Re: Justice concludes black voters need Democratic Party (via feedly)
Subject: Re: Justice concludes black voters need Democratic Party (via feedly)
From: Dan COLLINS <vermontaigne@gmail.com>
Date: 10/26/09, 14:32
To: Barrett Brown <barriticus@gmail.com>

Thanks, Barrett, that's very kind, and I wouldn't be corresponding with you about it at all if I didn't feel the same way toward you. 

I thought of contacting Pajamas right away when I read the holocaust piece and looked at the sources, but i think it's important that Stacy have an opportunity to respond before I boot it up there.  Still, I found what I saw very distasteful, particularly the idea that "miscegenation" should naturally be met with revulsion.

Quite frankly, one of the wonderful things about having left Protein Wisdom is that I don't jeopardize anyone's readership when I say something that I figure they will find offensive.  So, for example, when Cass Sunstein happens to say something that I agree with and have blogged about before, ie. that government ought to be out of the business of determining what is a "marriage" altogether, and people get all outraged, saying that he wants to do away with the entire institution of marriage, I can tell them they're full of shit (although I think Cass is loopy about some other things, I so respect that there's nothing at all covert about his beliefs).

My issues with LGF have not a whole lot to do with Stacy McCain, though.  I've said what I have to say about Charles, and see no point in going back to that well, though it seems to have become something of a sport for some people.

Dan

On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 2:19 PM, Barrett Brown <barriticus@gmail.com> wrote:
Dan-

I'm glad to hear it; I figured that of all the people who've been defending McCain and taking issue with Johnson and myself, you would be the one most likely to actually examine the facts, instead of just focusing on one or two of the weaker pieces of evidence and dismissing all of the allegations based on those. 

I appreciate you providing me with your opinions on all of this, and the reason I seek them out is because I need someone who's not necessarily in my corner on most things to alert me if I do indeed overreach on something, and I have about zero respect for those others who are generally on your "side" in this whole wacky blog-o-conflict, so you're the only person I can ask. Although I do think I've proceeded with due diligence so far and obviously don't agree with much of what you've written on me and this whole incident in general, I do like to have your take on these things.

On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 2:04 PM, Dan COLLINS <vermontaigne@gmail.com> wrote:
Barrett,

I don't read LGF anymore, and I haven't read Strata, but I did email Stacy last week and tell him that the allegations here are pretty serious and that I think that he really ought to respond to them:

http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/2009/10/meet-robert-stacy-mccain-neo.html

Now, he was up in NY-23, covering the Hoffman-Scozzafava thing, so I'm giving him a little time, but just so you know--I am not taking this lightly.

Thanks,
Dan


On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 1:58 PM, Barrett Brown <barriticus@gmail.com> wrote:
Of course I agree with you that this ridiculous DoJ nonsense is several sorts of wrong, although I don't see how it's relevant to Robert Stacy McCain other than that it shows that there are other people besides him who are racist or otherwise misguided. Perhaps you're implying that I ought to be writing about this particular story rather than the McCain story? If so, I would note that this DoJ story has already been covered by at least one national paper, whereas the details of this McCain story has not, to my knowledge. Perhaps you should cover the DoJ story yourself if you haven't already.

As you may be aware, I have presented the evidence on McCain. Perhaps you can answer these questions:

1. Do you think that McCain is a white supremacist?

2. Do you think that either I or Johnson have "libeled" McCain? If so, can you point to any specific instance?

3. Do you think that AJ Strata was wrong to assert the other day that McCain is indeed a racist?

On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 1:20 PM, Dan COLLINS <vermontaigne@gmail.com> wrote:
Marshall your evidence, Barrett.  I'm willing to take a look with an open mind.

But if you read the following, you'll find that it's DoJ policy, now, to encourage cross-party voting among whites and discourage it among blacks.

Dan


On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 12:58 PM, Barrett Brown <barriticus@gmail.com> wrote:
You know what else is kind of racist? Writing for a bunch racist and neo-Nazi forums under a Confederate-inspired pen name, writing that it's natural to feel revulsion at interracial marriage, obsessing over white birth rates in the pages of a white supremacist publications, or doing the the dozen or so other things that R.S. McCain has clearly done over the years.

On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 10:30 AM, Dan COLLINS <vermontaigne@gmail.com> wrote:
Hey, you want to know what's racist?

Justice concludes black voters need Democratic Party
Washington Times KINSTON, N.C. | Voters in this small city decided overwhelmingly last year to do away with the party affiliation of candidates in local elections, but the Obama administration recently overruled the electorate and decided that equal rights for black voters cannot be achieved without the Democratic Party.

The Justice Department's ruling, which affects races for City Council and mayor, went so far as to say partisan elections are needed so that black voters can elect their "candidates of choice" - identified by the department as those who are Democrats and almost exclusively black.

The department ruled that white voters in Kinston will vote for blacks only if they are Democrats and that therefore the city cannot get rid of party affiliations for local elections because that would violate black voters' right to elect the candidates they want.

Several federal and local politicians would like the city to challenge the decision in court. They say voter apathy is the largest barrier to black voters' election of candidates they prefer and that the Justice Department has gone too far in trying to influence election results here.

Stephen LaRoque, a former Republican state lawmaker who led the drive to end partisan local elections, called the Justice Department's decision "racial as well as partisan."

"On top of that, you have an unelected bureaucrat in Washington, D.C., overturning a valid election," he said. "That is un-American."
LAM

[link to original | source: Weasel Zippers | published: 1 hour ago | shared via feedly]