really really dirty. That I agree with everything in this video. And it’s from Fox News.

This election, it’s seriously fucking with my head.

My favorite History Proff never assigned a text book. He wanted us to look at primary sources of where history comes from instead. I learned a lot of stuff in his classes, which he started at the beginning of the quarter by showing the movie Roshomon. The primary source thing is the most important.

So while everyone is screaming about Hillary making assassination remarks about Obama with her RFK comment, I think it’s time we took a look at the primary source, in context.

Huhm, that doesn’t sound like a veiled threat to me. Doesn’t sound like she’s hoping for an Obama assassination so she can step in. Nope- sounds like she is describing the historical context of other primaries that went on until June.

But wait, maybe I’m just a bit too biased towards my own candidate. Let’s take a look at what RFK’s son said about Hillary’s comment. I mean if anyone was sensitive to veiled assassination threats, it would be a Kennedy, right?

It is clear from the context that Hillary was invoking a familiar political circumstance in order to support her decision to stay in the race through June. I have heard her make this reference before, also citing her husband’s 1992 race, both of which were hard fought through June. I understand how highly charged the atmosphere is, but I think it is a mistake for people to take offense.”

Wait- she’s made this statement before? How can that be? Is the media sleeping on the job and let her get an assassination dog whistle out there without calling her on it?

Perhaps it’s because she made the statement in March, when Obama thought he had the race sewn up, before Pennsylvania. Before West Virginia and Kentucky and a super close race in Indiana.

Perhaps this uproar over nothing is merely yet another cog in the WWTSBQ machine. Obama didn’t need to use fake assassination threats in March, but things are a bit more desperate now.(And for the love of Pete, with either a black man or a woman who is going to end up being the Dem nominee, there are enough REAL threats to their lives and safety without making them up).

I don’t think they can rely on the AA community to be their street rioting war fodder should the Precious not be nominated. And I’ll tell you why.

I live in an AA community, that’s no secret. We’re poor, we live where the housing is used to be cheap. I would imagine that I have wayyyyyyyyyyyyy more daily interaction with AA folks than the Blogger Boyz do, simply by,you know- actually living near, working with and talking to them every. single. day.

And for I don’t know what reason, grandfatherly type AA men like to talk to me. Not in a creepy way, but in a friendly neighbor way.

One of those men is the janitor at work. He likes to come hang out in my lab and we talk politics and poverty and violence (both of us have noticed the increase in violence in our neighborhood). He knows my feelings on Obama, I know his feelings. Yet I have not heard a single riot threat. Huhm. Perhaps the Blogger Boyz are using a racist stereotype of black people being excessively violent to bolster their candidate’s claim to the thrown.

So if it were just a sample of one black guy, who I happen to have a friendly relationship with, that would be too small of a sample.

So let’s go to today. I’m waiting on the corner for the bus when the grandpa equivalent of the coffee clatch is hanging out. One of them snuck up and tapped his cane on the widow of the bus shelter and nearly gave his friends a heart attack. When I started cracking up with them over the joke, this lovely old man with a cane decided to show me his basketball moves. And then he asked me what I do and I have taken to calling myself a writer (unpaid-except for generous donations, but I always said I wanted to grow up to yell at people, travel and write stuff- since I’m doing that I’m calling myself a writer) on politics, election stuff came up again.

Now since I don’t know him well, when he asked me who i was supporting I said I didn’t know if I wanted to tell him. HE said “Not that McCain” with big terrified eyes. “No, Hillary’s my girl.” “Well what do you think about Obama?”

“I can’t vote for him either, it’s either Hillary or Cynthia McKinney”.

Guess what- no riot threats. Huhm.

Now coming home on the bus I got into another chat with a less elderly black man. It started cause he thought the fact that I can read ebooks on my phone is cool (OMG Blogger Boyz- there’s another of your deeply held stereotypes blown to shreds- black people DO like to read!) And once again things came around to the election. I told him I can’t vote for Obama cause he’s a sexist. He said “You’re not voting for McCain”

Which I responded to with a “Hell no! It’s Hillary or Cynthia McKinney for me”.

And then he asked me the most important question “who you think is gonna win?”

“Honestly,” I said, “McCain. And he’s a fuckwad.”

“Tell me something I don’t already know”.

But once again- no threats of riots. Huhm, I’m sensing a pattern here.

Could it be that the O’bots are using racial stereotypes to their advantage? OMG. It’s not like they haven’t been doing that with sexism since forever.

So all I have heard from black men so far is that they hate McCain as much as I do. And unlike the Blogger Boyz, when I point out the sexism in the campaign they neither deny it or minimize it.

I starting to think the Blogger Boyz think of the AA community as their own army of Orcs. What do you think will happen when they discover that African Americans are real, thinking people and not an easy manipulated army out of LOTR?

Their heads may just explode.

Sometimes, even Royalty has to admit when they are wrong.

And I’ve been wrong. I was kinda working up to an apology to Nader voters, but today while warping yet another student, I had an epiphany.

And it’s dumb cause I should have had the epiphany when I was writing the first Hillary Racism Obama Sexism post, or at least by the second, But no, it came to me in a flash mid-argument.

I still owe the Nader voters and apology. Sorry and all that. You were right, vote your conscious, etc.

But this is an apology to all the poor or working class whites who voted Republican ever who I thought were stupid for “voting against their own-self interest”. You weren’t. I get it now.

You were voting for the party that would let you maintain what little bit of competitive edge you had (racism).

And when you had a viable non racist candidate that acted in your best interest, you voted for him twice (Clinton).

You don’t want to be racist. You just want to keep your families fed and housed. When neither party is offering you a better way, you go with the party that at least will keep the status quo.

I get it now.

I should have gotten it sooner.

And more people in the Democratic party should get it, but there is only one candidate in this entire race, Republican or Democrat, that gets it now. It’s not a coincidence that she also happens to be a Clinton.

So yesterday I wrote all about how practical privilege is what is driving the “racism” against Obama.

But does it work the same way for the sexism against Hillary. Only sort of.

Racism is not part of Hillary’s campaign strategy (despite the O’bots crying). She is not endorsing it, she has apologized when someone, herself even, has made a comment that seemed racist. All she has done is appeal to working class and poor voters, many of them white working class voters.

Sexism is a part of Obama’s campaign, whether being dished out by him and his campaign personnel (99 problems but a bitch ain’t one?) Or whether he is using the sexism in the media to further his candidacy.

And women, to the liberal elite boyz who get all tingly over the koolaid, are a much bigger threat to them than AAs are. AAs aren’t directly competing with them for college admission and graduate programs. And AAs aren’t their biggest competition in the workforce. Women are. Well educated white women.

But once again, Obama misses an opportunity. He could be talking about making things easier for everyone. He could be talking about more access to college educations for everyone or fostering industries that will create more creative class jobs for everyone. Instead he lets the boyz and their anger loose. And he sells out the rest of us.

Racism and sexism are real and awful, but whether the candidates try to improve the situation for everyone (like Hillary) or use those things to their own advantage (Like Obama) says a whole lot about what kind of president they will be.

I don’t want a president who will pit struggling people against each other for political gain.

Cause it was just that damn good:

So if anyone thinks that someone with a rather non-accomplished career, no experience, generally a poster child for those holding the money, makes a deal with the devil to buy a mansion he couldn’t afford while the poor under his watch went through a winter with no heat and no trash removal is qualified to keep track of the country when he could not keep track of his own district..go vote for him.
If those are the qualifications one’s seeks to be a leader and a president, vote for Obama. No use trashing Hillary Clinton or John McCain to make Obama look better. Vote for Obama on his experience, connections, record and judgment. No one has yet told me why I should vote for Obama. Everyone tells my why I shouldn’t vote for the other candidates.

I believe the criteria for GWB was that he ran a “better campaign”. I fail to see how that translated to being a better president.

For what it is worth, I do not smoke hopium and I have not yet had an obotomy. So one’s argument needs to be more compelling for me to support Obama.

From Linda C on the Dear Blogger Boyz thread.