis Vuitton
Louis Vuitton Replica
Louis Vuitton outlet is also active in other ...

CheapLouis VuittonReplica Handbags,Purses,Wallets Outlet and
Louis Vuitton Replica
Designer Bags,Shoes Outlet Store - discount price is our special offer, ...
Louis Vuitton Outlet

Tiffany Jewelry| 8.30.09 @ 10:05PM

Official abercrombie and fitch Store for all

tees, caps, hoodies, bags,abercrombie clothes,abercrombie fitch Shirts and

much more!

links of london| 9.11.09 @ 12:42AM

Thanks for your information, i have read it, very good！

Supra Shoes| 11.18.09 @ 4:40AM

Supra Shoes
Supra Skytop Shoes