Columnist – John Sammon
According to a Republican acquaintance of mine recently during a rare moment of candor, the race for president this November involves a contest between a nigger and a lesbian, versus John McCain.

I’ll only use the “N” word once because it is foul and obscene. Nevertheless, we know there are people who while they might not have the gall to say it to your face, think it in their heads when they think about Barack Obama.

This is what it comes down to in this country. According to a Republican. An “N” and a lesbian (Hillary Clinton), versus John McCain.

As for Obama being the “N” word. I have no evidence he is from the African country of Niger. So, when the Republican used this word this way, I have to take it that it’s all-inclusive. In other words, it means you’re pretty much from anywhere in Africa. And even if you’ve never personally set foot in Africa yourself, you can still be an “N,” because some of your ancestors were once upon a time from Africa.

It must also mean you think that if by some miracle Obama gets elected, he will spend all his time sitting on the White House porch with a wide grin, picking cotton tufts from his kinky hair and blue jean overalls, humming James Brown songs, strumming a banjo and smoking a corncob pipe, while contentedly munching huge gulps of fresh watermelon�?��?�..instead of running the country as John McCain no doubt will.

That must be what you think. If you’re a Republican.

As for Hillary Clinton being a lesbian. I have no problem with using the word lesbian, and will not call it the “L” word as I called Obama’s epithet the “N” word. For some reason, the word lesbian is less vulgar than the N word, because it simply implies a behavioral pattern, and not the kind of accident a person can suffer at birth (becoming the “N” word).

I have no direct evidence Hillary Clinton ever had romantic relations with another woman, or what kind of impact (if she did) it would have on her ability to govern the most powerful country in the history of the world. It certainly wouldn’t set an entirely new precedent. Evidence shows us that Eleanore Roosevelt had (at the very least) a probably platonic but flirtatious relationship with a close female friend. She was a far greater champion of social justice than her husband was.

How much can we fault her for this female friendship when she was married to a crippled man who disengaged himself from any personal physical contact with her, and likely cheated on her at least once, and was gone for months at a time? It’s hard to say.
I suppose if I was in that same situation (lonely), and masturbated a lot, Republicans would find fault with me also. Which begs the question. Do Republicans masturbate? I’m certain many of them do. But that’s another topic. We’ll talk about that later.
The most important thing about that statement, the race is between an “N,” and a lesbian, versus John McCain, is that it seems to hint that both the “N,” and the lesbian, will run against McCain. Both the “N” and the lesbian running on the same ticket, together. If that’s the case, who will settle for the vice presidential spot, the “N,” or the lesbian? More than likely, it would be the “N” if he lost the primary, or the lesbian if she lost. Politics does make for strange bedfellows.

Of course, if they were “bedfellows,” strictly speaking, she wouldn’t then be a lesbian, at least for that moment. But she would be guilty of inter-racial sex, or miscegenation. Perhaps Republicans believe once a lesbian, always a lesbian. They certainly believe an “N” is always going to be an “N.”

It’s not always hard to say what’s really on their minds.

Or McCain’s for that matter.

Copyright 2008 Sammonsays.