A modern day lynching?

Here's some supporting data (6.00 / 2)

The last SurveyUSA poll (http://www.surveyusa...) shows Deval leading 50-35 with whites, 80-18 with blacks.  In the original post-primary poll by the same organization (http://www.surveyusa...), it was 63-26 with whites and 74-26) with blacks.  So Healey is dividing the races.  It will be interesting to see who, if anyone, stands up against this.

  - Dan

---

by: danseidman @ Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 12:27:48 PM CDT

I Sadly Have to Agree. (6.00 / 2)

I have thought all along, especially when the LaGuer case was brought up, that the Healey's attacks really are a subtle attempt (maybe not so subtle) to interject race into the campaign.  I also had some white men say the same things to me that were said to you.  I became even more convinced that the hidden goal of the Healey attack strategy is to interject racism into the campaign when I read the story today about Deval Patrick's sister. 
The Healeyites had to find some way to make sure those conservative white guys vote for the girl, and they probably saw raising the race card by associating Deval Patrick with rapists as the only way to do it. 

---

by: TheOpenSociety @ Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 12:34:43 PM CDT

this is excellent, (6.00 / 2)

sad but true. Most people are aware of individual racism or bigotry but when it comes to institutional or covert racsim they don't know what they don't know. What the healey campaign is doing is bringing all the hidden isms in many people to the surface. It' is disgusting and  uncalled for.

---

by: leftisright @ Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 12:55:11 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Here's what I hear (6.00 / 3)

Kerry Healey keeps repeating this phrase.

"Do you really want one as governor..."

Read between the lines.

---

by: NoPolitician @ Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 23:39:07 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Not exactly subtle, is she? (6.00 / 2)

I've been hearing this tagline in my head for days now and getting mad about it. It's no accident that all of these sleazy smears involve cases with white victims and non-white accused. And now dragging the family into it, what the hell is that except a crude reenforcement of "be afraid, be very afraid." She's been trading on fear for weeks now, it's time to make the connection explicit. Unfortunately for her, the type of voters with whom this resonates won't be able to bring themselves to pull the lever for a woman, either. Justk Shannon O'Brien and all the men who turned out in droves to vote against her, that gender gap was huge.

---

by: sienna @ Sat Oct 14, 2006 at 00:51:08 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

STATEMENT FROM DEVAL PATRICK (0.00 / 0)

For nineteen months now, I have answered every one of your questions. Today I just need to speak my mind.

Thirteen years ago, while living in San Diego, California, my sister Rhonda was the victim of a sexual assault. I have not made her experience a subject of this campaign, because I believe it serves no victim to have to relive such a thing in the public eye. But the media today has tried to take that option from me.

The assailant was her husband Bernie. He plead guilty to the charge and served a short time in jail in California.

In 1995, about a year after my sister moved to Milton, she and her husband reconciled. They took a personal crisis and rebuilt a life. They have raised two wonderful children. They are deacons in their church and live a deeply religious faith. They celebrated their 25th wedding anniversary this past summer with a recommitment ceremony. They now counsel troubled couples. Their lives are about redemption, forgiveness and grace. I am proud of their turnaround and I love them both.

I got into this race with no illusions. In a world where negative campaigns are commonplace, I expected to have my own accomplishments trivialized, my own judgments questioned, my life choices challenged. I haven't always liked it, but I knew it was a price I would have to pay to be an agent of change -- not just in our policies, but in our politics.

And I took the time to prepare my family for what I thought would be coming.

My sister and her husband went through a difficult time, and through hard work and prayer, they repaired their relationship and their lives.  Now they and their children -- who knew nothing of this -- have had their family history laid out on the pages of a newspaper.  Why?  For no other reason than that they had the bad luck to have a relative who is running for governor.  It's pathetic and it's wrong.  By no rules of common decency should their private struggles become a public issue. But this is the politics of Kerry Healey. It disgusts me.  And it must be stopped.

Kerry Healey has never offered a single reason why she should be governor that doesn't depend on tearing me down. She has no vision, no plan, no positive agenda, and no leadership experience. Her record on jobs and the economy, on health care, on higher education, on crime has been one of shortcuts, gimmicks and failure. And so rather than deal with that, she has done everything she can to change the subject.

Well, my message to the Healey campaign is that I will not let you run from your record any longer. You can try all you want to change the subject and shift the blame, but we are going to expose for all just how your failed policies and your failed politics are the reason so many people are stuck and struggling and losing hope. The garbage peddlers who shopped this story around town are part of that failed politics, too.

We are going to ask the people to choose whether the politics of fear, division and personal destruction is what they want or whether we're better than that and are ready to finally throw out those who dump this trash in the public square.

We need a change. Gimmicks, slogans and dirty politics are no substitute for progress. The politics of fear is no acceptable alternative to the politics of hope. That's the change we need. And if anybody in the Healey campaign or in the public thinks I am unwilling to fight for that, you have badly underestimated me.

 Only the cod is sacred.

---

by: pablo @ Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 14:51:44 PM CDT

Yes and no... (6.00 / 1)

I wasn’t inclined to believe the charge when a friend of mine recently brought it up, but I am more and more coming to the conclusion that Kerry Healey’s attacks on Deval Patrick are based on a racist strategy.  A strategy that I don’t think will work, but is worth highlighting for its sheer audacity.

For centuries linking a Black man to the word rape has been a tool used to inflame fear in White people, and I believe the Healey campaign knows that.  Whether it’s his legal work, or their sleazy opposition research (reported in the Herald today) that dug up a crime committed against Patrick’s sister, the Healey campaign has one goal and one goal only; keep the name Patrick linked to the word “rape” through election day.

I find it extraordinarily easy to belive that racism is at the heart of this.  I find it extraordinarily hard to wrap my head around the idea that it is deliberate, or at least deliberate on the part of Healey herself. More's the pity: it's ingrained, reflexive and perhaps even Freudian.  I find the idea of deliberateness  difficult, not because I think Healey would  refrain if it occured to her, but rather that she is so incapable of inward inspection -of self-knowledge- that there is no sub-text there from which she could understand the use and effectiveness of this tactic.

Nor would I, even were I a political consultant of a particularly ruthless and/or amoral stripe, counsel a deliberate linkage of Patrick and the word 'rape' as you describe above. As far as logic can be applied to these situations any such appeals to irrationality would, I think, redound, not on Healey (a white woman and thus the archetype for 'victim' in this drama) but more to the benefit of Christy Mihos.  Playing on irrational fears of white males can really only work to the benefit of the only white male in the race.

I think we are seeing a particularly chaotic melange of Boston Herald bottom-feeding, shallow desperation and the ghosts of racism in Massachusetts.  It's all there and it's all pretty bad... but I don't think deliberate...

---

"Providing health care to the uninsured is a job killer, while not providing health care is merely a people killer....   Bonus: Job Openings!!"

--Stephen Colbert

---

by: petr @ Sat Oct 14, 2006 at 02:55:31 AM CDT

I Think You Are Being Naive (6.00 / 5)

Kerry Healey may be able to rationalize that there is no connection or intent by her to make the connection to race.  It would not surprise me in the least, however, if some of her political consultants understood perfectly what the real racial implications were of her attacks.  I bet they did and saw it as a plus. 

---

by: TheOpenSociety @ Sat Oct 14, 2006 at 07:01:08 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

agreed (6.00 / 1)

Somebody knows exactly what they are doing.  Healey is probably more the "beneficiary," playing the innocent in all this.  But this stuff is deliberate.

---

by: SunderlandRoad @ Sat Oct 14, 2006 at 07:20:57 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Two words... (6.00 / 3)

Plausible. Deniability.

Left in Lowell: cuz why read the Lowell Sun if you don't have to? ;)

---

by: Lynne @ Sat Oct 14, 2006 at 08:26:34 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Two words (0.00 / 0)

Totally.  Absurd.

---

by: gary @ Sat Oct 14, 2006 at 13:07:44 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Two more words. (6.00 / 1)

Willie. Horton.

This is the Repug's MO, through and through. It has Rovian fingerprints all over it.

How can Muffy McSoccerMom look at herself in the mirror anymore?

---

by: Sharoney @ Sat Oct 14, 2006 at 20:41:50 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Muffy's Mirror? (0.00 / 0)

To look at the effects of the botox treatment.

 Only the cod is sacred.

---

by: pablo @ Sat Oct 14, 2006 at 21:02:33 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Yes and maybe... (6.00 / 2)

"Playing on irrational fears of white males can really only work to the benefit of the only white male in the race."

Why?

Campaigns play on irrational fears all the time to draw support from a targeted demographic  --  and they do it to benefit their candidate male or female. (What's the Bush Administration been about the last five years)  In this case it's White suburban men.  As I said, this was clearly Healey's strategy --  take a look who appears most in her first round of advertisements (the later rounds it is of course easier to identify the targets what with there grainy, unflatering photo of the only Black candidate in the race, not to mention the cop killer and the rapist).  Also, all White men are running her campaign, so could that be influencing the strategic decisions?

Like you, I have a hard time imagining this being a deliberate strategy.  Then I think of all the campaigns I've seen and all the lies I've heard from Republicans at the state and national level; I think they will do and say anything to get elected -- they see it as a means to an end.

As I said, I don't think it will work but I do think when you see racism in politics or in society you should call it what it is.  Forget, subtle, overt, ingrained, institutional --  it's just racism.

---

by: Tom @ Sat Oct 14, 2006 at 07:12:57 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

No benefit to Healey here.. (0.00 / 0)

"Playing on irrational fears of white males can really only work to the benefit of the only white male in the race."

Why?

Campaigns play on irrational fears all the time to draw support from a targeted demographic  --  and they do it to benefit their candidate male or female. (What's the Bush Administration been about the last five years)  In this case it's White suburban men.

Irrational fears require some form of soothing. If soothing is not found it will be manufactured.

The act of playing on irrational fears has two components: the fear itself, and the 'out'... the soothing, if you will. This is the Bush strategy: give them something to fear and then provide something that defeats this fear. Bush says "bad men are coming to get you,: and then adds, "I won't let them." (In addition, Bushes lies, torture and wiretapping, etc, provide a subtext of ruthlessness that comforts some of the more frightened among us, which is scary.)

I don't see any corresponding out to the fears that Healey is peddling: Healey says "Scary black man. Rape." And that's it.

Further, she's peddling an age old fear that has some deeply ingrained archetypes, one of which is the constant victim status of white woman and the continued heroic status of white men.  It's not true, of course, but it is what lights up when the buttons get pushed. And I'm saying that when the 'black rapist' button gets pushed, the 'heroic white male' light gets lit, hence fear of Deval Patrick means a vote for Mihos. It's not rational but it is predictable.

Look, it's entirely possible that Healey is being deliberate here... if so then she's even stupider than I thought, or has some serious gender issues that cause her to identify with white male archetype more than with woman (America's Margeret Thatcher?)  But I think the situation is infinitely worse in that it is inchoate and floundering... like the people randomly pushing buttons purely out of desperation and fear.  I think it is important to assess the situation correctly here, because failing to do so means so much more heat generated than neccessary.

---

---

"Providing health care to the uninsured is a job killer, while not providing health care is merely a people killer....   Bonus: Job Openings!!"

--Stephen Colbert

---

by: petr @ Sat Oct 14, 2006 at 15:06:27 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

The "soothing" is (6.00 / 2)

vote for me, Healey, because I'm the white woman standing up to the scary black raping man. A vote for "me" supports the victimized female.  Dont' let "me" be exploited by scary black men. 

Top that off with a little "I'm tough on crime" rhetoric, and there you have it.

Alas, however, she only need stand there being blond, white, and female.  A vote for her, in this paradigm, is all that's necessary.  And the voter, the reflexive, unthoughtful voter who is only vaguely aware of the stirrings internally of these things, will vote for Healey out of reflex. 

Her campaign, as it's currently framed, is prima facie evidence of the potency of subliminal suggestion. 

---

by: lightiris @ Sat Oct 14, 2006 at 19:04:46 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Not even close (0.00 / 0)

Alas, however, she only need stand there being blond, white, and female.  A vote for her, in this paradigm, is all that's necessary.  And the voter, the reflexive, unthoughtful voter who is only vaguely aware of the stirrings internally of these things, will vote for Healey out of reflex.

In all the history of voting in America, the act of voting for a women, sadly, has never been 'reflexive'. Never.  This is exactly my point: white male is the default vote. Women haven't even been able to vote for more than a century... (women did not receive the right to vote on an equal terms with men until 1928) At the very least  anybody whose buttons are pushed by this scenario will experience severe cognitive dissonance at the choice posited and will either, I contend, vote for Mihos or stay home.  This is not a winning strategy for Healey.

---

"Providing health care to the uninsured is a job killer, while not providing health care is merely a people killer....   Bonus: Job Openings!!"

--Stephen Colbert

---

by: petr @ Sat Oct 14, 2006 at 19:17:22 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Not even close? (4.00 / 1)

Says who?  You?

Your patronizing tone does little to advance your argument.

As a white female with experience with rape by a black man in the South, I can tell you that I feel somewhat authoritative on the subject.  If you choose to dismiss my perspective, that's all well and good, but declaring me "note even close" is hubris of the worst sort.

White men have been rescuing white women from the scary black man for years.  It matters not the context.  Your denial of the societal reality doesn't make it so.  Perhaps you should learn to think less rigidily, e.g., voting patterns of the U.S., and think more along the lines of human behavior. 

But, of course, I defer to your authority, as a person who is "not even close." 

Asshole. 

---

by: lightiris @ Sat Oct 14, 2006 at 19:41:17 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

violent agreement here... (5.00 / 1)

White men have been rescuing white women from the scary black man for years.

Exactly my point.

Nabokov said, "If you introduce a gun in the first act, you must fire it by the third."  When Healey pushes the button labelled 'scary black rapist' she's putting a sign on her back that says 'helpless white female.'  The only thing that is missing is 'heroic white male.'  Now nobody is going to look at Kerry Healey and say that she fits the description of 'heroic white male.'  So they'll reflexively move to the closest approximation, which is here Christy Mihos. It could be anybody white and male... and he's the closest approximation.  If your house is burning down, anybody with a bucket looks like a fireman.

  It matters not the context.  Your denial of the societal reality doesn't make it so.  Perhaps you should learn to think less rigidily, e.g., voting patterns of the U.S., and think more along the lines of human behavior.

Riddle me this; how do voting patterns come about, if not through the agency of human behavior?  Your anger, righteous though it is, clouds your thinking.  Am I patronizing?  I suppose so, but that doesn't mean I'm wrong about your not getting it here.

We're rapidly approaching violent agreement here. We both know the GOP is low-down ruthless. We both know that trying to form a linkage between rape and black men is bad, and we both know that Kerry Healey is someone who sets impossibly low standards for herself and then fails, utterly, to meet even them. We differ on whether or not Healey is deliberate in her use of this attempted linkage as a tactic. I say no, mainly because Healey isn't that clever and, for her advisors to suggest it doesn't jibe: it makes no sense to ask a question in which no person will ever think Kerry Healey is the answer. It's just that simple.

---

"Providing health care to the uninsured is a job killer, while not providing health care is merely a people killer....   Bonus: Job Openings!!"

--Stephen Colbert

---

by: petr @ Sat Oct 14, 2006 at 21:00:55 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

My apologies for not validating your simple calculus. (4.50 / 2)

Healey, as a strong female already in a position of authority, doesn't need the white male surrogate.  When a white female is "raped," do white cops seek out some other white male else to "rescue" the female?  No.  So Mihos is irrelevant.  The white male's cop's vote is all she needs for "support" in this context.  That's the 21st century paradigm and it's gut level.  She doesn't need to hire Lakoff to illuminate the sociological context that informs the strong female persona in contemporary American politics. 

You, of course, being more authoritative and correct, and I, being "cloud[ed]" by my "anger," get to have the definitive right answer on this notion. 

You're a piece of work. 

---

by: lightiris @ Sat Oct 14, 2006 at 21:34:24 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

please.. (0.00 / 0)

Healey, as a strong female already in a position of authority, doesn't need the white male surrogate.

Well, that's certainly how Healey sees herself... do others validate that view?  I think she fails to get others to see that...  I think she's got a surrogate problem in extremis: her husband and her boss (Gov Goodhair)... That she can be pushed around is seen, especially in the debates where Mihos gets her so wound up (did you see the Springfield debate where she desperately tried to call time on Mihos. Laugh out loud funny.)

When a white female is "raped," do white cops seek out some other white male else to "rescue" the female?  No.

This discussion is not, and never has been, about the act of rape. It is about playing on fears of rape and racism. A subtle, but strong, distinction. Have you ever read "To Kill A Mockingbird"?  In it, a young women makes a pass at a black man, is beaten by her father for it and is then forced into accusing the black man of rape.  No rape occured nor, in fact was ever attempted... But the accusations were taken seriously enough to end in a conviction. Throughout the novel several variations of the archetypal strong white male saviour -from the lynch mob to Atticus Finch to Boo Radley- are put on display and explored.  The analogy isn't about what cops do once a rape has occured -that's irrelevant to this context- but what the community does when a rape is feared. People here are alledging that Healey is deliberately throwing shit at the fan while simultaneously claiming she'll not stink...

You, of course, being more authoritative and correct, and I, being "cloud[ed]" by my "anger," get to have the definitive right answer on this notion.

It is important not to be clouded by anything but to assess reality correctly so that we may affect a response that corresponds... else we risk mayhem. It is what it is.

---

"Providing health care to the uninsured is a job killer, while not providing health care is merely a people killer....   Bonus: Job Openings!!"

--Stephen Colbert

---

by: petr @ Sat Oct 14, 2006 at 22:01:38 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Reasonable people can and often do disagree. (0.00 / 0)

Yes, I've taught To Kill a Mockingbird for years; I'm a high school English teacher. 

Here's a lesson:  when a word or words is in quotation marks and is not a direct quote from text or speech, the translation for those quotes is so-called.  So, for example, when I wrote:

When a white female is "raped," do white cops seek out some other white male else to "rescue" the female?  No.

I was using rape and rescue figuratively.  For clarity, in retrospect, I should have similarly marked cops, but I think my point was clear, nevertheless.  I was using the term figurately. 

We're talking past each other; there's no point in continuing. 

---

by: lightiris @ Sat Oct 14, 2006 at 22:09:48 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Worthless. (0.00 / 0)

Thank you so much. 

It's been a pleasure exchanging ideas with you. 

You invalidation of my experience and my thoughts is truly appreciated and helpful in seeking a higher level of discourse on matters that trouble the well-intentioned among us. 

Worthless. 

---

by: lightiris @ Sat Oct 14, 2006 at 22:03:46 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

unnecessary hostility? (0.00 / 0)

I think petr has a point that makes sense--the racist crap that is being strewn around is tied to an image of the helpless "white woman" who needs to be rescued.  How does that help Healey?  I would not be surprised to learn that those who are supposedly helping Healey are actually encouraging her to dig her own grave.  I still remember when Romney said he would not run if Jane Swift chose to stay in the race--just before he elbowed her out.  Do the Republicans really want to see a viable female candidate?  What ever happened to Liddy Dole (hint: GWB jumped into the 2000 race super early to raise a lot of money and choke her off.)  Besides, a white woman doesn't work as a "savior" of white womanhood.  And, what the hell, that whole story is so, foreign to Massachusetts politics.  We have our problems, but defending white womanhood isn't one of them.  lightiris, I don't honestly know how your personal experience fits in here, but I think you overreacted and your namecalling was over the top, or "inappropriate" as they say in the shrink's office.  Just my 2cents.

---

by: SunderlandRoad @ Sat Oct 14, 2006 at 21:42:14 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

You rated my comments on this topic worthless? (0.00 / 0)

Worthless?  I'm blown away.

Worthless? 

Thank you, SunderlandRoad, really, for validating the value of more than one point of view, for validating the fact that no one person has the right answer, and validating the fact that disagreement among well-intentioned people is the foundation of civil and civic discourse. 

Worthless. 

Got it. 

---

by: lightiris @ Sat Oct 14, 2006 at 22:01:34 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

word choice (0.00 / 0)

I rated your earlier comment as "needs work" because you called the poster you disagreed with an "asshole," for no reason, which I thought was abusive.  Then, rather than backing down after that person's pretty reasonable reply to you, you came back with another obnoxious remark.  I rated that comment "worthless," because that was the best choice among the given options on the rating chart.  I would have preferred to rate it "obnoxious," or "unhelpful."  "Worthless" seems a little harsh, but you should not take it personally--I am not referring to your value as a human being, but to the quality of your comment.  Hope that clarifies it.

---

by: SunderlandRoad @ Sun Oct 15, 2006 at 09:45:29 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Hmm... (0.00 / 0)

I would not be surprised to learn that those who are supposedly helping Healey are actually encouraging her to dig her own grave.

This is a possibility I had not considered. I must admit I find it compelling...

---

"Providing health care to the uninsured is a job killer, while not providing health care is merely a people killer....   Bonus: Job Openings!!"

--Stephen Colbert

---

by: petr @ Sat Oct 14, 2006 at 22:23:47 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Actually, it is a winning strategy (0.00 / 0)

Negative campaigns like this tend to provoke disgust with both candidates and decreased willingness to get involved on the part of the voter. Low turnout is always better for Republicans and Healey knows that. The more voters she can get to throw up their hands and sit it out, the better her chances are. I think she's also betting on a belief that racism is a stronger primal force in society than sexism and that if she continues to push the black men are scary criminals, Deval loves and supports thugs, and hey, look at his family, even his genetics are against him, can we really trust him or will nature out meme, voters will be so terrified that they'll just vote for her out of default even if it is counterintuitive with the knowledge that Mihos is a third party candidate and not a viable option. I'm not sure this will work, but if she weren't arrogant enough to think it would she would never have out Willie Hortoned Lee Atwater in the first place.

---

by: sienna @ Sat Oct 14, 2006 at 23:00:04 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Good points (0.00 / 0)

I don't know if racism is more "primal" than sexism, but you have given me something to think about.

---

by: SunderlandRoad @ Sun Oct 15, 2006 at 03:19:35 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I don't see how Mihos benefits (0.00 / 0)

Well, I do, in theory, but maybe it just shows how dippy Mihos is that he can't get more of a rise out of the backlash.  You may be right in the sense that without this garbage, Mihos might be a complete non-factor by now.  Well he is pretty much a non-factor, and the only reason he isn't a complete non-factor in the race is because he is a white guy, a business man, with money for ads, who, as he's said, been fired from more than one government appointed position, therefore is "experienced." 

---

by: SunderlandRoad @ Sat Oct 14, 2006 at 07:27:29 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

He always was a factor (0.00 / 0)

Just a small one. Chances are he takes most of his small support from Healey (lol ya think??). But just a small percentage makes it much more insurmountable for Healey in a race which she constantly lags behind.

Left in Lowell: cuz why read the Lowell Sun if you don't have to? ;)

---

by: Lynne @ Sat Oct 14, 2006 at 08:27:51 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Great post (0.00 / 0)

It's provoked great discussion on my blog when I quoted it.

Left in Lowell: cuz why read the Lowell Sun if you don't have to? ;)

---

by: Lynne @ Sat Oct 14, 2006 at 08:28:14 AM CDT

Washington Post Article About Implicit Biases (6.00 / 2)

The Washington Post, in an article this week about the Virginia Senate race, discussed research being done on implicit biases that we all have despite what we like to think about ourselves.  It is these implicit biases that are really a concern when someone conducts a campaign like the Healeyites have done.  A person who is not overtly prejudicial towards African Americans, may decide they just do not like Deval Patrick because of their subconscious biases which have been reinforced by the focus of the Healey negative campaign tactics.  Just a thought. 

---

by: TheOpenSociety @ Sat Oct 14, 2006 at 11:18:38 AM CDT

Phil Johnston was right (5.25 / 4)

He saw what was coming.  He saw the first volley before anyone else saw it.  He had to backtrack.  It is clear that Kerry Muffy Healey is running a race-baiting campaign that would have even embarassed George Wallace in his prime.

Okay, photoshoppers!  Okay, movie makers!  Let's see what kind of evil segregationists can be pasted into Muffy movies!

 Only the cod is sacred.

---

by: pablo @ Sat Oct 14, 2006 at 13:19:32 PM CDT

Yeah (6.00 / 1)

I was thinking that I owe Uncle Phil an apology.  I thought he was just making with the hyperbole, as is his wont to do, but jeez.

I knew that it would get ugly after the primary, but I guess I underestimated how low Healey would go. 

Beyond 495 - Reality-based Commentary With a True Blue Perspective
Deval Patrick has a posse.

---

by: Susan M @ Sat Oct 14, 2006 at 14:45:42 PM CDT

[ Parent ]