Today on Athenae’s Obsession with the Freepi: Where’s Whitey’s Iced Tea?

Are they racist or are they assholes? Or are those two great tastes that go great together? We spelunk the Obama-Wright thread, you decide!

As long as he doesn’t throw the good Reverend under the BACK of the bus. That would be racist.

This is pathetic – this naive young man is totally unprepared to lead a Nation of 300 million people.

We “bitter, gun-totin’, bible-belivin’, religion-clingin’, everyone-hatin'” flyover country white folk saw your mask slip and what you really are!

Hussein is lying his arse off, he thinks whitey is dumb!

I can hear it now: “Obabma has left the fold and is kissing whitey’s A$$ because he is scared! Now its time to ride him dirty!”

The Black Value System ping

I’m beginning to think whitey’s being given a bad rap by these folks.


7 thoughts on “Today on Athenae’s Obsession with the Freepi: Where’s Whitey’s Iced Tea?

  1. No, sadly, thats how most white people think. Theres a reason why Democrats only win 30-40% of the white vote, and thats because people like this outnumber people like us.
    We’re a ‘credit’ to our race, these people are actually what most of us are like and we’d do well not to forget that.

  2. Soullite,
    Please don’t say most white people think like that. I certainly don’t.
    IN FACT, Until the recent videotapes where Wright just went too far, I defended his first speech that hit the videos. I note the comparison of McCain / Hagee and Obama / Wright.
    As for the comments that Athenae dug up, I wonder how many of these folks were featured on “My Big Redneck Wedding” (an actual reality TV show).

  3. Actually, you could have pulled most of those comments from Daily Kos yesterday, where people were piling on, suggesting Wright be run over and then backed over repeatedly, or perhaps run over by a train.
    I’m still wondering where Wright “went too far”. According to astudy published in 2005, 50% of a sample of US-born blacks between 15 and 44 said they thought HIV was man-made, a quarter thought it was produiced in a government lab, half thought there was a cure being withheld from poor people, and 12% blamed the CIA for spreading it. Half of the respondents had greater than a college education. Just under half had household incomes greater than $35K.
    And the US hasn’t sponsored or conducted terrorism? Seriously?

  4. Wright’s arena is clerical, not microbiological.
    That’s where he went too far. His opinion on such matters is as relevant as the Dixie Chicks.

  5. I’m still wondering where Wright “went too far”. According to a study published in 2005, 50% of a sample of US-born blacks between 15 and 44 said…
    Repeating stupid, easily-debunked anti-scientific, anti-intellectual canards is going too far. Just because 50% of a certain set of people believe something doesn’t actually make it right, or true. It makes it something a lot of people believe. Then again, a lot of people believe in flying-saucer aliens, astrology, and Bigfoot, too, not to mention creationism, American exceptionalism, the prosperity gospel, and all the other crap pushed by fundamentalist Christians.
    For posterity, I’d like to go on record as saying I repudiate the idiotic words of all dipshit clergy members, regardless of colour. Actually, I’d really like to see an equal amount of mass-media furore over the Dominionists who are intent on taking over the US and turning it into their idea of a Christianist theocracy, and just exactly how much of a complete and total whackaloonJohn McCain’s minister (Hagee) is, and, in a perfect world, a sober and level-headed analysis of why exactly religion matters so much in US politics, given that according to your Constitution, there’s explicitly supposed to be no establishment of religion and no religious test required for office. What I’m seeing looksdamn like a religious test.
    You folks really have no idea how weird this whole thing looks to a non-American. People caring about whether a political candidate goes to a particular sort of church? Weird. People caring what a political candidate’s clergy member thinks about politics? Double weird. A candidate for head of government describing part ofhis base as “stubbornly secular”?! Mind-blowingly weird, deserving of the “I look at you like you have three heads” treatment and a hasty exit from politics borne on a wave of giggles.

  6. So people think Wright went over the line on the AIDS thing. DId the rest of the Senate denounce Majority leader Bill Frist when he said it could be transferred by sweat and tears? Because I don’t remember any great national wave of outrage back in 2004 when that happened.
    Sure, I think Wright’s wrong. But does that require repudiation or refutation? It’s not as if Obama cleared up the origins of AIDS with his speech. In fact, he went out of the way to be as unspecific about which of Wright’s assertions he disagreed with. If the survey numbers are right, Obama could have used the opportunity to outline what he thought was the real origin of AIDS, and maybe convince people of the truth. By merely repudiating Wright without saying why, Obama is potentially repudiating a lot of people who might otherwise vote for him.

Comments are closed.