The terrorist vote vs. the racist vote

When a prominent Obama campaign spokesperson said in essence that racists were all voting for McCain, there was no media firestorm. It is accepted at this point that the Republican Party holds the "racist vote" spellbound. Of course this is supposed to scare us into thinking that the Republican Party is somehow encouraging to racists, or is racist itself. This is the kind of crap that Democraps--er, Democrats--use to try and keep African-American voters voting for them. Everyone believes the slander except for Republicans themselves.

Of course saying that McCain holds the "racist vote" is only talk. Nobody who is a prominent figure who is racist, not anyone, has come out and said, "thanks McCain for being the only white guy to vote for!"

But the Democrats have a problem with their own electorate---or at least, an 'electorate' that would vote in the United States election for President if it could. The Democrats have a strong hold of the terrorist vote. No, I don't mean Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn--those two are actually American citizens. The terrorist force of Hamas has expressed preference for a Barack Obama presidency. When John McCain pointed this out, Obama's campaign responded that it was a smear. As if saying McCain had a hold of the racist vote wasn't a smear.

So instead of assuring the American electorate that Hamas has plenty to fear from him, Obama and his campaign assure us that McCain has a lot to fear--Don't make them call you a racist! Because they will if McCain persists in pointing to Hamas' preference for Obama.

It is fair to ask what McCain is implying when he points out this telling fact: is he saying Obama and Hamas are pals? Well, that's how Democrats would like to paint it; McCain is trying to say Obama is a Hamas-friendly terrorist.

But what McCain is doing is simply pointing to the fact that dictators and terrorists have a preference for Democrat foreign policy ideals. Obama has promised to sit with Ahmadinejahd, Castro (the dead wax figure version) and Raul, Kimmie Jong-Il et al. How could Hamas NOT like Obama? He is the second-coming of the Democrat Messiah: Jimmy Carter!

It is interesting that Obama is so often compared to JFK. As history well knows, JFK wasn't exactly a Castro fan. It is hard to imagine JFK sitting down with Castro. Even to mock a dead, waxed version sitting in a rocking chair.

What McCain wants to point out---and what we should all realize---is that an Obama presidency is more likely to see friendly-relations with terrorist and dictatorial states, thus reversing years of tough-love American rejection. Democrats are big fans of talking and making empty gestures. Somehow talking to Ahmadinejad is supposed to persuade him not to pursue his theologically-driven plan to annihilate Israel. Somehow boycotting the Beijing Olympics will make China rethink their human rights policies...IF ONLY we could insult and abandon all our athletes, China would change! UN resolutions one after the other do nothing to make Iran and other such countries see the light.

This has veered from my original point, so let me wrap it up by relating this to McCain, Obama, the election and the "racist" vote vs, the terrorist vote.

The Democrats take offense when something true is pointed out; namely that their foreign policy ideals are comforting to terrorists and dictators. Meanwhile they feel no remorse in painting the Republican Party as racist--something that is, we can agree, at least debatable, not factual.

One thing for sure, terrorists are a lot more dangerous than racists. While the age of dangerous and violent racism has passed and a strand of silliness remains, the age of terrorism dawned. The Republicans should reject racism of course. How could they not? The Democrats' case for the Republican Party as racist relies on the fact that they reject affirmative action--which is, to paraphrade the great Martin Luther King jr--a policy that judges on the color of skin rather than character. The Democrats also base their reasoning on the fact that African-Americans overwhelmingly support them. Nevermind the fact that Republicans so have very prominent and capable leaders among them that are African-American: Condi Rice, Colin Powell, Clarence Thomas in the governmental and judicial sphere and Thomas Sowell, Larry Elder, and Walter Williams in the punditry sphere.

But what the Democrats refuse to acknowledge is this: even if Republicans have a lock on the racist vote, a much dirtier horse than racism resides in their own stable: terrorism. They don't want to address this fact, they just want to paint a picture of Republicans as accusing them of being terrorist-friendly. But that's not the problem. Of course Democrats don't endorse or agree with terrorists. The problem is that terrorists agree with them.