Paleface?! Listen Bub, if we want you self loaithing opinions we'll beat it out of you. Otherwise, DO YOUR JOB you homo.

I am sick of when the leftists don't get their way in an election if the person is black they attempt to go over the top ad nauseum with everything is racist...but when it is conservative black running they ridicule them in the nastiest of ways.

Talk about hypocrisy...

Btw...I saw this segment...what in the heck does Matthews think happened in Iowa of all places...eh?

Btw Matthews wake up, the only people to blame for Obama not winning is the brought in voters for the Clinton machine, Obama got plenty of votes, in fact dead on the money according to the polls....and the majority of those voting were white.

I would be surprised if Matthews is still employed by the end of the Political Conventions......He knows a lot about "Garbage out".

People are going to tune out his show even more, they don't wanna watch someone deteriorate before their eyes.

1. Give Obama credit. He doesn't indulge in this race game (at least he hasn't so far). I won't vote for him, but that's on policy differences. I genuinely respect him for avoiding all this crap.
2. How ironic that these media "stars" spend so much time speculating on the racism of the electorate. But, when the electorate has a chance to express ourselves, we're giving Obama a fair shot. The only ones who are focused on skin color are the media "stars" who consider themselves so much more enlightened.
3. Matthews thinks that people who respond to pollsters are expressing their "better" nature, and yet the voting booth allows them to descend to their vulgar racism. We read the quote about how Matthews reveres the "accuracy" of pollsters. How long before Matthews advocates that we honor the pollster more than the voting booth?

Not good evidence for the media about democracy ...

Mr. Graham are you saying by the snideness of your remarks that white people don't lie to pollsters? Are you denying the voluminous statistical evidence to the contrary which shows that many people of ANY race, will give a P.C. answer and then do the contrary in the privacy of a voting booth?  I mean, these things are well documented and are a known factor that EVERY pollster is aware of. Even the inimitable Frank Luntz. People who deny that racism exists are just as stupid as THOSE WHO SEE IT EVERYWHERE! However in the long history of polling the potential "skew" that occurs in inter-racial contests can't really be denied with any intellectual honesty. While I think that this might have been one factor AMONG MANY, I personally think that Hillary's CRYING GAME was an equal if not stronger contributor to the skewing of the polls. It's unfortunate that this was the only race in which the polls were "skewed" and that there was a significant event (crying) that took place almost simultaneously. So, in my opinion, there's no way to find out. 

The CRY took place too late in the evening and too close to the voting to show up in the polls, but the amount of traffic it received on EVERY outlet, IMO did it's work. I think that women, who turned out in record numbers for Mrs Clinton were upset that she was being piled on and the tears had their intended effect. In my opinion this played a stronger part than race politics, in this case. Because the impact of her crying was so jarring. That said, to deny that race might have played some part, is just as ignorant as suggesting that it played the ONLY part, since this is a well known possibility in the field of statistical analysis. 

By the way, it's funny that the same conservatives that decried African Americans in general and Oprah in particular for "race politics" by supporting Obama, are silent on the "gender politics" clearly at work here. 

"It may not be "I think I'm better than you," but it might be "I don't want to live next door to you."

 Guess what, Chris.  I'm a Philly guy too ('burbs, actually) who lives in what you'd call an upscale neighborhood. About 3 years ago a professional black couple moved across the street from us.  I figured, as many neighbors did, that any person of color who could afford to live in this neighborhood, hey, more power to 'em.  This conservative republican was one of the first to go up and introduce himself and as it turns out, they are probably the best neighbors we have!  So much for your theory.

I posted this same point in a different way than Matthews, but the fact is Democrats in IOWA who are white voted for Obama PROVING that Midwestern fly over white people are not racists at all as has been touted by liberals lecturing to them for years.

Who was it who would not vote for a black man and it is eastern white patricians who are the racists.

Matthews bringing this out only partially is completely correct.

.......and for those who think his Indian lingo might be racist to whites and Indians, that is the way Indian vocabulary works as a language. It is simple and words convey things like "crack of dawn" and all that is with it.
While using Indian shows Matthews inability to reason past lumpin all minorities as one, he should have said something akin to, "Hey homie da zebra brother sure don't hang with them Hampshire crackers".

Which is the fact. The people talking racism all the time are the racists just like the skirts in New Hampshire have proven once again they are malephobes in hating men and would vote for a looser woman just because "she is one of them".

*HIC IACET ARTORIVS REX QVONDAM REXQVE FVTVRVS

"By the way, it's funny that the same conservatives that decried African
Americans in general and Oprah in particular for "race politics" by
supporting Obama, are silent on the "gender politics" clearly at work
here. "

Then you haven't been paying attention. 

I can't stand Tweety but in this case I think he is dead on. A lot of people all over the political spectrum seem to be misunderstanding what the Bradley Effect is about. It does not say that whites won't vote for blacks or that all whites are racist.

It is simply a fact that a percentage of whites will tell a pollster they are supporting a black candidate and then vote against him. This percentage of whites is no doubt overwhelmingly liberal. Liberals feel an almost religious need to be considered non-racist. So when a pollster asks, they are being called out to 'prove' they are non-racist and say "sure I'll vote for him". Then, in secret, they don't.

This is a perfect explanation for what happened in Iowa as well as New Hampshire. In Iowa, it was actually the voting that occurred in public. In fact it was even more in public than the polling. Thus the liberal white had to stand up in front of his/her friends and neighbors and demonstrate their liberality by saying "sure, I'm voting for him". And that was their vote. The effect would be to deliver even more votes to the black candidate by pandering white liberals.

In NH, the opposite was the case. They were asked in public and demonstrated their liberalism by saying they would vote for the black fellow. Then, in private, they didn't.

It really ought not be news that liberals are about as race concious and pandering as any species on the planet. We aren't talking about bigotry per se, or people who are anti-black necessarily, but liberals who want to impress the rest of the world about how multiculturally oriented they are. And in this case, they screwed themselves to the wall for all the world to see.

Makes sense to me.  A rare hat tip to the whining Matthews who generally sets my teeth on edge.

If Rush Limbaugh had said "Methinks Paleface speak with forked tongue" the hypocritical outrage would be all over the media.

However, a committed leftist said it, so there will be no outrage.

In the same sense that Clinton
was our first black president, Chris Matthews is our first white Jesse Jackson.

Impunitas semper ad deteriora invitat