<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Palin backed Buchanan in 1999</title>
	<atom:link href="http://hurryupharry.org/2008/08/29/palin-backed-buchanan-in-1999/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://hurryupharry.org/2008/08/29/palin-backed-buchanan-in-1999/</link>
	<description>Liberty, if it means anything, is the right to tell people what they don&#039;t want to hear</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 24 May 2012 10:31:21 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Sam Schulman</title>
		<link>http://hurryupharry.org/2008/08/29/palin-backed-buchanan-in-1999/comment-page-2/#comment-221372</link>
		<dc:creator>Sam Schulman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 31 Aug 2008 01:23:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hurryupharry.org/2008/08/29/palin-backed-buchanan-in-1999/#comment-221372</guid>
		<description>Obama has a lovely family, and American black are indeed proud of him - the black Baptist church in my Virginia town is full of expressions of pride.  But in general the Democrats have sold out the family values of their black clients on a regular basis.  The black electorate is strongly pro-life and anti-gay marriage, while its leaders are forced to &quot;grow&quot; into the opposite positions - as did Jesse Jackson.  Obama of course did not come up from city politics, but was a creature of the white elites of Chicago, who paid his dues, as his wife probably explained to him that he must, by sitting in an ultra-black-nationalist church for 20 years (evidently asleep in the pews, for he never heard the Revd. Mr. Wright utter a harsh word).
In fact, it&#039;s fair to say that Obama contains within himself all the contradictions of the modern Democratic Party - with radical yearnings (Edward Said and Bill Ayers and Michelle&#039;s Princeton thesis) and elite HYP attitudes, but understanding that they must reach out to the masses they rather despise (bittergate and the absence of country music in Denver), while feeling entitled to more - bigger houses, better salaries, more respect.  As a couple, the Obamas remind one of the Blairs without their shared work ethic, Chrei&#039;s competence and Tony&#039;s imagination.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Obama has a lovely family, and American black are indeed proud of him &#8211; the black Baptist church in my Virginia town is full of expressions of pride.  But in general the Democrats have sold out the family values of their black clients on a regular basis.  The black electorate is strongly pro-life and anti-gay marriage, while its leaders are forced to &#8220;grow&#8221; into the opposite positions &#8211; as did Jesse Jackson.  Obama of course did not come up from city politics, but was a creature of the white elites of Chicago, who paid his dues, as his wife probably explained to him that he must, by sitting in an ultra-black-nationalist church for 20 years (evidently asleep in the pews, for he never heard the Revd. Mr. Wright utter a harsh word).<br />
In fact, it&#8217;s fair to say that Obama contains within himself all the contradictions of the modern Democratic Party &#8211; with radical yearnings (Edward Said and Bill Ayers and Michelle&#8217;s Princeton thesis) and elite HYP attitudes, but understanding that they must reach out to the masses they rather despise (bittergate and the absence of country music in Denver), while feeling entitled to more &#8211; bigger houses, better salaries, more respect.  As a couple, the Obamas remind one of the Blairs without their shared work ethic, Chrei&#8217;s competence and Tony&#8217;s imagination.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John P.</title>
		<link>http://hurryupharry.org/2008/08/29/palin-backed-buchanan-in-1999/comment-page-2/#comment-221223</link>
		<dc:creator>John P.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 Aug 2008 16:26:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hurryupharry.org/2008/08/29/palin-backed-buchanan-in-1999/#comment-221223</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;Which is bad, but Obama backed Jeremiah Wright in 2008. The same Wright who has strongly supported the racist, anti-Israel, Holocaust-minimizing, anti-gay and borderline antisemitic Louis Farrakhan.&lt;/i&gt;

Right you are.

But Obama is black, and so lapses into what can only be called dubious and remedial moral views are to be tolerated and excused.

Obama has the benefit and advantage of being measured by a different moral yardstick.

White Republicans are imperial and Black Democrats metric.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>Which is bad, but Obama backed Jeremiah Wright in 2008. The same Wright who has strongly supported the racist, anti-Israel, Holocaust-minimizing, anti-gay and borderline antisemitic Louis Farrakhan.</i></p>
<p>Right you are.</p>
<p>But Obama is black, and so lapses into what can only be called dubious and remedial moral views are to be tolerated and excused.</p>
<p>Obama has the benefit and advantage of being measured by a different moral yardstick.</p>
<p>White Republicans are imperial and Black Democrats metric.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David Lindsay</title>
		<link>http://hurryupharry.org/2008/08/29/palin-backed-buchanan-in-1999/comment-page-2/#comment-221215</link>
		<dc:creator>David Lindsay</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 Aug 2008 15:56:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hurryupharry.org/2008/08/29/palin-backed-buchanan-in-1999/#comment-221215</guid>
		<description>And I&#039;d already guessed that you hate blacks and blue-collar and/or rural whites.

Enough said.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>And I&#8217;d already guessed that you hate blacks and blue-collar and/or rural whites.</p>
<p>Enough said.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: old Labour</title>
		<link>http://hurryupharry.org/2008/08/29/palin-backed-buchanan-in-1999/comment-page-2/#comment-221210</link>
		<dc:creator>old Labour</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 Aug 2008 15:39:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hurryupharry.org/2008/08/29/palin-backed-buchanan-in-1999/#comment-221210</guid>
		<description>Lindsay: it may surprise you to learn that I&#039;d already guessed you were a Pat Buchanan fan. 

Enough said.

PS. Reposting entries verbatim from your blog of doggerel will not induce more people to visit.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Lindsay: it may surprise you to learn that I&#8217;d already guessed you were a Pat Buchanan fan. </p>
<p>Enough said.</p>
<p>PS. Reposting entries verbatim from your blog of doggerel will not induce more people to visit.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David Lindsay</title>
		<link>http://hurryupharry.org/2008/08/29/palin-backed-buchanan-in-1999/comment-page-2/#comment-221203</link>
		<dc:creator>David Lindsay</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 Aug 2008 15:21:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hurryupharry.org/2008/08/29/palin-backed-buchanan-in-1999/#comment-221203</guid>
		<description>Which feather is that, Old Labour?

Buchanan sees the neocons for what they are (old Trots, simply going about it by different means), and  he says so.

Buchanan is right about family values (strongly shared by Obama&#039;s black base, and by the rural and blue-collar whites who rallied to Clinton), right about strictly limited and strictly legal immigration (strongly shared by Obama&#039;s black base, and by the rural and blue-collar whites who rallied to Clinton), right about &quot;free&quot; trade (strongly shared by Obama&#039;s black base, and by the rural and blue-collar whites who rallied to Clinton), right about constitutional checks and balances (strongly shared by Obama&#039;s black base), right about real national security (strongly shared by the rural and blue-collar whites who rallied to Clinton), right about energy independence (strongly shared by the rural and blue-collar whites who rallied to Clinton), right about real environmental responsibility, right about Second Amendment rights and responsibilities (strongly shared by the rural and blue-collar whites who rallied to Clinton), right about Civil Rights (not &quot;affirmative action&quot;, and in those terms (strongly shared by the rural and blue-collar whites who rallied to Clinton, as well as by a growing number of blacks who see the Hispanics getting AA these days), right about America as an English-speaking country (very, very strongly shared by Obama&#039;s black base, and by the rural and blue-collar whites who rallied to Clinton), right about foreign policy realism, and at least open to the Biblico-Patristic critique of Americanism itself.

But Buchanan is wrong about the protection of workers and consumers (although he is not terribly badly wrong on that one these days), wrong about fair tax (likewise), wrong about universal health care, wrong about Social Security, and wrong about Civil Rights (in the sense that he still makes occasional rhetorical flourishes towards the remaining George Wallace Tendency, not they are ever going to get anywhere now).

Obama, however, is right about these things. Palin probably is, too. But McCain isn&#039;t.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Which feather is that, Old Labour?</p>
<p>Buchanan sees the neocons for what they are (old Trots, simply going about it by different means), and  he says so.</p>
<p>Buchanan is right about family values (strongly shared by Obama&#8217;s black base, and by the rural and blue-collar whites who rallied to Clinton), right about strictly limited and strictly legal immigration (strongly shared by Obama&#8217;s black base, and by the rural and blue-collar whites who rallied to Clinton), right about &#8220;free&#8221; trade (strongly shared by Obama&#8217;s black base, and by the rural and blue-collar whites who rallied to Clinton), right about constitutional checks and balances (strongly shared by Obama&#8217;s black base), right about real national security (strongly shared by the rural and blue-collar whites who rallied to Clinton), right about energy independence (strongly shared by the rural and blue-collar whites who rallied to Clinton), right about real environmental responsibility, right about Second Amendment rights and responsibilities (strongly shared by the rural and blue-collar whites who rallied to Clinton), right about Civil Rights (not &#8220;affirmative action&#8221;, and in those terms (strongly shared by the rural and blue-collar whites who rallied to Clinton, as well as by a growing number of blacks who see the Hispanics getting AA these days), right about America as an English-speaking country (very, very strongly shared by Obama&#8217;s black base, and by the rural and blue-collar whites who rallied to Clinton), right about foreign policy realism, and at least open to the Biblico-Patristic critique of Americanism itself.</p>
<p>But Buchanan is wrong about the protection of workers and consumers (although he is not terribly badly wrong on that one these days), wrong about fair tax (likewise), wrong about universal health care, wrong about Social Security, and wrong about Civil Rights (in the sense that he still makes occasional rhetorical flourishes towards the remaining George Wallace Tendency, not they are ever going to get anywhere now).</p>
<p>Obama, however, is right about these things. Palin probably is, too. But McCain isn&#8217;t.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: old Labour</title>
		<link>http://hurryupharry.org/2008/08/29/palin-backed-buchanan-in-1999/comment-page-2/#comment-221197</link>
		<dc:creator>old Labour</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 Aug 2008 15:02:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hurryupharry.org/2008/08/29/palin-backed-buchanan-in-1999/#comment-221197</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;The proudly white-supremacist racist vote is going to Obama, led by KKKman David Duke, who has endorsed him in a Leninist ploy, as the New Republic reported Aug. 29th. The condescending bien pensant liberal racist vote is going to Obama - and this faction’s tribunes are already announcing that anyone who doesn’t vote for him is a racist. So that just doesn’t leave many racists around to vote for McCain, unfortunately for Nick’s theory. &lt;/i&gt;

Excellent point Sam. No surprise to find that Pat Buchanan himself is rooting for Obama too. Birds of a feather...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>The proudly white-supremacist racist vote is going to Obama, led by KKKman David Duke, who has endorsed him in a Leninist ploy, as the New Republic reported Aug. 29th. The condescending bien pensant liberal racist vote is going to Obama &#8211; and this faction’s tribunes are already announcing that anyone who doesn’t vote for him is a racist. So that just doesn’t leave many racists around to vote for McCain, unfortunately for Nick’s theory. </i></p>
<p>Excellent point Sam. No surprise to find that Pat Buchanan himself is rooting for Obama too. Birds of a feather&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sam Schulman</title>
		<link>http://hurryupharry.org/2008/08/29/palin-backed-buchanan-in-1999/comment-page-2/#comment-221189</link>
		<dc:creator>Sam Schulman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 Aug 2008 14:36:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hurryupharry.org/2008/08/29/palin-backed-buchanan-in-1999/#comment-221189</guid>
		<description>The proudly white-supremacist racist vote is going to Obama, led by KKKman David Duke, who has endorsed him in a Leninist ploy, as the New Republic reported Aug. 29th.  The condescending bien pensant liberal racist vote is going to Obama - and this faction&#039;s tribunes are already announcing that anyone who doesn&#039;t vote for him is a racist.
So that just doesn&#039;t leave many racists around to vote for McCain, unfortunately for Nick&#039;s theory.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The proudly white-supremacist racist vote is going to Obama, led by KKKman David Duke, who has endorsed him in a Leninist ploy, as the New Republic reported Aug. 29th.  The condescending bien pensant liberal racist vote is going to Obama &#8211; and this faction&#8217;s tribunes are already announcing that anyone who doesn&#8217;t vote for him is a racist.<br />
So that just doesn&#8217;t leave many racists around to vote for McCain, unfortunately for Nick&#8217;s theory.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nick (South Africa)</title>
		<link>http://hurryupharry.org/2008/08/29/palin-backed-buchanan-in-1999/comment-page-2/#comment-221106</link>
		<dc:creator>Nick (South Africa)</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 Aug 2008 11:17:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hurryupharry.org/2008/08/29/palin-backed-buchanan-in-1999/#comment-221106</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;McCain’s going to hoover up the racist vote - which may be considerable.&lt;/i&gt;
Yet 92% of Blacks are backing Obama....go figure!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>McCain’s going to hoover up the racist vote &#8211; which may be considerable.</i><br />
Yet 92% of Blacks are backing Obama&#8230;.go figure!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alec Macpherson</title>
		<link>http://hurryupharry.org/2008/08/29/palin-backed-buchanan-in-1999/comment-page-2/#comment-221047</link>
		<dc:creator>Alec Macpherson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 Aug 2008 08:15:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hurryupharry.org/2008/08/29/palin-backed-buchanan-in-1999/#comment-221047</guid>
		<description>You ain&#039;t as toxic as a Nazi, Benji. Just regurgitated bile.

SL, I&#039;ll take the past two comments directed at me to mean, I can dish it but cannot take it. But, yes it is me. Likewise for that washed-out lumpen Geordie half-pissed on buckie.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You ain&#8217;t as toxic as a Nazi, Benji. Just regurgitated bile.</p>
<p>SL, I&#8217;ll take the past two comments directed at me to mean, I can dish it but cannot take it. But, yes it is me. Likewise for that washed-out lumpen Geordie half-pissed on buckie.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Benjamin</title>
		<link>http://hurryupharry.org/2008/08/29/palin-backed-buchanan-in-1999/comment-page-2/#comment-221044</link>
		<dc:creator>Benjamin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 Aug 2008 07:30:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hurryupharry.org/2008/08/29/palin-backed-buchanan-in-1999/#comment-221044</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;The only racist here is you, Benjamin Mackie. Take your misogyny and your disgusting, obvious and cynical exploiting of US race relations and fuck off.&lt;/i&gt;

Blimey! Nice bit of slander. I haven&#039;t said anything to merit such a strained accusation, but I hope you feel better after that. Nice to use my name full name for those all important Google searches. You devil, you ;-)

You forgot to mention, before you exploded in disgust, splutter, splutter, that I am actually &quot;worse than a Nazi&quot;;  I was politely informed of that by an equally unhinged HPer recently.

It really is a most bizarre forum, this.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>The only racist here is you, Benjamin Mackie. Take your misogyny and your disgusting, obvious and cynical exploiting of US race relations and fuck off.</i></p>
<p>Blimey! Nice bit of slander. I haven&#8217;t said anything to merit such a strained accusation, but I hope you feel better after that. Nice to use my name full name for those all important Google searches. You devil, you ;-)</p>
<p>You forgot to mention, before you exploded in disgust, splutter, splutter, that I am actually &#8220;worse than a Nazi&#8221;;  I was politely informed of that by an equally unhinged HPer recently.</p>
<p>It really is a most bizarre forum, this.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

