Hope and Change 2 – The Party of Inclusion

The Daily Show, September 5, 2012

What are the limits of Democrats’ “inclusiveness”?

Topics:

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • Church_of_Jed

    We don’t mind being not welcome, but we worry that not enough of us will draw the necessary conclusion and we won’t as a community be prepared for the future…

    http://westernrifleshooters.wordpress.com/2012/09/03/bracken-when-the-music-stops-how-americas-cities-may-explode-in-violence/

    • Puggg

       You must read Ann Barnhardt.

      I read this, too.  I don’t think the “stuff” can “go down” in a sustained long term fashion that this writer thinks it can.  The big error in his thinking is that if the blacks are as rowdy and destructive as he thinks, their electricity will get disrupted and they won’t be able to use their smartphones to keep on organizing riots and mobs.

      • Church_of_Jed

        He’s making three unwarrented assumptions about food, power, and guns, although his essay deserves reading and spreading.

        Corrections:

        Food won’t keep going to any areas except to govt. employees, who will get theirs at protected warehouses and army bases.

        Electricity will be off.

        Blacks also have the military training and will organize and arm the MUYs.

        • Puggg

           But blacks in the military largely avoid combat roles.  The only thing they could teach the MUYs in terms of military organization is how to be an affirmative action paper pusher.  If there are Hispanic gangs in this fashion, then you have to worry.  Because just as Hispanic gangsters are using the military for training to bring back home, they’ll help organize Hispanic mobs.

          • Church_of_Jed

            Unless the black Diversity vets promise the “youth” and “teens” each a blonde White girl as reward for service.

          • libertarian1234

            “But blacks in the military largely avoid combat roles.”

            For quite some time now blacks have been installed in various non-combat roles due to the immense amount of complaining by the black leadership that blacks were mostly used as bullet stoppers, even though the vast majority were unqualified for most all non-support roles.

            Complaints used to be made about the fact that it took instructors twice as long to train them and, even at that, they still weren’t really qualified.   Such complaints are taboo now with the far left brass in power at the present time.

            Carter and Clinton…and even Bush II…..slowly promoted those types in the Pentagon who were in lock step with social engineering.

            Obama’s tenture…..supported by old Banana Nose, Leon Panetta…..is responsible for a giant shift to PC. If he is re-elected, we won’t recognize what the military will eventually deteriorate to. 

  • Puggg

    The Republican Party looks like America on the convention floor but looks like Africa, Mexico and Israel on stage.  The Democrat Party looks like Africa, Mexico and Israel on both the floor and the stage.

  • guest

    Considering that liberals are an enemy to white heterosexual gun-toting males, I really don’t see how this is bad.  I would never in my life want to associate myself with these crazed liberals.

  • Hats off to the Daily Show. But not trucker hats, ’cause those are worn by stupid, ugly, bigoted white guys (who are intolerant)!

  • Yeah those gun toting White guys are only good enough to die in places like Afghanistan or Iraq, but their votes are no longer sought by the party lead by that Nobel peace prize lariat, as they’re replaceable. That’s modern day loyalty for you.
    The majority demographic/ideology gets to define us all, unfortunately current the majority
    is made of minority groups who’re amalgamating as the disenfranchised majority (in PC contradictions work) and who need an common enemy to blame for their own short comings, who through a process of elimination of peeling away the layers of weakness (aka PC ‘strength’) is the heterosexual, Christian, White male.

    I suppose in one way I agree with the left in terms of a target, as I see my own short comings
    as my hindrance to brilliance, they too see my demographic as their reason for failure. The difference in perspective is one blames internal forces the other external.   

    Drumming up support for the left must be like shooting fish in a barrel “life isn’t going the way TV tells you it should, then vote for us and we’ll rid you of that White bogey man who’s holding us all back”.

  • JohnEngelman

    I am reasonably confident that a plurality of those at the Democratic National Convention are heterosexual, white gentile males. 

    • IstvanIN

       If you are right then the real question is: why?

      • JohnEngelman

        Because they know that the Republican Party right now wants to repeal the economic reforms of the twentieth century and restore the rule of plutocrats. 

        • Sherman_McCoy

          Er, John . . .

    • The__Bobster

      It’s easy to get a plurality out of a bunch of misfits like that. You might need only 20%.

    • Ulick

      If by plurality you mean the most numerous sub-group in attendence at the DNC, then it’s likely white females and not heterosexual, white males that are the plurality at the DNC.  All statistics show white women being far more apt to vote Democrat than heterosexual, white men.

  • JohnEngelman

    Anyone can go to a gathering of people, interview a large number, and then select the interviews of those who are easy to ridicule. 

    • The__Bobster
      • JohnEngelman

        He is not condemning all Christians, only Evangelicals. Even then he is not speaking for the entire Democratic Party. If I had interviewed delegates to the Republican National Convention I could have found quite a few who believe that President Obama was born in Kenya, that he is a Muslim, that he hates America, and so on. I might even have found one who thought that the killing of Osama bin Laden was a hoax, and that bin Laden is still alive. 

        • Sherman_McCoy

          Er, John . . .

        • 5n4k33y3s

          You say that as if you saw the body of Osama Bin Laden  before it was dumped in the ocean. Come on man.

          You really believe Osama Bin Laden was killed in Abottobad Pakistan? You just take politicians at their word?

          Normally, you have to show the body to collect the bounty – unless you’re so special no one calls your bluff, I guess.

          • Carol Clark

             Hilarious.  Good call, John.

        • bluffcreek1967

          Yes, he’s specifically condemning Evangelicals because they are the kind of Christians who take seriously the message of the Bible and refuse to water it down with religious pluralism. Many conservative Catholics, Greek Orthodox Christians, and more traditional Protestants would also fall into this camp.

          ‘Liberal Christianity” or ‘Ecumenical Christianity,’ on the other hand, is not really a threat to liberals because they don’t espouse ‘hard’ Bible doctrines such as eternal punishment, condemnation of homosexuality, sin, God’s wrath and Christ as the only way to God. They are essentially liberals, except they wrap themselves in the banner of Christianity or religiousity. They employ the language of Christianity, but give its major doctrines foreign meanings never intended by the writers of the New Testament. Secular liberals understand this, and that’s why they don’t feel threatened by ‘gay’ churches or ‘ecumenical’ churches that teach there are many ways to God.

          • JohnEngelman

            The Bible has many more passages expressing concern for the poor than condemnation of homosexuality. By supporting the Republican Party the religious right serves mammon rather than God. 

      • Puggg

         I wish more fundamentalist Christians would pay attention to people like that.  Nobody should so insanely love people that hate them back.

    •  
      The left has used that technique for years. It’s straight out of Alinskys’ Rules For Radicals. Mock and ridicule.
       
      For some reason, the ultra-leftist Daily Show has chosen to mock and ridicule Democrats for a change.
       
      My best guess would be that the Democrats hypocrisy in invoking of tolerance and inclusion are so glaringly disconnected from their own intolerance and exclusiveness that the Daily Show had to hightlight this fact before they were called out for ignoring the obvious. 
       
       

      • 5n4k33y3s

         The reality is, most progressives are not aware they are partaking in an antisocial conspiracy. They just don’t think for themselves, and they can’t reliably detect when others are using emotional persuasion rather than appealing to logic.

      • bluffcreek1967

        That’s a good point. I also think The Daily Show, now and then, does ‘token’ segments exposing the lunacy of Democrats and even some liberal politicians. Similar to the ACLU which periodically supports some right-wing court case or defends the free speech of Nazis in order to appear ‘fair-minded’ and ‘objective,’ so also does The Daily Show poke fun at their own kind in order to appear ‘neutral.’ But other than those rare occasions, the overwhelming amount of segments on The Daily Show are about ridiculing conservatives.

    • bluffcreek1967

      Yes, that’s true. But the opinions and attitudes expressed by the people in the segment is very much representative of the Democratic Party. Granted, not every Democrat adheres to such beliefs, but one would be hard-pressed to prove that this isn’t a dominant view among them. For many years now, the Democratic Party has been taken over by hard core leftists, environamentalists, feminists, and militants of almost every stripe who are opposed to the founding principles of our country. Many of them are not merely anti-American, they are anti-White.   

      • JohnEngelman

        The Democratic Party has not moved to the left. It has stood by passively as the U.S. economy has changed from one that creates goods, services, and jobs, to one that enables multi millionaires like Mitt Romney to become richer by manipulating money in ways few people understand, and which only benefits fellow investors.
               
        While this has happened, the Republican Party has moved to the right, and attempts to repeal the basic economic reforms of the twentieth century. 

  • Detroit_WASP

    I must be their worst nightmare.  I belong to the NRA, hunt, fish, drive a truck, have 3 college degrees and run a successful business.   Not exactly the stereo-type they like.

  • libertarian1234

    Such out-of-touch fools interviewed in this video.  Such hate,  bigotry and hypocrisy in their remarks,  yet they’re obviously so dense they can’t see any of it.

    These are the dregs of white society.

  • It is no surprise that a recent Gallup poll found that 69% of the non-religious support the Dems.

    • zimriel

      I call nonsense on this claim that these 69% are non-religious. Most of them worship Pharaoh Puttmostest the First.

  • tickyul

    Yup, the Demorats are some of the most hateful, intolerant folks in this once fine country.

  • Church_of_Jed

    Just imagine the possible glories if Eve Carson, Channon Christian, and Brittny Watts had been glocked and loaded with finger on the trigger when most needed…

  • anarchyst

    WHY does Jerusalem figure in an AMERICAN election cycle?? I guess it shows who the TRUE supremacists are . . . (it ain’t white).

    • This is why a lot of people, even people who aren’t obsessed with what you like to call the “tribe,” don’t like the current US-Israel relationship.  I no more want our politics to obsess over which city is or should be Israel’s capital than Israeli politics to obsess over which city should be our capital.  Not having that plank in the DNC platform at first was one of the very few right things I agreed with from the DNC.

      Likewise, I no more want our banal talking heads to go to Israel to “teach” them how to “restore courage” (cough, cough, Glenn Beck, cough cough), then I would want, for example, a prominent Rabbi in Israel to come here to fill up a stadium to “teach” us how to “restore courage.”

      Also, political platforms are meaningless pieces of paper.  I don’t know why anyone is really getting in a tizzy over them, Republican or Democrat.  Rahm Emanuel admitted a few days ago that he has never read any DNC platform, and of course “meaningless piece of paper” is how Bob Dole described the RNC platform in 1996 that was far more conservative than his own positions.  It’s insanity to try to assign or debate the meaning of meaningless pieces of paper.

      • anarchyst

        Thank you for your kind remarks.  It’s not an obsession, merely my voice “crying in the wilderness”.  For every positive response, I get 3 or 4 negative responses and a “lecture” on how it is my “civic duty” to support whatever Israel and the “tribe” does.  I thought our AMERICAN political process was about what is good for America–NOT Israel.  I agree with you about the democrats not kowtowing to Israel and leaving foreign politics off their platform; it looks as if the “tribe” got to them . . .
        Best regards,

        •   “Our” support for Israel has more to do with pressure from our tribe, not their tribe.  Think it through.

          • anarchyst

            You are partially correct.  Please note that ever since dual-nationality was legalized in the USA, these dual-nationals have corrupted our government and have pretty much hijacked our foreign policy.  Incidences such as the deliberate attack on the USS Liberty, the Lavon affair and other “operations” carried out under the auspices of a “foreign” entity prove that the interests of the “tribe” do not coincide with what is good for MY country–the USA.  Please keep in mind that not all those of the “tribe” think and act the same way.  In fact, there is much more political diversity and differences in the “tribal homeland” than is permitted by those of the “tribe” here in the USA.
            Best regards,

          •  And why is this swept under the rug? Because our fundagelical Christians think we’re going to Hell if we talk about it.

    • Puggg

      The issue of which city is capital of which country is a matter for a world atlas, not a political party platform.