Redstate

...but "Book Club" -- good analogy! See Oprah's glowing endorsement of James Frey and A Million Little Pieces. If the woman is anything she is overly credulous.

--furious

"I find your lack of faith disturbing." -- Darth Vader

You shouldn't call Obama Oprah's "boy".

Amen to that. This intent was likely innocent, but this is plain old ignorant. As well as rude.

For we have a peculiar power of thinking before we act, and of acting, too, whereas other men are courageous from ignorance but hesitate upon reflection.

It wasn't rude or ignorant actually. Perhaps its just how people I know talk but I say "boy", I mean like "good friend,", etc. For example, if my friend is across the room, someone might say to me, "Hey there's your girl over there." People really need to take a chill pill.

"Count it the greatest sin to prefer life to honor, and for the sake of living lose what makes life worth living."
-Decimus Juvenal

It wasn't rude or ignorant actually. Perhaps its just how people I know talk but I say "boy", I mean like "good friend,", etc.

What you say in casual conversations with your friends, who know you are and where you are coming from, and what you put on the front page of RedState should be two different things. Context matters: what's innocent in one context appears ignorant and rude when the context is removed. That's doubly true for Republicans, who are already saddled with the reputation that they don't "get" race issues.

(That said, I've seen even friendly conversations turn unfriendly over the misuse of the word "boy"; it's one of the lingering fault lines from our not-so-distant past [even, present].)

For we have a peculiar power of thinking before we act, and of acting, too, whereas other men are courageous from ignorance but hesitate upon reflection.

She should have used homeboy!
___________________________________
Two thirds of the world is covered by water,
the other third is covered by Champ Bailey.

I think there's a difference between a celebrity using their fame to endorse someone and a political organization specifically created to lobby for candidates. YMMV I guess.

___________________________________
Two thirds of the world is covered by water,
the other third is covered by Champ Bailey.

but not from an ethical standpoint.

There are those who look at things the way they are, and ask why ... I dream of things that never were and ask why not. - Robert Kennedy

Or you are just (as usual) reading too much into it. Maybe she should have just left out the word ethics and just said "just because you can doesn't mean you should". Much like how people don't care what John Cougar thinks about politics either.

Troll on, brother!
___________________________________
Two thirds of the world is covered by water,
the other third is covered by Champ Bailey.

The cheap shot is a requirement from you.

I don't care one bit any celebrities views. But Ericka made a statement and I asked for a clarification.

There are those who look at things the way they are, and ask why ... I dream of things that never were and ask why not. - Robert Kennedy

I take the cheap shots at the trolls, it's part of my charm. You always enjoy a semantic debate that focuses on minutiae while ignoring the rest of the argument.

___________________________________
Two thirds of the world is covered by water,
the other third is covered by Champ Bailey.

I guess we've seen enough of him to know what to expect, huh?

I meant what I said and I said what I meant. An elephant's faithful 100 percent.

He says nothing substantive and calls me a troll EVERY TIME he responds to me. My choice is to either ignore him or engage in a flame war that I have no chance of ever winning, given the hometown refs.

My question was sincere. Ericka's use of the word ethics was odd to me and I asked if she could clarify that statement. If that is trolling then everyone here is a troll.

There are those who look at things the way they are, and ask why ... I dream of things that never were and ask why not. - Robert Kennedy

Most of the time when you make a comment, you ignore the overall point of the post, pull out a quote or comment that wasn't perfectly worded or perfectly clear and wool us to death over it.

And then when we say something to address your concern, you start saying things like, "So in other words, nobody ever needs anything from the gov't, right?" and try to get us to chase you down another rabbit hole.

I know you like Obama, and your post on this diary should have addressed the overall point, which was whether or not Oprah's endorsement was going to make an impact in the D primary, and if so, how much. You could have even given your opinion as to whether or not campaign finance laws should apply to such an endorsement, or come over to the right side and acknowledged that it should and that the law is straight out unconstitutional.

But instead, you started "wondering" about the word ethics.

I meant what I said and I said what I meant. An elephant's faithful 100 percent.

Well put. And thank you.
___________________________________
Two thirds of the world is covered by water,
the other third is covered by Champ Bailey.

Some people here see everything I write as a veiled, or not so veiled, attack intended to besmirch Republicans. Thus they consider me a troll who is seeking to disrupt the discussion.

Other people, more accurately, see the things I write as honest questions coming from a POV they generally disagree with their own. If I had the nefarious agenda that you and Darin and some others think I have I would never have lasted as long here as I have. Sooner or later I would have been caught and hoisted upon my own petard.

I did not infer that the diary was about the impact of Oprah backing Obama. I inferred that it was a criticism of Oprah choosing to back Obama. I asked about the specific word she used because it implied a level of wrongdoing by Oprah.

Words have meaning. And while you guys may agree with the overall points of most of the threads here, if they are based on faulty foundations, then perhaps the overall point isn't as sound as you may wish it to be. This is what frustrates some here. They don't like to have their assumptions and preconceptions challenged. Republicans=Good. Democrats=Bad. Everything else flows from that.

I asked Ericka a question which she was free to answer or not answer. However Darin, and now you, prefer to make the discussion about me. It is a standard tactic intended to intimidate others. People generally tire of being attacked, particularly over irrelevant issues and thus demur. It's an impolite and somewhat boorish tactic, but the Internet has never been known for it's good manners.

There are those who look at things the way they are, and ask why ... I dream of things that never were and ask why not. - Robert Kennedy

I don't want to heap praise on a possible D opponent, but Obama showed good wit there. Ouch. I started to say it was Reaganesque, but that just can't be said about a partisan dem.

I meant what I said and I said what I meant. An elephant's faithful 100 percent.

Is that a comment about race, that they're both in Illinois, that they're both libs . . . .?

...neither can stand Hillary, neither can stand Bill, they're both hardline against the war (none of these may be true, mind you); the reasons could probably keep going. Although it's interesting that I can't think of a domestic issue where Obama stands out, which is probably due to the fact that there isn't one.

It's a pity that this guy doesn't have a shot.

The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!

I think that the Democrats all have essentially the same policy remedies on most major domestic issues. It's party plank stuff. The big skirmish he and Hillary are having regards how universal their health care plans really are, with Hillary pulling a Mitt and advocating for required health care for everyone.

Policy isn't what wins elections.

There are those who look at things the way they are, and ask why ... I dream of things that never were and ask why not. - Robert Kennedy