[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
apbt55 wrote:
What seriously, your arguments have just as much credibility.
thank Clinton for cutting the military and national security budget, for all the deaths in NY on 9/11
Redefine credibility for me. It seems I have been wrong as to what it means.
[/quote]
Using arguments that are fact based not based on what the news would like you to believe.
[quote]apbt55 wrote:
Big_Boss wrote:
apbt55 wrote:
What seriously, your arguments have just as much credibility.
thank Clinton for cutting the military and national security budget, for all the deaths in NY on 9/11
Redefine credibility for me. It seems I have been wrong as to what it means.
Using arguments that are fact based not based on what the news would like you to believe.[/quote]
Sooo…where are your facts? Doesn’t matter really…because fact of the matter is that you have terrorists to thank for 9/11.
Rosie O’Donnell also made “fact based” arguments as well.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
BillO21 wrote:
ohh yeah I think the next time McCain sees Bush he is gonna drop kick em.
LOL.
If any conservatives/republicans want a place to put the blame for why they lost this election…they have no further to look than the person they voted for last time.[/quote]
Conservatives are not Republicans retard!
[quote]Lorisco wrote:
Professor X wrote:
BillO21 wrote:
ohh yeah I think the next time McCain sees Bush he is gonna drop kick em.
LOL.
If any conservatives/republicans want a place to put the blame for why they lost this election…they have no further to look than the person they voted for last time.
Conservatives are not Republicans retard![/quote]
True. Just as liberals are not Democrats.
[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
Lorisco wrote:
Professor X wrote:
BillO21 wrote:
ohh yeah I think the next time McCain sees Bush he is gonna drop kick em.
LOL.
If any conservatives/republicans want a place to put the blame for why they lost this election…they have no further to look than the person they voted for last time.
Conservatives are not Republicans retard!
True. Just as liberals are not Democrats.
[/quote]
True. I think liberals have taken over both parties.
[quote]Lorisco wrote:
Big_Boss wrote:
Lorisco wrote:
Professor X wrote:
BillO21 wrote:
ohh yeah I think the next time McCain sees Bush he is gonna drop kick em.
LOL.
If any conservatives/republicans want a place to put the blame for why they lost this election…they have no further to look than the person they voted for last time.
Conservatives are not Republicans retard!
True. Just as liberals are not Democrats.
True. I think liberals have taken over both parties.
[/quote]
AGREED…that’s were the true unbalance of power lies.
[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
apbt55 wrote:
Big_Boss wrote:
apbt55 wrote:
What seriously, your arguments have just as much credibility.
thank Clinton for cutting the military and national security budget, for all the deaths in NY on 9/11
Redefine credibility for me. It seems I have been wrong as to what it means.
Using arguments that are fact based not based on what the news would like you to believe.
Sooo…where are your facts? Doesn’t matter really…because fact of the matter is that you have terrorists to thank for 9/11.
Rosie O’Donnell also made “fact based” arguments as well.[/quote]
That is ture, it was terrorists and if we could all get over blaming each other and the presidents and try to secure our nation that would probably help.
I will be the first to admit I have the same problem, when people point fingers I will point them back.
And not trying to bring this up again but I really don’t see that happening under Obama unless his briefings change his tune about the state of our national security.
I know I will catch flack for saying this but I would love to see a military coupe of our corrupt government even if for a short time, while we secure our borders and get our economy under control.
All of our corrupt government Republicans and Democrats alike.
You are right it isn’t a democrat or republican thing, it is that no party really knows who or what it is. Even the demoratic party. Evidence with some of the people who voted for obama without really knowing his stance on some things.
But it is all talk nothing will ever happen we are all just screwed.
There’s a military coupe for you.
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
There’s a military coupe for you.[/quote]
That is fucking bad ass.
where’s the hot chic with the 50 cal barrett laying on top.
[quote]valiance. wrote:
Regardless of the name of the party there was always one party that helped blacks and one that didn’t (unless there was none). When the party helping them switched, blacks switched their allegiance.[/quote]
If you look at even the passage of the Civil Rights Voting Act of 1965, while it was a Democratic president who passed it, there was actually more Republicans who were against it than Democrats:
[quote]valiance. wrote:
It’s not some irrational love for the (D) after a politician’s name. Black people vote for their interests, just like you do! [/quote]
Actually I think that it is rather irrational, especially considering that many black people are actually socially conservative and religious people who agree with Republicans on many issues.
As for myself, I vote for candidates who represent my personal, and not group interests.
[quote]valiance. wrote:
The reason for a lack of ideological diversity amongst black people is because years of discrimination artificially narrowed outcomes so no matter what if you were black, your life was pretty similar to another black guy’s. Republicans want black votes? Maybe stop being racist and promote the growth of a black middle and upper class. It’ll take time and more than token outreach to one or two exceptional blacks like Colin Powell or Condoleeza Rice. [/quote]
So how are modern Republicans being racist? I am dying to hear this.
[quote]valiance. wrote:
What you said WAS true (and I appreciate you correcting my sloppiness) but remember it was also Democratic presidents who pushed through the legislation of the civil rights era. And because blacks are disproportionately poor (hundreds of years of slavery and disenfranchisement will do that to you), they benefit disproportionately from those policies which lift up the lower classes–such as the policies of the New Deal which began the shift of blacks to the Democratic party in the first place. With the shift of southern Democrats to the Republican party and the embracing of civil rights by the leaders of the Democrats, black economic interests aligned with their civil rights interests, and that created the solid Democratic block you see today. But you already knew this…
Decent definition of racialism, though I must confess it has always seemed to me a bit of a weasel word/concept. It has always appeared to be a way to sneak racism into polite society by toning it down a bit. The only people I’ve heard use the word “racialist” have been white nationalists and racists. Though I’m using it now… woops… >;)
I think my problem with racialism as a concept is that acting in the best interests to further your racial group necessarily comes at the expense of those outside your racial group (even if its not coupled with the racist idea that you are superior to other racial groups), and such divisive and hostile attitudes are counterproductive to creating a healthy, functioning civil society in a land that’s so multicultural. I don’t deny that all groups have an element of racialism and cliquishness in them and while I can tolerate and understand it, I don’t think that that’s ideal.
Ethnic clannishness is a huge problem in the U.S. (its a large reason why we can’t have a welfare state as they do in many European countries–white people don’t want to feel they’re supporting lazy minorities) and abroad-- look at the Sunni/Shiite or the power struggles of proportionally representative ethnic governments in Africa or the ethnic warfare between the Janjaweed and others in Sudan or even the struggles of French Arabs to fit into French society or for UK legal traditions to assimilate Sharia law. All pretty contentious issues that racialism only exacerbates.[/quote]
So now you are against racialism too?
Sorry, but I cannot explain bloc voting by anything else by either racialism or racism (you can rationalize why it is “normal” but it still doesn’t make it anything else but racialism). You can also hear this by the endless speeches containg words like “we”, “us” and “our” when individual blacks speak about what having Obama as president means to them. Clearly there are a large majority of black Americans who view themselves as part of a group. If whites were to do this they would be denounced as racists or white supremacists.
valiance. wrote:
Maybe one party consistently speaks to issues that affects black people and the other ignores them? One party reaches out and the other is the haven for unreformed racists. Hrmm shocker, I wonder why blacks don’t vote for Republicans more…
That’s true, but unfortunately Republicans are the party of racists. Most Republicans aren’t racist, but most racists are Republican (though not all as we saw in the Dem primaries). Black people know this and tend to stay away. This is in addition to the natural economic preference for Democrats that blacks already have due to their generally disadvantaged positions.
I would say that generally Republicans like individual blacks but hate blacks as a people. Typically thinking stuff like: “Colin Powell is so successful why are other blacks so lazy?” While ignoring his exceptional gifts, hard work, and even luck in getting to where he is. For every Colin Powell there are 10 Jamals who never get a shot or even think of going for one because of systemic disadvantages against them.
Sorry, I do tend to go on… my thoughts run together a bit and the quote tree has gotten a bit ugly.[/quote]
What you are saying is false. Recent polls even show that there are roughly the same amount of white people in either party that hold negative or unfavorable views about black people.
Not all of Democrats are the wine and cheese variety liberals you know; many of them are blue collar people who don’t vote Republican because they think that the Republicans are the party of the rich, or they don’t like the “bible thumping kooks” etc. in the party. Some of them might be racists, some might be not. Many of the Christian Right types have theology which is anti-racist.
This is not even considering the Farrakan types in the Democratic party as well.
[quote]phil_leotardo wrote:
If you look at even the passage of the Civil Rights Voting Act of 1965, while it was a Democratic president who passed it, there was actually more Republicans who were against it than Democrats:
Actually I think that it is rather irrational, especially considering that many black people are actually socially conservative and religious people who agree with Republicans on many issues.
As for myself, I vote for candidates who represent my personal, and not group interests.
[/quote]
how do you know they are voting for some group interest? who are these black people who SHOULD be voting republican according to you but are too racially conscious to? do black people agree with republicans on many issues? I don’t think so… if they did, they’d be voting for Republicans. Just as black people switched from voting R to voting D when the parties changed; they’ll change back if Republicans offer them something. Voting patterns can change, people respond to incentives.
[quote]phil_leotardo wrote:
So how are modern Republicans being racist? I am dying to hear this.
[/quote]
really? the party of strom thurmond and jesse helms isnt racist? jesus christ… the southern democrats you’re so fond of pointing to are almost to a man now members of the Republican party.
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/10/16/obama-bucks/
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/westmoreland-calls-obama-uppity-2008-09-04.html
http://archives.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/12/09/lott.comment/
http://www.thenation.com/blogs/thebeat?pid=208
then there’s that woman calling Obama an Arab at a rally and McCain defending him by saying he’s a decent man (as if Arabs cant be decent men?)
McCain supporters shouting kill him and treason and terrorist at rallies
how about consistently emphasizing use of Obama’s middle name to try and make false associations with Saddam Hussein?
I mean if you haven’t noticed Republicans being racist you haven’t been paying attention at all…
[quote]phil_leotardo wrote:
So now you are against racialism too?
Sorry, but I cannot explain bloc voting by anything else by either racialism or racism (you can rationalize why it is “normal” but it still doesn’t make it anything else but racialism). You can also hear this by the endless speeches containg words like “we”, “us” and “our” when individual blacks speak about what having Obama as president means to them. Clearly there are a large majority of black Americans who view themselves as part of a group. If whites were to do this they would be denounced as racists or white supremacists.
[/quote]
whats wrong with being against racialism? I just explained its faults in my view. you seem to be against it too, am I wrong?
and it kills me when white people complain about racism/racialism in America, as if ya’ll weren’t responsible for the whole goddamn thing in the first place. you’re seriously complaining about black racialism?
white people have been saying that blacks complain about racism too much for decades. guess what? its never been true. by and large, black people complain about racism because it exists. in the 1960s whites thought that everything was fine and dandy and that everything was equal… guess what? it wasnt…
[quote]phil_leotardo wrote:
What you are saying is false. Recent polls even show that there are roughly the same amount of white people in either party that hold negative or unfavorable views about black people.
Not all of Democrats are the wine and cheese variety liberals you know; many of them are blue collar people who don’t vote Republican because they think that the Republicans are the party of the rich, or they don’t like the “bible thumping kooks” etc. in the party. Some of them might be racists, some might be not. Many of the Christian Right types have theology which is anti-racist.
This is not even considering the Farrakan types in the Democratic party as well.
[/quote]
No, what you’re saying is false. There are racist Democrats, sure, but Republicans generally have far more negative views of black people. To argue that Republicans are not the party of racists is insanity.
http://news.yahoo.com/page/election-2008-political-pulse-obama-race
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Are some of you aware of how pathetically childish this “fear the worst” mentality is?
Hypocrites.[/quote]
I don’t see how fearing the worst is pathetic. I fear the worst, I hope for the best.
I am by no means a fan boy of Obama, and am concerned that he will do poorly, but the blame and apologists are already lining up credit and blame. Both sides. Is anyone blaming the Clinton years for the initiation of the current credit fiasco that we facing?
He had his apologists and still does for a completely unremarkable presidency. Are Bush apologists already lined up? Yes. Obama is in a no lose position. Successes are already tempered with “SEE!!” and his failure that hasn’t even happened yet and may or may not is already lathered with “look at the mess he inherited”
Partisanship is hypocritical by design and practice.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
BillO21 wrote:
The numbers show blacks voted for a Democrat, same as usual when speaking generally. You don’t understand because you don’t want to. I also tend to think explaining this much beyond that is a waste of time.[/quote]
I am calling bullshit on this. Blacks voted, and I am undecided because there is no clear cut definition of the term “racism” and what is and what is not, but how about the term “racial preferencing”? We call votes along party lines for what it is, partisanship. The odds of a set demographic voting for the same demographic, in the percentage that it did, and to state that the skin color wasn’t a factor at all is suspect.
No I cannot imagine what it is to be a discriminated person of color. Can anyone of any other group live the moment that I was, without question, discriminated against because of my skin color? Similar, sure. Live the moment? no. I abhor racism.
Obama won and people are screaming that it was a landslide of change. Bush beat Kerry with a slightly smaller margin and it was called squeaking by. ???
Seeing the tears in the eyes of a very good friend of mine, a man of color, when he said “you don’t understand what this means to me” I could only respond, “No, I can’t completely understand, but I can see it”
Now that the glass ceiling is broken, the road is paved and waiting to dry, I hope that we can sincerely get past the concentration of melanin is someone’s skin. This man Obama broke the ceiling. Without question. I disagree with his politics. There is a person of color out there that shares my point of view that will earn my vote when he is the candidate.
I await the day that that the US comes to the point that Morgan Freeman talks about in MSN
The shit part of the history that is referred to as “Black History” is American History. Nothing less.
[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
Lorisco wrote:
Big_Boss wrote:
Lorisco wrote:
Professor X wrote:
BillO21 wrote:
ohh yeah I think the next time McCain sees Bush he is gonna drop kick em.
LOL.
If any conservatives/republicans want a place to put the blame for why they lost this election…they have no further to look than the person they voted for last time.
Conservatives are not Republicans retard!
True. Just as liberals are not Democrats.
True. I think liberals have taken over both parties.
AGREED…that’s were the true unbalance of power lies.[/quote]
Bush and Obama are parts of the same Oreo cookie.
[quote]jp_dubya wrote:
Professor X wrote:
BillO21 wrote:
The numbers show blacks voted for a Democrat, same as usual when speaking generally. You don’t understand because you don’t want to. I also tend to think explaining this much beyond that is a waste of time.
I am calling bullshit on this. Blacks voted, and I am undecided because there is no clear cut definition of the term “racism” and what is and what is not, but how about the term “racial preferencing”? We call votes along party lines for what it is, partisanship. The odds of a set demographic voting for the same demographic, in the percentage that it did, and to state that the skin color wasn’t a factor at all is suspect.
No I cannot imagine what it is to be a discriminated person of color. Can anyone of any other group live the moment that I was, without question, discriminated against because of my skin color? Similar, sure. Live the moment? no. I abhor racism.
Obama won and people are screaming that it was a landslide of change. Bush beat Kerry with a slightly smaller margin and it was called squeaking by. ???
Seeing the tears in the eyes of a very good friend of mine, a man of color, when he said “you don’t understand what this means to me” I could only respond, “No, I can’t completely understand, but I can see it”
Now that the glass ceiling is broken, the road is paved and waiting to dry, I hope that we can sincerely get past the concentration of melanin is someone’s skin. This man Obama broke the ceiling. Without question. I disagree with his politics. There is a person of color out there that shares my point of view that will earn my vote when he is the candidate.
I await the day that that the US comes to the point that Morgan Freeman talks about in MSN
The shit part of the history that is referred to as “Black History” is American History. Nothing less.[/quote]
Unless you are about to provide some proven statistics that show blacks voted STRICTLY because of skin color, you just wasted a few paragraphs.
[quote]jp_dubya wrote:
Seeing the tears in the eyes of a very good friend of mine, a man of color, when he said “you don’t understand what this means to me” I could only respond, “No, I can’t completely understand, but I can see it”
Now that the glass ceiling is broken, the road is paved and waiting to dry, I hope that we can sincerely get past the concentration of melanin is someone’s skin. This man Obama broke the ceiling. Without question. I disagree with his politics. There is a person of color out there that shares my point of view that will earn my vote when he is the candidate.
.[/quote]
This is a great point. It is very disingenuous to say that it wasn’t about race when you see many blacks with tears in their eyes saying things like - finally a black man is president.
So without a doubt, for many, it was all about race.
Since blacks are a very small percentage of the population they could not elect anyone without other non-blacks voting as well. So without a doubt a large percentage of Whites and Latino’s also voted for Obama. And what this means is that institutional racism, for the most part, is dead. Blacks can no longer blame society for their own lack of motivation.
Now with a shinning example on capitol of what can be achieved as a person of color, there ARE no more fucking excuses! Obama has reset the achievement bar for blacks as high as the bar goes for anyone in the USA.
So while most all blacks now think this is a great day, and I believe that it is, I doubt if they understand how this event has also placed the responsibility for their own success or failure squarely back on their own shoulders.
[quote]Lorisco wrote:
jp_dubya wrote:
Seeing the tears in the eyes of a very good friend of mine, a man of color, when he said “you don’t understand what this means to me” I could only respond, “No, I can’t completely understand, but I can see it”
Now that the glass ceiling is broken, the road is paved and waiting to dry, I hope that we can sincerely get past the concentration of melanin is someone’s skin. This man Obama broke the ceiling. Without question. I disagree with his politics. There is a person of color out there that shares my point of view that will earn my vote when he is the candidate.
.
This is a great point. It is very disingenuous to say that it wasn’t about race when you see many blacks with tears in their eyes saying things like - finally a black man is president.
So without a doubt, for many, it was all about race.
Since blacks are a very small percentage of the population they could not elect anyone without other non-blacks voting as well. So without a doubt a large percentage of Whites and Latino’s also voted for Obama. And what this means is that institutional racism, for the most part, is dead. Blacks can no longer blame society for their own lack of motivation.
Now with a shinning example on capitol of what can be achieved as a person of color, there ARE no more fucking excuses! Obama has reset the achievement bar for blacks as high as the bar goes for anyone in the USA.
So while most all blacks now think this is a great day, and I believe that it is, I doubt if they understand how this event has also placed the responsibility for their own success or failure squarely back on their own shoulders.
[/quote]
LOL.
Anyone who thinks Clarence Thomas would get this sort of voter turn out needs to find a brain…quickly.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Lorisco wrote:
jp_dubya wrote:
Seeing the tears in the eyes of a very good friend of mine, a man of color, when he said “you don’t understand what this means to me” I could only respond, “No, I can’t completely understand, but I can see it”
Now that the glass ceiling is broken, the road is paved and waiting to dry, I hope that we can sincerely get past the concentration of melanin is someone’s skin. This man Obama broke the ceiling. Without question. I disagree with his politics. There is a person of color out there that shares my point of view that will earn my vote when he is the candidate.
.
This is a great point. It is very disingenuous to say that it wasn’t about race when you see many blacks with tears in their eyes saying things like - finally a black man is president.
So without a doubt, for many, it was all about race.
Since blacks are a very small percentage of the population they could not elect anyone without other non-blacks voting as well. So without a doubt a large percentage of Whites and Latino’s also voted for Obama. And what this means is that institutional racism, for the most part, is dead. Blacks can no longer blame society for their own lack of motivation.
Now with a shinning example on capitol of what can be achieved as a person of color, there ARE no more fucking excuses! Obama has reset the achievement bar for blacks as high as the bar goes for anyone in the USA.
So while most all blacks now think this is a great day, and I believe that it is, I doubt if they understand how this event has also placed the responsibility for their own success or failure squarely back on their own shoulders.
LOL.
Anyone who thinks Clarence Thomas would get this sort of voter turn out needs to find a brain…quickly. [/quote]
That’s true.
So what you are saying is that blacks are blinded by the party mantra the same as everyone else?
Thomas being demonized because he is (gasp!) a conservative black man would certainly cause some concerns for the faithful liberal minions. But on a level playing field, with candidates who are not so polarizing like Thomas, the issue of race would and is more of a factor. But, to be honest, I don’t have a problem with that at this point in time. Based on what has historically happened to blacks I think that is a very reasonable response to vote for the first black president just because he is black. However, in the future that mentality should decrease, but continuing to vote for someone just because of their race would then become an issue.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
jp_dubya wrote:
Professor X wrote:
BillO21 wrote:
The numbers show blacks voted for a Democrat, same as usual when speaking generally. You don’t understand because you don’t want to. I also tend to think explaining this much beyond that is a waste of time.
I am calling bullshit on this. Blacks voted, and I am undecided because there is no clear cut definition of the term “racism” and what is and what is not, but how about the term “racial preferencing”? We call votes along party lines for what it is, partisanship. The odds of a set demographic voting for the same demographic, in the percentage that it did, and to state that the skin color wasn’t a factor at all is suspect.
No I cannot imagine what it is to be a discriminated person of color. Can anyone of any other group live the moment that I was, without question, discriminated against because of my skin color? Similar, sure. Live the moment? no. I abhor racism.
Obama won and people are screaming that it was a landslide of change. Bush beat Kerry with a slightly smaller margin and it was called squeaking by. ???
Seeing the tears in the eyes of a very good friend of mine, a man of color, when he said “you don’t understand what this means to me” I could only respond, “No, I can’t completely understand, but I can see it”
Now that the glass ceiling is broken, the road is paved and waiting to dry, I hope that we can sincerely get past the concentration of melanin is someone’s skin. This man Obama broke the ceiling. Without question. I disagree with his politics. There is a person of color out there that shares my point of view that will earn my vote when he is the candidate.
I await the day that that the US comes to the point that Morgan Freeman talks about in MSN
The shit part of the history that is referred to as “Black History” is American History. Nothing less.
Unless you are about to provide some proven statistics that show blacks voted STRICTLY because of skin color, you just wasted a few paragraphs.[/quote]
To what other factors beyond race would you attribute such a huge disparity between the white and black vote?
[quote]Professor X wrote:
LOL.
Anyone who thinks Clarence Thomas would get this sort of voter turn out needs to find a brain…quickly. [/quote]
That’s true. Blacks would call him an Uncle Tom and say he’s a puppet of the white establishment. And I’d vote for him in a second.