"And as secretary of state, I'm going to keep my partisan or non-partisan views to myself on that. But I think all Americans were taken with the fact that we were able, after the long history that we've been through, that initial birth defect of slavery that we elected an African American."
I'm taking that as a yes.
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
६६ टिप्पण्या:
Earlier, Ann posted a video of Secretary Rice's November 5 press briefing, which I enjoyed very much for the open reflection of one person's experience.
It wouldn't surprise me to learn that she voted for Obama. I'm not a fan of her boss, but Rice seemed to me to be closer to a liberal hawk, a la Paul Berman with some real influence and backbone, rather than a neoconservative. Though I suppose many more paleoconservative types would say the line between liberal hawks and neocons is a pretty gray one.
I saw Rice speak a little over a month ago at an event for the Baker Institute at Rice University. While I didn't go there expecting to be favorably disposed to what she had to say, she gave a graceful, thoughtful speech and she talked about the issues she wanted to focus on in her post-Bush Administration career. Those issues were education and immigration reform, and while she didn't lay out a policy agenda, what she had to say didn't sound like what one would generally consider to be a conservative agenda. It'll be very interesting to see what she does over the next few years, and what allies and adversaries she'll make.
Just more proof that the election of Obama is proof that all of America isn't racist. Just the blacks are.
We've proven that whites don't vote based on skin color. But blacks do.
My god how I love that woman... Ms. Condi.
I'm taking her answer for what it is...it's her business. I surely hope that she didn't vote skin color but looked closer and.. oh never mind. How stupid am I to think that anyone did otherwise.. and if they did and wanted his agenda then God help us all!
Here's a personal confession: I actually considered voting against McCain because I didn't like the pallor of his skin. And it just sort of rubbed me the wrong way how he would refer to himself "white." As if I can't see with my own eyes? Please.
Plus he was sort of erratic.
Yes, Meade, not "white", but a "person of pallor." Persons previously known as "black" will henceforth be known as "palloricly challenged."
We've proven that whites don't vote based on skin color. But blacks do.
We have? Did you see the results from Louisiana, Alabama or Mississippi or other former confederate states. With the exception of Virginia (and I bet it wasn't the real Virginia but inside the beltway Virginia), whites in the south voted based on skin color.
We can't tell much about voting skin color from the general election: Whites in the South are mostly Republican and Blacks everywhere are overwhelmingly Democratic. Both voted party-line for the most part.
The Democratic nomination contest is a whole different matter. Clinton and Obama had few differences policy-wise and yet Obama got huge margins of black voters while Clinton got small majorities among white voters.
I am a white guy, and it is no big deal for me to have a minority president.
From what I have seen, people of color have a very different experience. If Dr. Rice voted for a man because of his racial significance, God bless her.
This is hugely important to a lot of the country. It is my hope that it is indeed part of healing.
Trey
"This is hugely important to a lot of the country. It is my hope that it is indeed part of healing."
This is the 21st century. Jim Crow is long gone. We need no "healing" of this sort, we've already healed.
Except OJ and Obama have shown that blacks tend to think of skin color before anything else.
Theo, I am in line, my friend. But fair warning: I will jump the queue if I get the opportunity. I'm hoping for a date with Condi. Seriously. I've asked her and she hasn't said no. To me, that's a glass half-full.
Of course, if I get so lucky, no one will hear one single detail about our romance. I will be as discrete as the day is long...
...for national security purposes, naturally.
Do the people who made this vile poster love her now? I wonder how she'll get along with her new friends on the left?
Do the people who made this vile poster love her now? I wonder how she'll get along with her new friends on the left?
ROFL.
ROFL.
Wow, you have a very low humor threshold. Seriously, I thought support for Obama washed away all (right-wing) sins?
Greetings:
Back in the joy of my youth, in the Bronx of the late ‘50s and early ‘60s, basketball became the preferred way to waste my time. Eventually, my skills led me and some friends to travel to other neighborhoods in search of new competition. Some of these neighborhoods were more “diverse” and less safe than my own. News of my travels reached my father and I was subsequently summoned to a "Denis, me boy-o" meeting in our living room.
My father had grown up in Ireland and came to this country in 1927, in time for both the Great Depression and World War II. He was a practicing Catholic and, to my knowledge, had no particular bone to pick with black folks. When he found out where I had been traveling to play ball, he shared the following advise with me; "right or wrong, don't ever expect them to take your part against their own."
It was good advice then, as now.
Palladian, you still love Althouse, right?
She voted for Obama. Doesnt' make her a leftist.
"Palladian, you still love Althouse, right?"
My love for Althouse is complicated.
"She voted for Obama. Doesnt' make her a leftist."
Nope. It doesn't. It doesn't make the millions of other people who voted for him leftists either. But I bet you that the people who made that nasty poster thought of themselves as leftists.
dpb wrote: and yet Obama got huge margins of black voters while Clinton got small majorities among white voters.
That theory falls flat. There were plenty of overwhelmingly white states like Washington and Minnesota where Obama won big.
For those who want to make the case that African Americans vote for "their own," how do you explain Joseph Cao and Steve Cohen?
Palladian,
Fuck the people who made that poster. They aren't even Americans. They are dead to me.
Rice is a conservative who disagreed strongly with Obama over the Iraq war and interrogation of detainees, among other things.
However, there was a school of thought among Bush conservatives that the only way to get Democrats to buy into the War on Terror was for a Democrat to get elected President so that they would have to confront the problems of the war and the Enemy that came with it. I strongly suspect that if Rice did vote for Obama, that thought might have entered her mind.
She gave an interview with Rita Braver today in which her defense of Bush and the war bordered on the passionate. This woman remains a Republican. Yet I would not be surprised that she is satisfied that the Democrats cannot now retreat behind the Minute of Hate anymore-that the War is their responsibility at long last, and that that is a good and necessary thing for unity in foreign policy.
Besides, other than Sarah Palin, let's face it, the McCain Campaign had nothing to offer. I voted for McCain out of duty, not enthusiasm. His was one of the great, incompetent campaigns of our time. It's a signal of McCain's incompetence as a candidate that when he had the chance to choose Rice as his VP, he chose Palin instead.
As it turned out, Palin was good enough, but nothing was good enough to win.
"My love for Althouse is complicated"
Don't give me that namby pamby crap, Palladian. It isn't worthy of your typically frank and open style. Love is not complicated. You might be complicated but love isn't. Either you do or you don't and in this case, you do. Step up and admit to it.
Good comment by section9. But I disagree about the extent of McCain's campaign incompetency. In a normal year against a normal opponent, McCain would have won. I still think he was too old. I'm amazed he did as well as he did when there was so much stacked against him - the media, unpopularity of Bush, the receding economy. I expect McCain to be a statesman and a part of a loyal opposition. Most of us want Obama to be a successful president, to continue pushing the far left to the margins. He's everyone's president now. The best thing for the country will be for him not to fail in ways similar to Clinton, Carter, and Johnson.
I saw the Braver interview, too, and the CNN one before that and I admire Condi for defending her record and Bush's in these needling sessions. Asking her about the popularity polls--what a (fatal) softball to a woman like Rice!
As you say, what a woman!
Speaking as a person of color (a rather delightful pinkish hue), I must say I don't know what to make of all this.
But I'm glad you, Dr. Althouse, are all over this like white on ... oh my. I've rather painted myself into a corner, haven't I?
So now all the white folk have license to cross party lines to vote for skin color without being labeled racist, right?
Don't understand why you're taking that as a "yes." I know quite a number of conservatives who most definitely did not vote for Obama, who nonetheless expressed more or less the same sentiment.
Ya gotta look for a silver lining somewhere.
Funny, I'm taking it as a "no". Or, even, a "none of your goddamned business", but more gentle.
Really? I don't read that into it at all. I happen to agree with her analysis of what his election implies, although I do not agree that electing him was a good idea (because of what ELSE it implies) and gave lavishly to the McCain campaign trying to prevent it.
Prof A
I voted for Nixon in 1960 & expressed pretty much the same sentiments as Condi, if we substitute “Irish Catholicism” for her “slavery” & Irish-Catholic American ” for her “African American”.
Dennis:
I don't mean to diminish your respect for your father in any way, but his advice was, shall we say, provincial. It made good sense regarding ad hoc neighborhood hoops then, but now, in the big, wide world some of us live in, many matters are, shall we say, more nuanced.
I think, for instance, that Condi has just taken Bush's part in foreign policy against her “own”.
Must agree with ventanar7 and Seneca. Sec. Rice was clearly unwilling to divulge what should be a private decision. Right or wrong, it is more complicated for her than it likely would be for others in her position. Other Republicans can say without reservation that they did not vote for "The One." As a black woman she can say "no comment" and not worry about losing friends. It is one thing for her to support Bush against Kerry. However, to admit to voting for McCain against Obama would be taken differently.
Bottom line: I hope she is smart enough to not have voted for Obama, but I respect her wishes not to discuss her vote.
Partisans generally vote along party lines. For the first time though, race has been introduced into the presidential election. If race were still a factor in the recent presidential election, it will be revealed by the extent, if any, of white Democrat votes that went to McCain and black Republican votes that went to Obama.
From the data I've seen, white Republicans continued to vote Republican and white Democrats continued to vote Democratic - nothing was irregular except for several key black Republicans voting Democratic. Moreover, white and black new voters overwhelmingly voted for Obama.
If race were a factor in this election, it certainly didn't harm Obama. Rather, if there were any lingering racism, the outcome of the election suggests the racism was directed at McCain.
If it makes you feel better to engage in winking and nudging with fellow Obama supporters, exultant that Rice supported your man, then by all means, proceed.
I'm inclined to give her the benefit of the doubt; if she says she does not want to comment on partisan politics, she is not then going to immediately comment on partisan politics. She was simply expressing delight, as many people of all political persuasions have, that a black man has been elected PotUS.
"Blogger Freder Frederson said...
We've proven that whites don't vote based on skin color. But blacks do.
We have? Did you see the results from Louisiana, Alabama or Mississippi or other former confederate states. With the exception of Virginia (and I bet it wasn't the real Virginia but inside the beltway Virginia), whites in the south voted based on skin color."
Let me guess, you are from one of those enlightened northern states that know that everyone in the South marries their cousins and can
t count past 6.
Do you honestly believe that people in "those former confederate states" can't vote on principles and see only skin color? Flash for you Charlie, I've lived and worked on both sides of the Mason Dixon line and racial prejudice in the North is a whole lot more endemic than in the South --- but it is concealed better.
I don't think her answer reveals much of anything, but it's certainly consistent with a Republican voter who sees no reason to give any ammo to leftwing morons who already abuse her as a race traitor and house n-----r.
Hey Meade and Theo, I love her too! And I'm female!
In fact, she (pretty much alone) has the power to make me feel better about Bush and Iraq.
As long as the queue is all you jump, Meade.
And I admit without envy that she has great legs.
I take the quote as a Southerner's version of "none of your business."
Of course she voted for him. African Americans always vote Democrat. That's something both parties can take for granted.
When he found out where I had been traveling to play ball, he shared the following advise with me; "right or wrong, don't ever expect them to take your part against their own."
It was good advice then, as now.
Indeed. Only whites are conditioned not to stick up for their own. Years back when he was still in HS, my brother was jumped by a black kid..when he fought back, several blacks joined in and beat him up good while his white friends stood passively. I intervened later - not going after the blacks for acting to their nature, but beating up his bewildered best friend, who stood by, as a lesson...his cowardace or passivity being worse than the adolescent black thugs.
**********************
Section9 - It's a signal of McCain's incompetence as a candidate that when he had the chance to choose Rice as his VP, he chose Palin instead.
Selecting the woefully underqualified Goddess of the Religious Right (Goddess for being an ex-TV sportscaster adept at photogenically parrotting 30-year old talking points stale 8 years ago) - was bad enough. But selecting a woman who spent 9 years with her head planted up George Bush's ass and who was, as main policy advisor, in on some of his dumbest moves? That would have been even worse. Even McCain was not that egotistical, incoherent, and stupid.
"whites in the south voted based on skin color."
Bull.
Bull.
Brilliant analysis! I chose Louisiana as an example, because that is where I live and the state I am most familiar with. (And I too John have lived on both sides of the Mason Dixon line).
As you can see, McCain got more votes and won by a higher margin than Bush beat Kerry by in 2004, that despite high turnout in Orleans Parish. Unless you are contending that Kerry was less liberal and a better candidate than Obama, I think the evidence is pretty overwhelming that white voters in Louisiana voted based on race.
At the same time Mary Landrieu was returned to the Senate by a comfortable margin. Later analysis showed that Obama got 12% of the white vote in Louisiana (it was even worse in Alabama and Mississippi) and it would have been much lower if not for strong white support in Orleans Parish.
Freder, citing the third world banana state of Louisiana is hardly valid as a typical state.
But even there, whiltes voted for democrats and whites voted for republicans, both in significant percentages.
Blacks nationwide vote overwhelmingly for democrats. That the presidential candidate was black only increased that trend.
Such a monolithic block shows that blacks vote based on their race, not on ideology or any other criteria. Thus, blacks in large percentages, do not vote based on the content of character but on the color of their skin. This is definitional racism.
What has always shocked me is how Democrats act like it's a bigger deal than any Republicans I know think it is. We've been willing to vote for a Black person for over a decade. In the 90s the Republicans courted Colin Powel to run, more recently many were enamoured of Rice. Bush's cabinet was the most racially and gender diverse in history.
Yet Democrats act like it's a miracle. To me it's just life, hey that guy got elected, he happens to be Black. Ok so what? I, and most Republicans I know, never even thought about his race, but all the Democrats I know couldn't shut up about it, and mainly it was during the Democrat primary that all the racial issues came up.
It just seems to me Democrats have a cynical view of humanity and of other Americans.
Can't help but notice that Freder is using a white *Democrat* as an example of a candidate winning with votes from both whites and blacks. Are there non-white candidates other than Bobby Jindahl running for LA state offices?
Louisiana has 2.9 million registered voters, 1.5 million are registered as Democrats and 729,000 as Republicans. Saying that *whites* voted based on skin color isn't accurate. White *Democrats*, who should otherwise be voting for a Democrat candidate, vote based on skin color.
We've been willing to vote for a Black person for over a decade.
Yeah, that accounts for the huge Black Republican Congressional Caucus.
Freder, citing the third world banana state of Louisiana is hardly valid as a typical state.
The contention was made by you that whites do not vote based on skin color. While it is true that many whites did overcome longstanding prejudice in much of the country and voted for Obama (and the Bradley effect is apparently dead and buried), to contend that there were not a significant portion of white voters who refused to vote for Obama simply because he was black is patently absurd. This was most obvious in the deep south where overall Obama got less of the white vote than Kerry did four years ago.
If you can come up with a reasonable explanation, other than racism, why Obama would get less white votes than Kerry in these states when he improved on Kerry's numbers almost everywhere else in the country, please provide it. Otherwise, I will have to assume that some whites, especially in the heart of Dixie, are still racist.
Freder wrote: "Yeah, that accounts for the huge Black Republican Congressional Caucus."
I'm no fan of republicans, but the lack of a black republican congressional caucus is more evidence that blacks are racists, and the few blacks that are republicans act and think in terms of their ideology and not in terms of a monolithic racist voting block.
So what if she did vote for Mr. Obama? God Bless America.
Freder, it would be more correct, and more gracious, to say some whites vote along racial lines.
The question is open whether more whites voted for Obama because of his race, or voted against him because of it.
Skyler said...
Just more proof that the election of Obama is proof that all of America isn't racist. Just the blacks are.
We've proven that whites don't vote based on skin color. But blacks do.
3:56 PM
---------------------------
Pure and unadulterated bullshit!
Blaks did in this election what they have done for decades: vote 90%+ for the Democrat.
They did it for Clinton--you said nothing about race.
They did it for Kerry--You said nothing about race.
They did it for Gore--You said nothing about race.
But Barrack Obama?!
Oh he's black it must be race!
This is how you root out a racist. They fall over their own lack of intellect. Come again, please Skyler
Skyler said...
Freder wrote: "Yeah, that accounts for the huge Black Republican Congressional Caucus."
I'm no fan of republicans, but the lack of a black republican congressional caucus is more evidence that blacks are racists, and the few blacks that are republicans act and think in terms of their ideology and not in terms of a monolithic racist voting block.
10:59 AM
-----------------------
So what we have here is a conclusion you've gone scraping for "evidence" to support.
Whatever happens "blacks are racist". One can only imagine what you have vested in this conclusion.
Blacks have voted for white presidential candidates in the same numbers for decades upon decades. All of a sudden they're "racist" when they do what they've always done all along.
Oh look! He's black this time!
But if you were really thinking you would not have missed the guy's obvious point:
1) Blacks vote Democrat--not race. Ask Michael Steele. Black Republicans do not do well in black areas. Therefore, from math we know that the variable is the party, not the race.
2) He may also be alluding the the fact that there are not many Black Republicans in politics anymore.
Blacks did nothing unusual this year that they have not done in any other Presidential election. And I am still waiting for your numbers to show that:
a. Obama got more black support than any other presidential candidate from the Democrats.
b. That this support was disproportionate to the increases of support for Obama by any other group.
c. New voters do not make up the difference for any increase.
I bet you don't have any percentages even.
As for Louisiana--they're nuts. Did David Duke not get 30% of the vote in a primary there a few years aback?
Funny how the South does not make all Whites racist; but let a black guy win the presidency and boom: All blacks are racist and all voted solely on race.
Say what you really want to say.
Don't wheel and come again with that nonsense.
And as for Condi?
Well, first it amazes me how people who have never had to give a moment's thought to discrimination can pontificate about how "Jim Crow is behind us".
Do you even know what it was?
Are you sure?
It is ridiculous to not expect Blacks to have a long memory of Jim crow, especially since the vast majority either grew up during that era--or have parents who did. Vast.
This is not ancient history, it is a part of them.
Hopefully that will fade as the generations roll on. But it is funny how "My grandmother was a Holocaust survivor" has more sympathy than the memory of Jim Crow. Which is more recent.
Anyways, pity is not a virtue; but Condoleezza Rice, well, you read...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/16th_Street_Baptist_Church_bombing
(Ctrl+F and search for "Condoleezza")
Of course she's happy! Of course she voted for Obama!
Next please!
"I'm taking that as a yes."
I'm not so sure. It was diplo speak yes. But thats about it.
Many conserative types (who were McCain voters) said the same kinds of things after election day. 'Well at least this says something good about America'... Most of them then went on to say something nice about Obama personally to show some grace vs being bitter...
So, no... not seeing this as evidence one way or the other.
The Republican Party wanted to elect Colin Powell for president long before Barack Obama was considered as a candidate for the Democrats.
I'm black and Barack Obama's candidacy has bothered me, on many levels, for some time:
He did run a racial campaign.
He benefited from extreme media bias.
He reversed many of the positions he ran on - as he was running.
It was noticed by many (TIME Magazine's Joe Klein and Newsweek's Evan Thomas being just two) the running of his campaign was as a political cult - a claim his campaign confirmed in front of an Australian journalist.
The cult aspects of the Obama campaign were voiced by various "spiritual" types in the media with barely a comment from the mass media, revealing their ignorance and/or willingness to overlook such a troubling (but widespread and recurring) phenomena running throughout our country.
"She gave an interview with Rita Braver today in which her defense of Bush and the war bordered on the passionate. This woman remains a Republican."
Let's face it, for all intents and purposes, the last election was between two Democrats. If Ms. Rice's decision about which was the better Democrat to elect didn't match mine (and let's face it, being at the center of things, she's had much better information than me) I wouldn't count that against her Republican credentials.
And also FWIW, on foreign policy positions Obama has veered so far right since the election he's presenting as a Neocon. We'll see if it lasts, but it sure has twisted the correct tails.
She's lied about damn near everything else, why wouldn't she lie about this?
Good lord, she still talks about how right we were to go into Iraq and that Bush will be remembered as a wonderful President.
Get real.
Mark said..."Let's face it, for all intents and purposes, the last election was between two Democrats."
You actually believe John McCain is in some way, shape or form...really a Democrat?
He voted with Bush 90% of the time and selected one of the most conservative people on the planet to be his V.P.
Get a grip.
If you can come up with a reasonable explanation, other than racism, why Obama would get less white votes than Kerry in these states when he improved on Kerry's numbers almost everywhere else in the country, please provide it.
Let's see... Obama had an even more liberal voting record than Kerry; he had decades less experience than Kerry; he associated with anti-American partisans more recently than Kerry had; he had more offensively anti-white racist associations than Kerry had... Personally speaking, I find a black candidate that has close personal formative associations with anti-white racists as unappealing as a white candidate that has close personal formative associations with anti-black racists.
I will have to assume that some whites, especially in the heart of Dixie, are still racist.
No shit, Sherlock. There are still racists and the lion hasn't lain with lamb yet, either. The existence of racism is not a digital measure of the racist nature of America nor the determining factor of the effects of race in politics. Living in a majority-minority city in the south I can tell you that local experience informs me that it is far more common to see white voters crossing the racial line than black voters. An unscientific poll of bumper stickers alone confirms that.
A. Friend wrote:
"They did it for Clinton--you said nothing about race.
They did it for Kerry--You said nothing about race.
They did it for Gore--You said nothing about race.
But Barrack Obama?!"
Actually, that's not true. I did say it then. I've been saying it ever since OJ Simpson murdered people and got away with it simply because he was black. To this day most black people deny that he was guilty or say that his guilt or innocence is irrelevent to whether he should have gone to jail.
The fact that blacks vote almost monolithically for one party means that they vote based on their own race, not on the ideology of the issue or candidate.
Certainly there are exceptions to the rule, but if Condoleeza Rice voted for Obama, then even those exceptions are fewer than we could have expected.
"He voted with Bush 90% of the time and selected one of the most conservative people on the planet to be his V.P."
Well, looking at domestic policy, Bush was pretty much a Democrat too. (He was sincere with that "Compassionate Conservatism" schtick.) Do you think a conservative Republican bends over backwards to bail out Detroit?
And yes, McCain got exactly one thing right during his campaign. Blind pigs and truffles, dontchaknow.
Skyler said...
A. Friend wrote:
"They did it for Clinton--you said nothing about race.
They did it for Kerry--You said nothing about race.
They did it for Gore--You said nothing about race.
But Barrack Obama?!"
Actually, that's not true. I did say it then. I've been saying it ever since OJ Simpson murdered people and got away with it simply because he was black. To this day most black people deny that he was guilty or say that his guilt or innocence is irrelevent to whether he should have gone to jail.
The fact that blacks vote almost monolithically for one party means that they vote based on their own race, not on the ideology of the issue or candidate.
Certainly there are exceptions to the rule, but if Condoleeza Rice voted for Obama, then even those exceptions are fewer than we could have expected.
--------------------------
I knew you had a vested conclusion. More nonsense.
Did Robert Blake get away with murder because he was White?
Rational people who don't have resentment (of the unmentionable kind maybe) would say OJ "got away" because he had a lot of money and bought the best defense.
And what does voting for Clinton, Kerry and Gore have to do with OJ. Methinks you have other problems, that's what.
As a matter of fact, what does OJ have to do with all or even most blacks?
No you did not say it then. Nobody ever said blacks voted 90%+ for Kerry, Gore or Clinton because of race. That makes no sense whatsoever.
Jews mostly vote Democrat. Is it about "group" for them too?
And what about the time Blacks never voted Democrat (pre-Southern Strategy)?
You need to meet some black people (and I don't mean on TV).
I voted for McCain. Yet, the fact Americans no longer seem unwilling to vote for a black person I, too, saw as a plus.
Wouldn't jump to any conclusions about what Condi actually did or did not do.
Section9 - It's a signal of McCain's incompetence as a candidate that when he had the chance to choose Rice as his VP, he chose Palin instead.
Selecting the woefully underqualified Goddess of the Religious Right (Goddess for being an ex-TV sportscaster adept at photogenically parrotting 30-year old talking points stale 8 years ago) - was bad enough. But selecting a woman who spent 9 years with her head planted up George Bush's ass and who was, as main policy advisor, in on some of his dumbest moves? That would have been even worse. Even McCain was not that egotistical, incoherent, and stupid.
-Next time, C4, don't forget to work in the Joooos. Your posts simply aren't the same without the Worldwide Jewish Banking Conspiracy.
A. Friend, you are having a comprehension problem. Get over your hurt feelings and look at the argument.
There was no nearly universal support by any group for Blake. There still is nearly universal support by blacks for OJ's murders.
"No you did not say it then. Nobody ever said blacks voted 90%+ for Kerry, Gore or Clinton because of race. That makes no sense whatsoever."
Let's see, the extremely high percent of blacks voting identically is not because of their race? What is motivating them to be so monolithic, then? Blacks come from all kinds of economic and ideological slants, so why would there be nearly universal agreement to vote for one side of a political ballot if their own race is not the overriding factor in their voting choices? This is called racism.
I'm sorry your feelings are hurt, but facts are facts.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा