Redstate

I want that made in to a commercial.

There are various eyes. Even the Sphinx has eyes: and as a result there are various truths, and as a result there is no truth.
~Friedrich Nietzsche

HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater

for strikes on Obama's teleprompters?

Unscripted, he's a dodo bird.

You are absolutely correct. Just wait till the adds start running telling people that McCain is going to ship their job to China and pass tax breaks for big business.

Economic populism is the greatest problem we have here in the rust belt. The people are largely self sufficient, don't appreciate nanny-statism, and generally socially moderate to conservative. The problem is they have swallowed the Union/Democratic economic BS hook line and sinker.

...cultural issues like guns, abortion, multiculturalism, Obama's radical roots, etc. After all, Obama himself said that these people get bitter and cling to their guns and religion.

“.....women and minorities hardest hit”

And will work to an extent this time. But don't underestimate the power of these issues, and the anger and misperceptions are at a level that I have never seen before.

“.....women and minorities hardest hit”

I assume by your name that you live in St. Louis. But perhaps there are other smaller cities by that name around the country. I'm telling you, talking to people here, the confusion and anger is real and powerful. You don't have to watch the news or read polls to get a sense. Just talk to people, listen to local radio shows, and read the opinion sections of local newspapers.

Watch the campaign commercials of Bob Casey, Sherrod Brown, and other successful Democratic candidates in this area.(I know Casey would have won anyway, but it should not have been a nearly 20 point blowout)

Why is it so hard to believe what I am saying? As long as we ignore these issues, we are not going to have much success in this area of the country.

I doubt that guns, abortion, gays, etc will hit Obama that hard unless folks see a realistic turnaround of the economy and a light at the end of the Iraqi tunnel. People are too mad and scared about gas prices, an ongoing war, their jobs, and keeping their homes to worry about issues that's not an immediate threat to them. Although Obama hasn't really connected with the white workers, I don't think McCain can win their votes without convincing them that he can correct these issues. That as we know, is a tall order.

There are various eyes. Even the Sphinx has eyes: and as a result there are various truths, and as a result there is no truth.
~Friedrich Nietzsche

Resisting 21st Century Communism
by Baron Bodissey

"Quotas and employment based on sex, religion, race or any criteria other than meritocracy, the rule of merit, where individuals are chosen through competition on the basis of demonstrated ability and competence, interfere with private property rights. This violates basic human rights of the employer. Historical experience indicates that respect for private property, along with respect for freedom of speech, are the hallmarks of true liberty. Abandoning these principles inhibits the creation of wealth."

http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2007/06/resisting-21st-century-communi...

Get it?

I agree with that, affirmative action is a mask that attempts to solve inequality while ironically entrenching it further and creates resentment.
However, that doesn't meant multiculturalism is inherently bad.

There are various eyes. Even the Sphinx has eyes: and as a result there are various truths, and as a result there is no truth.
~Friedrich Nietzsche

.

The definition is contested? Why not just the Latin (?) roots? Many cultures? Diverse cultures? A la New York

There are various eyes. Even the Sphinx has eyes: and as a result there are various truths, and as a result there is no truth.
~Friedrich Nietzsche

Allow me to offer this excerpt as an example of the definition being contested. I found the article it is excerpted from to be a very thoughtful and cogent explanation of varying definitions being applied and the implications of those differences.

"One of the difficulties of accommodating multiculturalists is that defining a multicultural society, curriculum, or institution seems to be determined by one's perspective. A commonly held view suggests that being multicultural involves tolerance towards racial and ethnic minorities, mainly in the areas of dress, language, food, religious beliefs, and other cultural manifestations. However, an influential group calling itself NAME, or the National Association for Multicultural Education, includes in its philosophy statement the following: "Xenophobia, discrimination, racism, classism, sexism, and homophobia are societal phenomena that are inconsistent with the principles of a democracy and lead to the counterproductive reasoning that differences are deficiencies."{4} NAME is a powerful organization composed of educators from around the country, and it has considerable influence on how schools approach the issue of diversity on campus. The fundamental question that the folks at NAME need to answer is, "Is it always counterproductive to reason that some differences might be deficiencies?" In other words, isn't it possible that some of the characteristics of specific culture groups are dangerous or morally flawed (for example, the culture of pedophilia)?

It is not uncommon for advocates of multiculturalism like NAME to begin with the assumption that truth is culturally based. It is argued that a group's language dictates what ideas about God, human nature, and morality are permissible. While Americans may define reality using ideas from its Greek, Roman, and Judeo-Christian heritage, Asian or African cultures see the world differently based on their traditions. Multiculturalists conclude that since multiple descriptions of reality exist, no one view can be true in any ultimate sense. Furthermore, since truth is a function of language, and all language is created by humans, all truth is created by humans. This view of truth and language has a spokesperson in Dr. Richard Rorty, humanities professor at the University of Virginia, who argues that truth that transcends culture is not available because "where there are no sentences there is no truth, and sentences and their respective languages are human creations."{5}

Finally, if all truth is created by humans, it is all equally true. Cultural ideas or institutions, like human sacrifice or welfare systems, are equally valid if they are useful for a given group of people. In other words, we live in a universe that is blind to moral choices. We are the final judges of how we shall live.

As Christians, we believe that ideas do have consequences. While being careful not to promote one set of cultural rules over others simply because we are comfortable with them, we acknowledge that Scripture reveals to us the character and nature of God, humankind, and our need for a savior. These truths can be communicated cross-culturally in a sensitive way, regardless of the people-group involved. If we didn't believe this to be true in a universal sense, then Christianity can't be true in any real way. In other words, in order to be what it claims to be, Christianity must transcend culture in a way that many multiculturalists argue cannot occur.

http://www.probe.org/content/view/778/169/

Interesting read except for the Christian stuff, but that was expected from the site and author.
The part about injecting woman/minorities in to textbooks annoys me too. I dislike it when textbooks add these minorities like George Washington Carver to appear PC. The sad truth of the matter is that most minorities were inconsequential in the 1800s. Education shouldn't add importance to insignificant people, but focus on why these minorities lacked a voice in the first place.
Furthermore, I'd say it is even more denigrating to "inject" it in to the textbook. For example, when there is a special section labeled "Women Involvement in X" gives the perception the women were a collectivized unit with one view unable to be separated in to other sections of the chapter. It really ires me when special status is given to a minority in a book despite no true notability.
Textbooks should cover Harriet Beecher Stowe or Margaret Thatcher not because of their gender but because they truly had immense influence on the world. While George Washington Carver can be put in to the trivia books.

woah...big tangent there...

There are various eyes. Even the Sphinx has eyes: and as a result there are various truths, and as a result there is no truth.
~Friedrich Nietzsche

Perhaps you should review the historical record of Mr. Carver before you make such broad pronouncements of his insignificance. Your life is touched everyday by the products of his efforts.

"It is rare to find a man of the caliber of George Washington Carver. A man who would decline an invitation to work for a salary of more than $100,000 a year (almost a million today) to continue his research on behalf of his countrymen.

Agricultural chemist, Carver discovered three hundred uses for peanuts and hundreds more uses for soybeans, pecans and sweet potatoes. Among the listed items that he suggested to southern farmers to help them economically were his recipes and improvements to/for: adhesives, axle grease, bleach, buttermilk, chili sauce, fuel briquettes, ink, instant coffee, linoleum, mayonnaise, meat tenderizer, metal polish, paper, plastic, pavement, shaving cream, shoe polish, synthetic rubber, talcum powder and wood stain. Three patents were issued to Carver."

http://inventors.about.com/library/weekly/aa041897.htm

Beyond your historical ignorance and dismissal of Carver as trivial, your antipathy towards Chistianity, and your animus towards "insignificant people" and "inconsequential minorities" you are ready to "focus on why these minorities lacked a voice in the first place." Let me guess why...evil euoropean white men?

I don't know where or if you ever went to college, but if you did, you should demand your money back. You was robbed!

“Never ascribe to malice that which can be adequately explained by ignorance.”

-James Thurber

33 Questions About American History You're Not Supposed to Ask. By Thomas E. Woods Jr.

I'm a little hesitant...the second link that came up on google was lewrockwell.com praising this book.

There are various eyes. Even the Sphinx has eyes: and as a result there are various truths, and as a result there is no truth.
~Friedrich Nietzsche

Way to continue the Carver legend. He did not invent three hundred uses for peanuts.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Washington_Carver#Beyond_the_Peanut_...
Wikipedia has sources listed there too.

"George Washington Carver was not a saint whose soulful nobility enabled him to overcome insurmountable obstacles in order to fulfill his altruistic mission of saving the agrarian South. Instead, he was a smart, determined man who had no objection to exaggerating and aggrandizing his real successes to enjoy the perks and honors of fame. He could be petty, threaten to quit his job over imagined slights, and complain about teaching, the job for which he was hired. When he did teach, he was not an effective educator. He mismanaged parts of his job that were of lesser interest to him. He was, in fact, a human being with his share of faults as well as undeniable virtues and accomplishments."

you are ready to "focus on why these minorities lacked a voice in the first place." Let me guess why...evil euoropean white men?

Yes. Who else repressed minorities in 1800s? From NINA to the Immigration Acts in the latter part of the century, I don't even think it is even contested that the upper classes (not necessarily evil) clearly repressed minorities.

antipathy towards Chistianity

I hardly consider what I wrote to be antipathetic to Christianity. I just prefer to read information without referencing Biblical scripture.

Stop lionizing an average man, who at best deserves a footnote in textbooks. The truth of the matter is that most minorities didn't have the opportunity to succeed in the 1800s.

There are various eyes. Even the Sphinx has eyes: and as a result there are various truths, and as a result there is no truth.
~Friedrich Nietzsche

People worry about it because they think it means giving equal weight to competing value systems, more than it means the programming of the Colours TV channel.

Personally, the things John Rocker hated about New York were always my favorite things about the city whenever I went.

lesterblog.blogspot.com

The problem is that the glory days for the heavy industries of the Rust Belt are over. Permanently.

There's nothing we can do about that. It's not just globalization, but automation. Robotics has gotten to the point that few if any human workers are needed on assembly lines anymore. Those jobs are gone for good, along with the jobs of telegraphers, elevator operators, and keypunch machines.

It's not just the Democrats either. During the GOP primaries, Mitt Romney had the sheer gall to lie to the Michiganders and "promise" them that he was going to restore the automobile industry to its former glory. He cynically told them what they wanted to hear, and they ate it up. I was appalled at his opportunism.

These false promises are keeping the folks in the Rust Belt from realizing they need to make drastic changes in their economic base.

We all know that, the problem is nobody is explaining that to voters.

HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater

But he did not explain why. People still believe that they went to China and Mexico. They don't realize that most have been lost due to animation.

Ask anybody around here, and they'll tell you that America's manufacturing in decline, and has moved to other countries. Which is nonsense, but that is the common perception.

I'd be interested in knowing the stats on your assessment of job loses Aetius. I can assure you that industrial PLC and robotics has not been the demise of American jobs. In many cases, while eliminating a small number of jobs, it has created a demand for a higher skilled labored. Instead of replacing workers with equipment, it has brought many workers skills to a higher level in order to maintain the equipment. Granted, there may be examples of layoffs at given plants but it has also brought in outside contractors for troubleshooting as well as PM work that previously didn't exist. The cost savings has not been in manpower but rather in efficiency.
The mass job losses in recent years is due to American factories being shut down here and moved or replaced in other countries- GE, Fisher & Paykel, Kimberly-Clark, KenSa, Levi Strauss, Triton Manufacturing and the list goes on and on and on. These jobs, as Senator McCain has said, are not coming back.

It comes from reality.

http://www.cato.org/research/articles/reynolds-040321.html

http://www.heritage.org/research/economy/wm1709.cfm

http://www.american.com/archive/americana-entries/don2019t-make-nafta-a-...

Here are just three links. Some time spent at the Heritage Foundation or Cato Institute websites, or even just on google will show you where my assessment of job losses comes from.

The impression is that manufacturing output in America is declining, and that is the reason that employment is declining. The truth is that output is growing, and both that fact and the decline in overall employment are because of rapidly growing productivity, of which automation is a big part. People need to be informed that American manufacturing is alive and well.

The point I am making is that to most people, McCain's support of free trade is the same as supporting sending more jobs to China or Mexico or whatever country. Which I find amusing, since both of those countries have seen declines in their manufacturing employment as well.

The world went to non-US companies for their steel needs, to the point that a Russian company recently bought some US plants, but I'm sure they won't be paying anybody $40/hour for halfhearted union labor.

lesterblog.blogspot.com

in the November election, since he is perceived as the most centrist of the three Democrat candidates running.

"A republic, if you can keep it..." - B. Franklin

Nice. Reminds of this onion article: The Nightmare Ticket
http://www.theonion.com/content/news/obama_clinton_mccain_join_forces

There are various eyes. Even the Sphinx has eyes: and as a result there are various truths, and as a result there is no truth.
~Friedrich Nietzsche

with running mate Mike Huckabee. Mortifying as many may find that ticket, it could win a plurality.

lesterblog.blogspot.com

Pejman, my regrets. Marty

The democrat's presidential possibles(Clinton hasn't given up yet, never say never & all that) are very weak, and both have gaping flaws & vulnerabilities. This drawn out nomination process, however they may try to spin, has not helped matters. I am frustrated to no end by the congressional portion - the democrat congress is vulnerable, however the Republicans are in no shape to exploit that fact.

with every election. I would also argue that a good 5% is either Operation Choas operatives or flat-out application fraud. Anyways look at the exists from KY and WV if that sample is representive of blue collar dems, Obama is going to need all those new voters to actually show up.

McCain '08

Some are Republicans who voted Obama just to defeat Clinton for once.

HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater

Oh great one,

Please enlighten those of us in the great unwashed who voted for McCain in the primaries and will vote for him in the general show us the error of our ways. Please tell us who we SHOULD HAVE voted for to be simpatico with the greatness of whoever you were backing that would have led us out of the wilderness.

OR NOT!

______________________________________
Proud member of the Barry Goldwater wing of the party !

HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater