Good Olde West Virginny: Wild, Wonderful, White Bread, Wacist . . . Or What?
I have a theory about West Virginia, the state with the “Wild and Wonderful” slogan and the first bearer of good tidings for Hillary Clinton since her accountant told her it was okay to lend herself another few million bucks in her quest to defy gravity.
West Virginians aren’t irredeemably racist as some commentators portray them, they just don’t like any politician who is not a white male, and despite her lopsided 41-point victory there yesterday Clinton is no Mountain Mama, merely their version of sloppy seconds.
After all, 30 percent of West Virginia Democrats voted for George bush in 2004 over that girlie man John Kerry.
Furthermore, those all-important undeclared superdelegates are not going to be moved by the results of a primary election that hasn’t mattered since 1960 when JFK beat HHH, and whose voters personify the concept of a backwater state.
West Virginia ranks toward the bottom in household income and other quality-of-life indicators among all states, and apparently in viewing positively the coming of the first serious black candidate for president, as well. How else to interpret this staggering fact: Two in 10 people leaving polling places in the Mountain State unapologetically said that race was a factor in who they voted for, which I would translate to mean that it was a factor for a substantial majority of voters who would never utter such a thing to a network exit poller.
And although he had dropped out of the race 15 weeks ago, a white guy by the name of Edwards got 7 percent of the vote. Dunno. Maybe it was his haircut, but white guys did really well in the Republican primary, too.
This suggests a couple of things:
* Obama’s race will be a huge factor in the fall and the big question is whether people who will not vote for the nominee simply because of his skin color and/or because they falsely believe he is a Muslim can be offset by new Democratic voters who don’t give a fig about race, already registered blacks, more affluent white voters and Independents.
My own view is that they can, and American is an election cycle or two away from race, gender and sexual preference not being determining factors in the success of a national candidate.
* Despite Clinton’s belated apologies for her campaign’s seeming obssession with race (as in belabor Obama’s vulnerability because of his blackness 19 times and then apologize the 20th), expect to hear more such talk in the run-up to the primary next week.
That is in the state of Kentucky, which is a lot closer to West Virginia than Oregon in more than distance and will be another “symbolic” victory for Clinton.
This is not to say that people who are disinclined to vote for a black are her Great White Hope, because there is no hope for her with Obama holding a big lead in popular votes, pledged delegate votes, opinion-poll positives, contributions and endorsements, and is currently picking off uncommitted delegates by a 4-1 margin. (As it was, Clinton’s 12 delegate gain in West Virginia has been more than offset by superdelegates migrating to Obama.)
Besides which, the mainstream punditocracy has dutifully fallen in line behind NBC News blowhard Tim Russert, who in a moment being compared to Walter Cronkite telling LBJ that the Vietnam war could not be won, declared after the North Carolina and Indiana primaries last week that “We now know who the Democratic nominee is going to be, and no one is going to dispute it.”
Me too, and the version of this story at my own blog was bumped by two that are far more important — a development in the Pat Tillman case and the latest setbacks for the Bush torture regime.
Well, maybe not everybody has gotten the message. Just ask folks in the Wild and Wonderful State.
Comments to “Good Olde West Virginny: Wild, Wonderful, White Bread, Wacist . . . Or What?”
Another commenter observed recently that not everyone is up to speed yet when it comes to joining the 21st century. It's hard to believe that even Hillary is delusional enough to think a win in WV means very much. As for Tim Russert? I think his “blowhard” quotient has been steadily on the rise for some years now, which is unfortunate considering the size of his audience.
You have just realized that? You are going to discover just how racist this country is in the fall, and it's going to break you heart.
Anyone who depends on new voters gets their asses handed to them, they are the most unreliable voters out there. Considering that Obama lost all the swing states ( PA, OH, FL ) and that he is going to lose the red states, you better get ready for a McSame Presidency.
Hope springs eternal!
African-Americans are approximately 15% of the population, call me when you see 15 African-Americans in the Senate and a half a dozen African-American Governors in power at the same time.
There are several things that Obama could do to have his Sister Soljah moment. He could call for an end to race based affirmative action. He could say that due to the high costs of energy, he is against all forms of forced busing and mandatory school integration and that it is energy saving for students to attend schools in their own neighborhood. He could say that the federal budget is so screwed up that he will issue an executive order ending 8A and other minority set aside contracts. He could balance everyone of this initiatives with new politices such ending no-bid contracting all together, initiatives to improve neighborhood schools, and to help poor but bright studetns afford college.
The problem that Senator Obama would face is that every initiative he could propose that would well received by blue collar whites would upset some core Democratic group.
To Mr. Bush Jr.
Are you a Communist, Sir?
Yes!
This would have been the given answer, if the question had been submitted during the Cold War era, before the collapse of the Soviet Union.
How have I came to this conclusion regarding U.S’s President?
Simply because Mr. Bush, through his policies in the Balkan region, follows Stalin’s and Tito’s aspirations for reducing Greece’s national entity.
The pseudonym state, the so-called nation and the newly invented language of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia was one of Stalin’s dreams. Both Stalin and Tito manufactured this state, back in August 1944, in the frames of Yugoslav federation.
They simply altered the name of old Vardarska in Macedonia and they baptized the multi-ethnic population of Vardaska constituted by Bulgarian, Serb, Greek Albanians and others into a so-called “Macedonian nation”. Using as a pretext the fabricated name of the state, they claimed that the inhabitants of “Macedonia” are “pure” descendants of Alexander the Great.
Today, Alexander’s descendants they call their state as “free Macedonia” and they argue that Macedonia is under Greek occupation!
They strive to find an exit to the Aegean Sea, following Stalin’s plan to absorb Greek territories and establish a new state, under the protection of the Warsaw Pact, under the name “Macedonia”. This important detail is clearly mentioned in f.YROM’s constitution and is globally transmitted through state propaganda. Their main aim is to incorporate Thessaloniki – Greece’s second largest city – into their national frontiers and proclaim Thessaloniki as their future capital! It is important to note that this kind of propaganda is not presented in the web, but is also recorded in school books.
Back in 1944 U.S reacted rational. Edward Stettinious, the then American Minister of Foreign Affairs declared that “Every discussion about Macedonian nation, Macedonian homeland or Macedonian conscience constitutes unjustifiable demagogy and does not correspond any kind of national or political reality whatsoever”. And he concludes by saying that this kind of behavior is an act of aggression against Greece.
During the I and the II World War and during the Cold War era Greece helped US, and US assisted Greece through the reputable Marshall Plan. However, now Mr. Bush Jr maintains this communist monstrosity and strives to aid f.YROM stealing the unquestionably Greek name of Macedonia from their legitimate title – holder, Greece.
Mr. Bush’s wants to make real Stalin’s and Tito’s dream, put an end to a hundred years of Greko-American friendship and alliance. He supports American enemies, till some years ago. Mr. Bush must answer the following question. Who fought side by side with the American soldiers in Korea. The pseudo-macedonians or Greek soldiers, many of them originated from the ancient Greek soil of one and only Macedonia?
Traditionally, Greeks stood side by side with the United States of America. However, neither Mr. Bush Jr. nor Mrs. Hilary Clinton value this honest attitude. In order to rectify the aforementioned damage to the mentality of the Greek nation, the American President or his Foreign Secretary should admit that: nowadays citizens of f.YROM are not of Macedonian ethic roots, but they come from the Slavs. My proposal to them, if they question this historic fact, is to approach American academic historians or archaeologist. Maybe, after that they will be able to re-approach history form a valid point of view.
Maybe….
Anastasios Kazantzidis
A Greek Teacher
So, please enlighten me.
While I like Obama WAY more than Clinton, why is it when he directly courts black voters with code words and direct language, and captures 80+% of the black vote in some states, there is no racism involved either by him or the black voters.
But why then when Hillary does the same, then she is guilty of racism, and the white voters are obviously ignorant, racist animals as well?
The answer is obvious of course. In the Liberal mind-set, Blacks cannot, by definition, ever be racists, but all Whites who are not Liberals are.
AR,
I think you make a legitimate point.
Consequences matter, however.
The 15% African-American part of the population can be a threat ot white power only in so far as forcing them to share it.
The same is not true when white racism works to enhance the advantage of inherited pwer..
I's the difference between sharing and exclusion.
AR,
I think you make a legitimate point.
Consequences matter, however.
The 15% African-American part of the population can be a threat ot white power only in so far as forcing them to share it.
The same is not true when white racism works to enhance the advantage of inherited pwer..
I's the difference between sharing and exclusion.
The explanation behind this ugly thread: Anyone not voting for Obama in sufficiently large numbers but instead for Clinton is committing heresy toward the rabid anti-war (and anti-US-success-in-the-Middle-East) element who have adopted Obama and hate Clinton nearly as much as McCain, if not more so.
The explanation behind this ugly thread: Anyone not voting for Obama in sufficiently large numbers but instead for Clinton is committing heresy toward the rabid anti-war (and anti-US-success-in-the-Middle-East) element who have adopted Obama and hate Clinton nearly as much as McCain, if not more so.
[...] SHAUN MULLEN, TMV Columnist wrote an interesting post today on Good Olde West Virginny: Wild, Wonderful, White Bread, Wacist …Here’s a quick excerptMe too, and the version of this story at my own blog was bumped by two that are far more important — a development in the Pat Tillman case and the latest setbacks for the Bush torture regime. Well, maybe not everybody has gotten the … [...]
Change Me…
I always learn something new when visiting your site, thank you very much!…
Definition Of Terrorism Patriot Act…
You have got to be kidding!…