Thursday, November 6, 2008

W wasn't a racist?

"Fact is, "W" never gave any evidence of holding racist attitudes."
http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/11/06/the_election_of_the_first_blac/

Then why was he accused (on that site) of purposely flooding New Orleans in order to drown its black residents?

2 comments:

jana said...

Of all of the unfair attacks on George Bush (and there were plenty of them...), the accusation that he deliberately wanted to hurt black people in the aftermath of Katrina was no doubt the most abhorrent.

Bush deserves criticism on many things (and I'm a Republican), but his concern about Katrina and her victims is not one of them....

JamesR said...

What is amusing, is all the scrambling I am seeing now to be nicey-nice to W, and to say charitable things about him in the media.

I've read that a possible reason for it is because the Dems are afraid of the risk of some well deserved payback coming from the other side of the political spectrum for 8 years of unmitigated vitriol, defamatation, character assassination (and non-stop fantasies - including posters, t-shirts, even movies, of REAL assassination), and flat out venomous HATRED directed at "Bush-Hitler."

Media narrative. Bush wins 51%. Country divided. HE needs to try to reach across and TRY to HEAL the rifts HE has caused.

Versus:

Obama wins 52%. Country united. All come together over TO the Obama side of the aisle. Get on board HIS train.

Nothing new with that however. Same thing happened when Clinton was elected. The Republicans are always, magically, the dividers and not the uniters. Funny how that works.