quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth
however, what I found most interesting when trying to search the demographics contained in the polls was the lack of a source willing to document what the plurality is.

Merc, You're not trying very hard. Gallup has their daily polling broken down by race available every single day. It's two clicks from Gallup.com.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/108040/Candidate-Support-Race.aspx

Sincere thanks for that DK. I'm keeping that link. ummm 91% - I don't think you  could get 91% of any other demographic group to be so lock step on any issue.

I do see one validation for the result. Blacks have supported the Democratic Party forever, so there is a traditional basis for their voting block. Having a person who has 1/2 of his genetic background and who has identified with that half of his parentage I can appreciate generating a greater plurality. However 91%? I don't think my demographic identity, Italian, would have a 91% result regarding how their favorite pasta sauce should be prepared! 

I must have put the wrong parameters into google search. Either that or too focused on getting away to Vegas tomorrow.

Again - [sm=thanks.gif]!

quote:

ORIGINAL: bestbabync

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mteMQh5zD0c

a black pub voice
this one is different.

quote:

ORIGINAL: bestbabync

again, how can Obama contradict the pub president, senators or congressman and then vote the same as they did for the bailout bill?   all of them are the same, just a different road to the same destination.  Obama just admits it publically, right?

quote:

ORIGINAL: corysub

It's not racism when 90% of blacks are voting for Obama.  The blacks in this country have been bought and paid for by the democrats and that's just a fact of life.  I'm surprised it's not 95%!

quote:

Democrats Were Wrong on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac


Seventeen.

That's how many times, according to this White House statement (hat tip Gateway Pundit), that the Bush administration has called for tighter regulation of the government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs) Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Congress has cooperated only once. In spring 2007, as House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank likes to point out, the House did pass a bill in response. The Senate did not act until 2008; Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd spent most of 2007 camped out in Iowa running for president. The legislation passed by Congress in 2008 enabled Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson to put Fannie and Freddie into federal conservatorship this summer when they failed. But it didn't prevent them from spewing a huge amount of toxic waste, in the form of subprime and Alt-A mortgages, into our financial institutions from 2004 to 2007. As Stephen Spruiell points out in The Corner on National Review Online, Fannie and Freddie spewed out $1 trillion worth (face value) of subprime mortgages between 2005 and 2007. That's a whole lot of toxic waste. For more detail, consult the items referred to in my previous blogpost on this subject (most of the comments seem to have been disputes about the plot line of the movie It's a Wonderful Life, which I should think could be settled by consulting a reference work).


<snip>


Much if not all of that could have been prevented by a bill cosponsored by John McCain and supported by all the Republicans and opposed by all the Democrats in the Senate Banking Committee in 2005. That bill, which the Democrats stopped from passing, would have prohibited the GSEs from speculating on the mortgage-based securities they packaged. The GSEs' mission allegedly justifying their quasi-governmental status was to package or securitize such mortgages, but the lion's share of their profits—which determined top executives' bonuses—came from speculation.



http://www.usnews.com/blogs/barone/2008/10/06/democrats-were-wrong-on-fannie-mae-and-freddie-mac.html

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: bestbabync

again, how can Obama contradict the pub president, senators or congressman and then vote the same as they did for the bailout bill?   all of them are the same, just a different road to the same destination.  Obama just admits it publically, right?

No, the point is the exact opposite.

A Republican administration crafted this bailout.  An administration that, along with the rest of the Republican Party, has pushed deregulation policies since Reagan took office in 1980.  The same Republican Party that branded any government regulation or intervention in business as socialism.

The same Republican Party whose policies have been so destructive to the economy that they are forced to embrace the same things they have railed against for almost 30 years.

Not only embrace them, but being forced to take far more drastically socialistic measures than any Democrat would have ever dared to propose.

The irony would be hilarious if it weren't so tragic and potentially deadly to our welfare. 

quote:

ORIGINAL: TabrisMaceth

I'm sure a few of you have had something to say about this already, but I seriously gotta say something:

quote:

ORIGINAL: corysub

It's not racism when 90% of blacks are voting for Obama.  The blacks in this country have been bought and paid for by the democrats and that's just a fact of life.  I'm surprised it's not 95%!

Holy fucking shit! Does that strike anyone else as a tad bit, I dunno, racist?! It's so thinly veiled, he might as well replaced "blacks" with "negros" and called Obama "uppity"!

-Tabris

quote:

ORIGINAL: bestbabync

thank you Sanity

i thought him rather "dead on" in describing modern slavery!