Democratic Underground - No code required look at the following things she cites in her article

http://www.postwritersgroup.com/archives/park080514.htm

It's about blood equity, heritage and commitment to hard-won American values. And roots.

Some run deeper than others and therein lies the truth of Josh Fry's political sense. In a country that is rapidly changing demographically -- and where new neighbors may have arrived last year, not last century -- there is a very real sense that once-upon-a-time America is getting lost in the dash to diversity.

White power.
Thanks HRC for tipping us into the GE so our hackles are already raised.

Contributing to the growing unease among yesterday's Americans is the failure of the federal government to deal with the illegal-immigration fiasco. It isn't necessarily racist or nativist to worry about what these new demographics mean to the larger American story.

It is when you are talking about yesterday's Americans, hard-working, uh, white voters and other crappy references. Who could be more American than native Americans, how full-bloodied American are they considered to be by these guns, god, and gay voters she referenced?

It is in your face, over the top, and these newspapers need to decide if they are conduits for this speech. If that is what they want to be known for, fine. But if that is not who they are, they need to restrain themselves.

The "guns, God and gays" trope has haunted Democrats, and Republicans have enjoyed dusting it off when needed to rile the locals. It's an easy play.

But so-called "ordinary Americans" aren't so easily manipulated and they don't need interpreters. They can spot a poser a mile off and they have a hound's nose for snootiness. They've got no truck with people who condescend nor tolerance for that down-the-nose glance from people who don't know the things they know.

Does it mean I should let the writer and her ilk tell me who I can vote for? Or if I find their view repugnant that I should accept this b.s. as is? NO.

The best part of her conclusion is that it is over.

Some Americans do feel antipathy toward "people who aren't like them," but that antipathy isn't about racial or ethnic differences. It is not necessary to repair antipathy appropriately directed toward people who disregard the laws of the land and who dismiss the struggles that resulted in their creation.

Full-blooded Americans get this. Those who hope to lead the nation better get it soon.

I hope newspapers are ready for the heat. It is no question in my mind that this article reference means full-blooded American means not black. The part that gets me is they think they will define who we as Americans are.

Reply #5: No code required look at the following things she cites in her article [View All]