Anecdotal turnout report: Virginia

In comments, Old Dominion readers report high, pro-Obama turnout at their Northern Virginia polling places this morning -- and intrepid Irish Trojan correspondent dcl notes that Obama is also doing well among the important cute-blonde-girls-at-bars demographic. I say this trend demands further research. Any volunteers? ;)

Comments

[Gardner]

I would say that Obama in the North makes sense. This would be his white "base". Educated, High-Income earners. I think Middle and South play more toward Clinton, but there are areas will Obama will do strong. I think Obama will get an easy win. Look for the AP/CNN/Fox News Alert at 7:00 pm.

[Brendan]

I want to agree... but this feels a little like New Hampshire to me...

[Gardner]

From a left leaning VA blogger (fairly well informed)

http://www.notlarrysabato.typepad.com/

UPDATE: I am really sick today so I haven't had a chance to hear much of what's going on- but based on the emails I am getting, Barack Obama is winning Virginia in an epic blowout.

UPDATE #2- Virginia Run, one of the most Republican precincts in Fairfax County has had 230 Democrats and 130 Republicans so far. WTF? Poll workers there just called me and said some Republicans have admitted being told to take the Democratic ballot and vote for the weaker candidate. Who is that to the GOP?

Of course this is a clinton supporter, so take it for what it is worth.

[yea]

are republicans really that scared of obama?

[Derek]

Seems to me that if Obama's destined to win, a few GOP crossovers can't do it :)

[Gardner]

I'm not sure what you are referring to? I think Republicans are doing 1 of 2 things.

Voting for Obama because they hate Hillary.
Voting for Hillary because they know the country hatred of Hillary will be easier to beat than the man of Hope.

I think conservatives are scared of what would happen to the country if he won.

[PenguinSix]

I showed up in Maryland and there was one Obama person standing outside electioneering. I got out of my car (an Audi), put on my shades and a NAVY sweatshirt and started walking into cast my vote. I think she racially profiled me (or automobile-profiled me, or sweatshirt-profiled me) as she didn't even attempt to hand me an Obama flyer.

Held my nose and voted for McCain.

[PenguinSix]

Many Republicans are voting for Hillary because they think a campaign against her would be a more traditional record vs. record election, whereas if you run against Obama is it your record, career, etc vs. the hyper-mystical 'change' platform, WTF that is...

Republicans did it in 1980--they know you can run on a 'vision' thing rather than a resume / record. You fear running against an idea more than you do a man (or woman). And with Obama, we are also seeing the first hints of 'if you speak against him it is racial' so that is another thing to worry about in the general.

p.s. I hate Hillary, and I fear for our country under Obama (honestly) no matter how many fancy speeches he makes.

[Jenn in NOVA]

I voted this morning at 8:30 in Reston, Va. At the time the democrats were voting two to one over the republicans. I usually vote GOP, in fact I worked at the White House under current President Bush.

I voted for Obama today for a few reasons.

I don't want Clinton to get the nomination -- some of this is based on friends who worked for the Clinton administration who are appalled that she might be out president.

Second, I like the idea of having a non-white, younger person be our president. We need something other than Bush, Clinton, Clinton, Bush, Bush...ugh Clinton. I think both McCain or Obama could at least add something different to the political spectrum.

Who I vote for in November is yet to be determined.

But, one thing to ponder -- Obama seems to be the only serious presidential candidate that has not cheated on his spouse or been cheated on.

McCain - Before his tour of duty in Vietnam, McCain had married a model from Philadelphia, Carol Shepp. While he was imprisoned, she was in an auto wreck, thrown through her car's windshield and left seriously injured. After his return to America, McCain had an extramarital affair with Cindy Lou Hensley, whose father owned Hensley & Co., a Phoenix-based liquor company that is the nation's second largest Anheuser-Busch distributor. McCain and Shepp were divorced in 1980, and he married his millionaire mistress the following month. In 1981 McCain left the Navy, signing his discharge papers the same day he buried his father at Arlington National cemetery, and the newlywed McCains settled in her home state of Arizona, where he went to work for his father-in-law at Hensley & Co.

Clinton - The Monica Lewinsky scandal was a political-sex scandal emerging from a sexual relationship between United States President Bill Clinton and a then 22-year-old White House intern, Monica Lewinsky. The news of this extra-marital affair and the resulting investigation eventually led to the impeachment of President Clinton in 1998 by the U.S. House of Representatives and his subsequent acquittal on all charges (of perjury and obstruction of justice) in a 21-day Senate trial.

Of course there is this :):

http://thenoosewire.blogspot.com/2007/03/obama-considers-having-extramarital_20.html

[Jenn in NOVA]

I voted this morning at 8:30 in Reston, Va. At the time the democrats were voting two to one over the republicans. I usually vote GOP, in fact I worked at the White House under current President Bush.

I voted for Obama today for a few reasons.

I don't want Clinton to get the nomination -- some of this is based on friends who worked for the Clinton administration who are appalled that she might be out president.

Second, I like the idea of having a non-white, younger person be our president. We need something other than Bush, Clinton, Clinton, Bush, Bush...ugh Clinton. I think both McCain or Obama could at least add something different to the political spectrum.

Who I vote for in November is yet to be determined.

But, one thing to ponder -- Obama seems to be the only serious presidential candidate that has not cheated on his spouse or been cheated on.

McCain - Before his tour of duty in Vietnam, McCain had married a model from Philadelphia, Carol Shepp. While he was imprisoned, she was in an auto wreck, thrown through her car's windshield and left seriously injured. After his return to America, McCain had an extramarital affair with Cindy Lou Hensley, whose father owned Hensley & Co., a Phoenix-based liquor company that is the nation's second largest Anheuser-Busch distributor. McCain and Shepp were divorced in 1980, and he married his millionaire mistress the following month. In 1981 McCain left the Navy, signing his discharge papers the same day he buried his father at Arlington National cemetery, and the newlywed McCains settled in her home state of Arizona, where he went to work for his father-in-law at Hensley & Co.

Clinton - The Monica Lewinsky scandal was a political-sex scandal emerging from a sexual relationship between United States President Bill Clinton and a then 22-year-old White House intern, Monica Lewinsky. The news of this extra-marital affair and the resulting investigation eventually led to the impeachment of President Clinton in 1998 by the U.S. House of Representatives and his subsequent acquittal on all charges (of perjury and obstruction of justice) in a 21-day Senate trial.

Of course there is this :):

http://thenoosewire.blogspot.com/2007/03/obama-considers-having-extramarital_20.html

[Brian Foster]

Obama seems to be the only serious presidential candidate that has not cheated on his spouse or been cheated on.

Yet.

Or, alternatively:

That we know of.

[Jenn in NOVA]

I voted this morning at 8:30 in Reston, Va. At the time the democrats were voting two to one over the republicans. I usually vote GOP, in fact I worked at the White House under current President Bush.

I voted for Obama today for a few reasons.

I don't want Clinton to get the nomination -- some of this is based on friends who worked for the Clinton administration who are appalled that she might be out president.

Second, I like the idea of having a non-white, younger person be our president. We need something other than Bush, Clinton, Clinton, Bush, Bush...ugh Clinton. I think both McCain or Obama could at least add something different to the political spectrum.

Who I vote for in November is yet to be determined.

But, one thing to ponder -- Obama seems to be the only serious presidential candidate that has not cheated on his spouse or been cheated on.

McCain - Before his tour of duty in Vietnam, McCain had married a model from Philadelphia, Carol Shepp. While he was imprisoned, she was in an auto wreck, thrown through her car's windshield and left seriously injured. After his return to America, McCain had an extramarital affair with Cindy Lou Hensley, whose father owned Hensley & Co., a Phoenix-based liquor company that is the nation's second largest Anheuser-Busch distributor. McCain and Shepp were divorced in 1980, and he married his millionaire mistress the following month. In 1981 McCain left the Navy, signing his discharge papers the same day he buried his father at Arlington National cemetery, and the newlywed McCains settled in her home state of Arizona, where he went to work for his father-in-law at Hensley & Co.

Clinton - The Monica Lewinsky scandal was a political-sex scandal emerging from a sexual relationship between United States President Bill Clinton and a then 22-year-old White House intern, Monica Lewinsky. The news of this extra-marital affair and the resulting investigation eventually led to the impeachment of President Clinton in 1998 by the U.S. House of Representatives and his subsequent acquittal on all charges (of perjury and obstruction of justice) in a 21-day Senate trial.

Of course there is this :):

http://thenoosewire.blogspot.com/2007/03/obama-considers-having-extramarital_20.html

[Jenn in NOVA]

I voted this morning at 8:30 in Reston, Va. At the time the democrats were voting two to one over the republicans. I usually vote GOP, in fact I worked at the White House under current President Bush.

I voted for Obama today for a few reasons.

I don't want Clinton to get the nomination -- some of this is based on friends who worked for the Clinton administration who are appalled that she might be out president.

Second, I like the idea of having a non-white, younger person be our president. We need something other than Bush, Clinton, Clinton, Bush, Bush...ugh Clinton. I think both McCain or Obama could at least add something different to the political spectrum.

Who I vote for in November is yet to be determined.

But, one thing to ponder -- Obama seems to be the only serious presidential candidate that has not cheated on his spouse or been cheated on.

McCain - Before his tour of duty in Vietnam, McCain had married a model from Philadelphia, Carol Shepp. While he was imprisoned, she was in an auto wreck, thrown through her car's windshield and left seriously injured. After his return to America, McCain had an extramarital affair with Cindy Lou Hensley, whose father owned Hensley & Co., a Phoenix-based liquor company that is the nation's second largest Anheuser-Busch distributor. McCain and Shepp were divorced in 1980, and he married his millionaire mistress the following month. In 1981 McCain left the Navy, signing his discharge papers the same day he buried his father at Arlington National cemetery, and the newlywed McCains settled in her home state of Arizona, where he went to work for his father-in-law at Hensley & Co.

Clinton - The Monica Lewinsky scandal was a political-sex scandal emerging from a sexual relationship between United States President Bill Clinton and a then 22-year-old White House intern, Monica Lewinsky. The news of this extra-marital affair and the resulting investigation eventually led to the impeachment of President Clinton in 1998 by the U.S. House of Representatives and his subsequent acquittal on all charges (of perjury and obstruction of justice) in a 21-day Senate trial.

Of course there is this :):

http://thenoosewire.blogspot.com/2007/03/obama-considers-having-extramarital_20.html

[Jenn in NOVA]

I voted this morning at 8:30 in Reston, Va. At the time the democrats were voting two to one over the republicans. I usually vote GOP, in fact I worked at the White House under current President Bush.

I voted for Obama today for a few reasons.

I don't want Clinton to get the nomination -- some of this is based on friends who worked for the Clinton administration who are appalled that she might be out president.

Second, I like the idea of having a non-white, younger person be our president. We need something other than Bush, Clinton, Clinton, Bush, Bush...ugh Clinton. I think both McCain or Obama could at least add something different to the political spectrum.

Who I vote for in November is yet to be determined.

But, one thing to ponder -- Obama seems to be the only serious presidential candidate that has not cheated on his spouse or been cheated on.

McCain - Before his tour of duty in Vietnam, McCain had married a model from Philadelphia, Carol Shepp. While he was imprisoned, she was in an auto wreck, thrown through her car's windshield and left seriously injured. After his return to America, McCain had an extramarital affair with Cindy Lou Hensley, whose father owned Hensley & Co., a Phoenix-based liquor company that is the nation's second largest Anheuser-Busch distributor. McCain and Shepp were divorced in 1980, and he married his millionaire mistress the following month. In 1981 McCain left the Navy, signing his discharge papers the same day he buried his father at Arlington National cemetery, and the newlywed McCains settled in her home state of Arizona, where he went to work for his father-in-law at Hensley & Co.

Clinton - The Monica Lewinsky scandal was a political-sex scandal emerging from a sexual relationship between United States President Bill Clinton and a then 22-year-old White House intern, Monica Lewinsky. The news of this extra-marital affair and the resulting investigation eventually led to the impeachment of President Clinton in 1998 by the U.S. House of Representatives and his subsequent acquittal on all charges (of perjury and obstruction of justice) in a 21-day Senate trial.

Of course there is this :):

http://thenoosewire.blogspot.com/2007/03/obama-considers-having-extramarital_20.html

[yea]

hey Jenn, who did you vote for today and why?

[David K.]

So Jenn, out of curiosity, exactly how MANY times did you vote today?!?!

[PenguinSix]

"But, one thing to ponder -- Obama seems to be the only serious presidential candidate that has not cheated on his spouse or been cheated on."

Give me a break.

Please. Open mouth, insert finger, vomit up the Kool-Aid you drank.

[Derek]

Jenn, I don't condone extramarital affairs ever, or divorce under almost any circumstances. I don't think McCain's affair is excusable. But I do think the story is more justifiable than you let on, and I think the spin you put on McCain is unfair.

McCain spent 5 1/2 years in a Vietnamese POW camp. If you think soldiers returning home from battle have trouble adjusting to home life (note the high divorce rate among military spouses after a return from duty), the strain from a POW camp is much worse.

McCain's wife experienced an automobile accident during that time that not only left her severely disfigured but also four inches shorter. And she didn't want to tell McCain about it through POW-communiques because she wanted him to keep up his spirits.

So McCain shows up home, not just with the normal soldier syndrome, but also with a wife who looks far different than when he'd left.

Over the next seven years they experienced a rocky relationship, including affairs. By the time McCain met Cindy, he and his then-wife had already separated.

Again, not excusable. But the timeline and sequence gives a lot more understanding for why it happened rather than "he wanted to marry a young heiress."

As for spousal issues and candidates, I'm all for scrutinizing their personal lives for clues about how they may govern, but it appears to be of limited, if any, value (despite the protests from some Romney supporters). George W. Bush has been faithful. Ronald Reagan was not. Jimmy Carter was faithful. JFK was not.

Maybe if you could lend a clue as to why you find it particularly relevant in this election... I'm all for giving those with marital fidelity the benefit!

[Big Cat]

I had sex with Obama. It was the single greatest experience of my life.

[yea]

im more concerned about Mccain's racist remarks toward asains than any supposed extramarital affairs. i think a person's is his/her own business, but i dont think we can let someone who might be racist run the country, regardless of the circumstances that led to those beliefs/feelings.

[yea]

*i think a person's marriage is his/her own business

[Derek]

yea, was there more than one? I recall the 2000 Vietnamese slur, but that's the only one that came to mind.

[Brian Foster]

In fairness, that remark was not directed at, toward, or about "asains." Or even Asians.

[yea]

you guys are probably more familiar with mccain than me so if you know im wrong please go ahead and correct me, but i thought he had a history of using that specific slur and that it was well known that he did so. my belief was that he stopped using it around 2000 when he was running for president and hasnt used it since.

[Derek]

I have no idea. I just recall the one comment.

I figured the election would focus on typical scandals like "Keating Five v. Rezko," not "Louis Farrakhan-supportive pastor v. Vietnamese slur." But then again, I guess the financial scandals don't get the headlines, but the racial ones do.

[Brian Foster]

yea,

First, just to clarify in case there is any confusion, I was not picking on your typo -- I wanted to make clear that I was taking issue with your characterization of the remark(s), so I needed to quote you, but if I hadn't clarified that I meant "Asians" it might have given even more of an appearance that I was trying to make something out of an unintentional error. Just so we're understood there. :)

Second, I don't know much about his frequency of use of the term, although given his initial reaction to the furor in 2000 (something along the lines of "that's the nicest word I can think of to describe them and I will continue to use it") before later apologizing, I would imagine that he used it more than once.

But my point is that he used it in reference to some specific and actual individuals who, from his perspective, are very deserving of being described in vile, despicable, hateful terms. And I would venture to guess that it was a commonly used term among his colleagues during the years in question, in reference to those same particular individuals.

Now, I realize you indicated that you don't care about the "circumstances that led to those beliefs/feelings," and that's fair enough. But I think it is a mistake to presume that his use of that term to describe those particular individual people means that he harbors racist sentiments toward all Asians. I think the circumstances, and his explanation for why he used that term (when he did use that term), more than adequately dispel any notion that he is a "racist."

Again, I recognize and respect that you may not feel such circumstances justify his use of the word, and I am not 100% certain that I disagree with you. I only caution against reading too much into his use of that word.

[dcl]

No discussion at all of the cute girls in bars demographic? Wow, this place is far to wonky...

[Alasdair]

dcl - and you are just starting to realise that ??? (ROTFLMFOWEST!)

yea - if McCain wants to use the term "gook", has he not earned that, by his experiences in Life ? Who are any of us, to condemn him from our position of safe experiences ?

[yea]

Alasdair,

he has the right to say anything he wants. however, he is running for president and has to realize that the term "gook" is horribly offensive to a large amount of americans. how can he look asian americans in the eye and ask for their vote?

furthermore, china, japan and other asian countries are major powers and id like to know that he can deal with asia and not be biased because of his past experiences. with china becoming an increasingly important factor in the world, id like to hope his personal biases wouldnt interfere with making good policy. the fact this he's used this slur until he was in his 60s (ie this isn't something that he did when he was young and just came back from the war), bothers me also.

[Abbreviator]

Um . . .

Rolling On The Floor Laughing My Fanny Off Without Even Smelling Turds?

[David K.]

Uh, no Alasdair he has not earned the right to use a racial slur. Thats like saying that if Brendan got beat up by a black guy he could start throwing around the N-word whenever he wanted because of his experience in life. Seriously, just put the keyboard down and walk away.

[Brian Foster]

id like to know that he can deal with asia and not be biased because of his past experiences. with china becoming an increasingly important factor in the world, id like to hope his personal biases wouldnt interfere with making good policy

Right, that's exactly the kind of inference that I think absolutely cannot be drawn from his use of the word. The leaders, politicians, and diplomats of China, Japan, and other Asian countries are not the Viet Cong soldiers who beat and tortured him for five years, so he has absolutely no reason to be be biased in his dealings with them.

The only exception is if one of his captors is now a highly placed Vietnamese official. I'll concede that things could get dicey in that scenario.

I think I agree with you, though, that regardless of whatever justification he may have for hating those individuals and describing them in that way, it's simply not good domestic politics to use the word unapologetically.

I tend to think (similar to the BLSA / Patty O incident) that there's no objective basis for "Asian Americans" to be offended at his display of disdain and hatred for his non-American captors, but like the SBA before him, McCain can't win that argument (in part because it wouldn't be an "argument," it would be an orgiastic emotional outpouring of identity politics and groupthink). So he would have been better off to keep his preferred terminology to himself.

[Joe Loy]

Me, I think Brendan should ban usage of horrendously offensive terms like "geek". ;]

"No discussion at all of the cute girls in bars demographic? Wow, this place is far to wonky..."

Naah, dcl, it's not Wonkism. Everybody's just afraid that if we Discuss our interactions with that crucial Demographic :}, next thing we know we'll all see our Extramarital or otherwise Fornicative affairs publicly Delineated in Detail here. Five Times Each. :> { Hi NOVAJenn, how's tricks? Let me Rephrase that. How's the Food down there at the NOVA Institute for the Pathologically Judgemental? :}

[Brian Foster]

Thats like saying that if Brendan got beat up by a black guy he could start throwing around the N-word whenever he wanted because of his experience in life

Wrong.

No one is saying McCain can throw around the "G-word" "whenever he want[s]." They (we) are saying he is entitled to some license to throw it specifically at those who tortured him, because they tortured him, for five years in Nam.

And I hope it is elementary to you, David, given your steadfast opposition to most of the Bush administration's policies in prosecuting the war on terror, that there is a vast gulf separating "getting beat up by a . . . guy" from "being held prisoner, beaten, and tortured by dozens if not hundreds of . . . guys on a daily basis for five years."

So if we wanted to correct your analogy, it would be this:

Thats like saying that if Brendan got beat up and tortured by a dozens if not hundreds of black guys every day for five years while being held as a prisoner of war under inhuman conditions in a foreign land he could start throwing around the N-word whenever he wanted specifically to describe his captors because of his experience in life as measured and defined by the horrific atrocities he suffered at their hands.

And if that were the case, I daresay that few would have the moral authority to haughtily dress him down for his strong feelings on the matter, however much they might cringe internally upon hearing it, or recognize that he is doing himself no favors if he happens to be in a position to try and court the African American vote, or, in their myopia, think less of him for it.

[Derek]

Also, the etymology for the n-word and for the g-word are entirely different. The n-word refers to a pejorative term used by whites during slavery; the g-word refers to Vietnamese or Korean enemy soldiers.

So when McCain uses the g-word as one who fought against Vietnamese or Korean soldiers, it's one thing. When Brendan uses the n-word [wow, what a horrific hypothetical] against some random person who beats him up, it's not remotely related to the context of the term.

Consider the converse: McCain using the g-word to describe a neighbor cooking ethnic food he abhors, and Brendan using the n-word as a 17th-century slave trader.

I'm not saying one should walk around tossing either word out in any context, particularly in public, particularly as a public official. I'm also not saying either is even justifiable in its original form. I just want to point out the absurdity of the analogy. (Reductio ad n-word, as I might call it.)

(I also find it somewhat ironic that McCain is berated because he's in favor of amnesty for millions of illegal immigrants, and simultaneously berated because of being a racist!)

[yea]

didnt mccain deny that his plan was "amnesty" during the debates? if his plan really offers "amnesty" why not admit it? isnt that the point of the straight talk express?

[David K.]

Oh, i get it, so if i'm tortured by people who happen to be asian THEN i am morally justified in using racial slurs. You can argue that he is entitled to use it because he was tortured, and I'm going to call you and him a racist for doing so. Once again, an example fo the fine upstanding morals of the GOP. Its ok to hate, as long as you don't hate America!

[CD]

McCain has stated that his use of the term 'gook' was always aimed at a very specific group of Viet Cong soldiers. It was not an 'asian epithet' but a 'Viet Cong' epithet. He has apologized for the offense that the larger vietnamese community took based upon the use of this word and has since renounced his public use of the word.

I'm not going to argue that McCain is some particularly sensitive guy. He has and will again make many insensitive remarks about individuals and groups and he will be judged for it, as is anyone's right to do. People are already having fun remembering one of his most notable slips: "Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly? Because Janet Reno is her father". The guy is certainly a charmer... hm.

However, David, before you come out with your 'racist' paint brush for McCain and the entire Republican party, maybe you should actually take a look at the positive impact John McCain had and continues to have in healing relations between the US and Vietnam. Maybe you ought to think about that fact that he is friends with more Vietnamese people than you've probably even met in your lifetime. And maybe realize that in this one instance, we can give him the benefit of the doubt and assume that he used that term to reference a particular group of *soldiers* who treated him horribly, especially within the context of his relations with the country and its people over the past decades.

Lastly, the ignorance that leads someone to assume that 'gook' is something that all 'asians' take offense at is the root cause of more problems than that of which you are accusing McCain.

[David K.]

CD, I realize that McCain himself is not continuing to use the word, my complaint was the attitude that people here (alasdair and Brian) were taking, i.e. that he (or anyone) is justified in using racial slurs like that. As commenters, especially Alasdair, who regularly trumpet how horrible the democrats are, and how saintly the GOP is, I thought it releveant to point out such hypocrisy. I absolutely do not believe that everyone in the GOP is racist.

I also am quite aware that "asians" are a culturally diverse group, and that calling a Japanese person a Korean, or a Chinese person Vietnamese can be offensive to them, my point was not to lump all asians into one group, but to highlight that poor abuse by one small sector of people who happen to be part of a larger group does not entitle you to use racial slurs against the larger group, thats all, I'm sorry it wasn't as clear as it could have been.

[Alasdair]

David K - while it may well explain your own typing ability, *I* don't actually hold the keyboard while I am typing - so I am not likely to "just put the keyboard down and walk away." ...

ROTFLMFOWEST - Rolling On The Floor Laughing My Fundament Off With Eyes Streaming Tears ...

To a significant part of the US population the word "Republican" is just as much of a racial slur as "gook" or any of the other classics ... to a different part of the population, "liberal" is an equivalent slur ...

And "geek" just isn't up there, cuz so few are willing to even pretend to take offence about its use ... and most of us geeks are proud to be geeks ...

Unless we intend to enshrine ignorance and bigotry, then we find ourselves needing to accept that "Offence is taken" - and, much of the time, those who take offence do so for strategic reasons ...

If, God forbid, Brendan is mugged by persons of very high melanin content from a certain francophone sub-Saharan country, and he happens to refer to the Nigers who beat him up, that isn't a racial slur ... that's descriptive ...

[David K.]

No Alasdair, offense is GIVEN when you behave in a way that is offensive towards others. Your attempts to wash away teh guilt of people who are engaging in offensive behavior is stomache churningly appauling, however not surprising given your black and white extreme political views. How else to justify the actions of your oh so upstanding moral politicians who engage in dirty tactics but to declare it the fault of the person being attacked. "Gook" as an insensitive and racially bigoted term. PERIOD. If you or I or anyone else uses it towards a person of asian (esp. Viatnamese) descent we are being racist. PERIOD. There is no justifiation, there is no "you are TAKING offense" bullshit, its just plain wrong. YOU are just plain wrong.

And once again your attempts to be clever are just that, attempts, failed ones at that. You are pathetic.

[Brian Foster]

Oh, i get it, so if i'm tortured by people who happen to be asian THEN i am morally justified in using racial slurs.

No reasonable, intelligent reader could possibly read what I, Alasdair, or Derek has written, and believe that this summary by David K is in any way accurate or representative of the views expressed.

Succinctly: when McCain calls his torturers "gooks," it has nothing to do with their race, and everything to do with the fact that they were his torturers. Only a small, closed, feeble mind would see it otherwise.

We can debate about whether it's insensitive to others who are themselves overly-sensitive about such things, and I've already acknowledged that it was certainly unwise for him to advance this term in public during his last presidential campaign. But racist he most certainly is not.

For similar reasons, your would-be slogan for the GOP, "Its ok to hate, as long as you don't hate America!" is utterly nonsensical and has no bearing on anything being discussed. To the extent any approval to hate is being extended, it again has nothing to do with either race or nationality, and everything to do with infliction of torture.

And of course, the mere fact that you proposed such a slogan contradicts your later attempt at backpedaling (" I absolutely do not believe that everyone in the GOP is racist"). Talk about being blinded by hate.

Finally:

poor abuse by one small sector of people who happen to be part of a larger group does not entitle you to use racial slurs against the larger group

I agree with you here. I am quite sure Derek does too. I would guess Alasdair does as well, and I have no doubt that McCain himself is right there with us.

David, no one has argued that being abused by the Viet Cong entitles McCain to "use racial slurs against the larger group" of all Asians, or all Vietnamese, or even all Viet Cong. You are simply making that up.

Once again, your inability to follow an argument, employ basic reasoning skills, discern nuances, or separate your primitive and unsophisticated "views" from the external reality of the political world and discussions that take place therein, has rendered you utterly irrelevant to this conversation.

[Alasdair]

David - actually, in the English language, offence cannot be given ... it can only be offered ... and, unless it is subsequently taken, it doesn't actually turn out to be offence ...

If I call a David a Republican, then, if he is an intelligent David, he will not take offence ... if he is a Democrat David, he might well take offence, but that is by his own choice ...

If he is a David hunting high and low for offence to take, then he may take offence at the prior paragraph ... to do so, however, he has to read meanings into the words used that aren't there ... and *that* is traditionally called "prejudice" ...

[David K.]

Alasdair, you can try and twist definitions around all you want, but if someone walked up to you, spit in your face, called your wife a whore, and started swearing at and belittling your children, my guess is you would be offended by it. You can pretend otherwise but reality disagree with you.

[Alasdair]

David K - if someone started doing that, I would be offended by someone spitting in my face ... yup - ya got me on *that* one ! Of course, I do believe that's called "Assault" ... and is a physical offense ...

Calling my wife a whore - well, I'd be more than happy to have my wife deal with that ... she is a surgical specialist, after all ... and she can be just as surgical verbally, if she so chooses ... sicne my wife isn't, in fact, someone who sells sex for money, I doubt she'd be all that offended ... more likely amused ...

Belittling my children - equivalent answer - my kids have shown a good ability to hold their own in such situations ...

Now, if someone starts swearing at 'em and using foul language, I might well intervene to get 'em to go cuss elsewhere ... or I might just stage whisper about how poor an education the idiot must have, to be stuck repeating the same few words over and over ...

Bottom line - we consider the source ... and when we don't respect the source, why would we give a rat's fundament what the unrespected source is saying ?