Little Hawk and Bart

Sorry to step in. I'm on a sort of roll. (IMNSHO anyway)

Dear Mav,

That's what it means, but the term is a creature of the DNC.

And LSC is a creature of the right. With as much or as little legitimacy. I can imagine there are hardcore militia types out there (Like the Freemen of Montana or that group in TX) who are armed to the teeth and willing to stand up to the US or various state governments, some being perfectly legit and some are totally whacked out criminals. I would consider them RWEs.

How legit? If you're going to accept the benefits (even passivly) then there are concomitant responsibilities. Refer to Bushwacked Four and the discussion of the social contract.

Most of these people are former GIs and are patriots in every sense of the word (if they are "right wing") and don't really do much but have meetings and be "at the ready".

Which is fine if that's as far as it goes. And when they decided to go further? I'm not proposing a preemptive strike, but a lot of these types (at least the ones I know) strike me as users. Despite all the rhetoric, what they want is to have their cake and eat it to. Patriots? Maybe. I have an old family friend who's a retired General and Medal of Honor winner. His take of these "patriots" is that they're hiding behind "patriotism" as an excuse for not doing what a responsible citizen should. (And before you leap to a conclusion, his opion of clinton, gore, et ale is even nastier than yours) If they were to encounter real communists, you can bet there would be real combat and to the death, they have nothing in common whatsoever (they think the US govt is red) And thinking the government is red makes it okay?

I've never met one, nor do I seek to, but I have met a Libertarian who has a massive arsenal and wants to get a tank, maybe he has a few buddies.

I want one too. And as I said, I've met them. And I maintain that at the bottom, a lot are leeches (to use an inflammatory term).

In reference to your article from "The Nation"; The mere presence of well spoken, highly educated and successful Americans of color in these prominent cabinet positions should give all members of that socially abused group pause to realize that they have been just that, not at the hands of the Republicans, but rather the democrats and their own self serving "black leaders".

Starange that they don't see it that way? And viewing people of color as pawns in the hands of their own leaders and the democrats qualifies as about a six on the genteel bigotry scale.

Nobody wants to dis-empower minorities, just liberals. The blacks are welcome at the table of economic freedom and the push is on to reach out to them via the church networks and faith based organizations despite the screamings of protest from the traditional racebaiting "civil rights leaders".

Welcome? Where? In business? Is that why people of color (all other things being equal) are passed over for promotions, are hired in at lower initial salaries? Or maybe why they get refused service at restaurants (in solidly red areas). Or have to pay higher points for mortgages? When their neighborhood has been "redlined" simply because its one of "those" neighborhoods. Or when a fellow worker (an African American) who lives in fairly upscale (and heavily Republican, btw) is stopped by the police while walking to a neighbors house demanding to know what he's doing in that neighborhood? And has had the same happen in upscale Democartic neighborhoods too. Reach out? The people o f color I know supported and support the democrats because they view them, patronizing attitude and all, as being a better entree into the mainstream.

Linking it to politics, right left or moderate, is simply sophistry to avoid dealing with the underlying racism. I'm not claiming that the programs the democrats have come up are better or worse that the "welcome" from the Republicans. Just that the problem isn't linked to politcis but to people.

Doug,

I reread your post and realize I leaped before I digested. Sorry.

Regards

John