Is opposing Obama racist?

[kimmy]

He probably would have won if blacks stayed home.

Gore got somewhere in the figure of 90% of the black vote....didn't help him.

I think we were talking about the Democratic primaries.

-k

[PocketRocket]

For instance did you ever hear of anyone calling Bush critics RACIST?

if you didn't support Bush... you were fine...

if you don't support Obama... you're a racist...

is it sinking in finally?!

If you didn't support Bush, you weren't "fine," you were anti-American or a terrorist supporter or a traitor or guilty of treason to the same extent that those who don't support Obama are racists.

so I ask you .....

is it sinking in finally?!

I think you're both right, but too tied up in your individual mindsets to see it.

We've reached a point where the polarization of Left and Right are like nothing we've seen in history.

Over the past several years we've been seeing a trend develop wherein the supporters of the president are quick to cast accusations at anyone who does not support the policies of the president.

The accusations they choose are simply based on whatever straw is easiest to grasp at....

In Bush's case, there was this national emergency based on America being "at war" with terror, so if you spoke against Bush or his policies "in this time of war", you were treasonous.

For Obama supporters, well, they don't have the convenience of a manufactured war to lean on, so they use the one tool they have at their disposal, the race card.

In both cases, I should have used the words "some supporters", because many people, arguably most, do NOT stoop to such tactics.

Unfortunately we seem to hear the opinion of the louder, more extreme folks a lot more. After all, good soundbites do NOT come from someone who has no complaints.....

[GostHacked]

because the person who won the election wasn't white? oh thank you for validating my point.

It would even have been a turning point if a woman became president of the US.

[M.Dancer]

I think we were talking about the Democratic primaries.

-k

True...

In a national survey by CNN/Opinion Research Corp., 59 percent of black Democrats backed Obama, an Illinois Democrat, for their party's presidential nomination, with 31 percent supporting Clinton, the senator from New York.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/18/poll.2008/index.html

Despite a majority (at that point, and it would grow) supporting Obama, a sizable minority were supporting Clinton.

The point I would make is, Obama won not because he was Black, but because he was the democratic candidate. It was as much a vote against the Republicans as it was a vote for Obama.

[Guest American Woman]

QUOTE=ToadBrother: it was a historic day for the United States, and a turning point in its history.

because the person who won the election wasn't white? oh thank you for validating my point.

No one is arguing what ToadBrother said. Your point, however, seems to be that it means he won because he is Black. You are taking two completely different issues and trying to make them one.

Yes, it was historic that a Black man won. That doesn't in any way, shape, or form "validate" your claim that he won because he's Black.

[GostHacked]

And the answer to this whole thread is a resounding NO. Opposing Obama is not racist. Cause if opposing him is racists, I would say that voting for him is also racist.

So... again, the answer is NO. Thank you and good day to you!!

[lictor616]

Obvioulsy she wasn't.

50% of america is female. By your logic, she should have won.

But she didn't.

the argument should be here that gender politics are never as powerful as racial ones... you can try to cover up race under the powder of empty words sprinkled over it... but it lies dormant in the soul, dormant in the mind and it always awakens with the slightest gust of wind...

and boy did you see all those crying blacks at inauguration dot dot dot in a state of trance

(start at 0:36 seconds)

"If Obama looses, there will be black race riots"

Vote Obama or DIE" (

) here you hear Jeremiah Wright, Obama's mentor and best friend for 25 years, in typical fashion, refer to white people as "the Enemy"

and just in case that wasn't enough... here's young jeezy and jay-z rapping to an enthusiastic crowd (most of it black) KEEP MOVING OUT THE WHITE HOUSE: MY PRESIDENT IS MUTHA- F***ING BLACK N*GGA"..... jay-z "NO MORE WHITE LIES, MY PRESIDENT IS BLACK!!!" " I'm so proud of being balck right now.. i'm speechless"

to enthusiastic applause... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXgcmJm_oUo...feature=related

that's right Obama authorized an inauguration party that featured "artists" that said the "n-word" every 2 sentences... classy stuff. great for a "post-racial america" I suppose... (i guess since the people saying the n-word where black... sok

here we have children being excited and apoplectic at the inauguration: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0e1Qyt6V2Pc

"it feel so damn good to have a black president" (

)

there's a nice song that goes like this in this clip: "dear oba-ba-ba ma, dear oh ba ba ba ba ma ... OBAMA!!! lol

might as well be bleating "dear oba BAHH BAH BAH BAH"

Edited October 23, 2009 by lictor616

[bush_cheney2004]

And the answer to this whole thread is a resounding NO. Opposing Obama is not racist. Cause if opposing him is racists, I would say that voting for him is also racist.

Correct.....not opposing Obama would also be "racist". As POTUS, he should expect and be subjected to all the challenges that have met his predecessors, and I am sure he wouldn't want it any other way.

[Guest American Woman]

Quote=American Woman: If you didn't support Bush, you weren't "fine," you were anti-American or a terrorist supporter or a traitor or guilty of treason to the same extent that those who don't support Obama are racists.

so I ask you .....

is it sinking in finally?!

I think you're both right, but too tied up in your individual mindsets to see it. We've reached a point where the polarization of Left and Right are like nothing we've seen in history. Over the past several years we've been seeing a trend develop wherein the supporters of the president are quick to cast accusations at anyone who does not support the policies of the president. The accusations they choose are simply based on whatever straw is easiest to grasp at.... In Bush's case, there was this national emergency based on America being "at war" with terror, so if you spoke against Bush or his policies "in this time of war", you were treasonous. For Obama supporters, well, they don't have the convenience of a manufactured war to lean on, so they use the one tool they have at their disposal, the race card.

In both cases, I should have used the words "some supporters", because many people, arguably most, do NOT stoop to such tactics. Unfortunately we seem to hear the opinion of the louder, more extreme folks a lot more. After all, good soundbites do NOT come from someone who has no complaints.....

Note that I said: If you didn't support Bush, you weren't "fine," you were anti-American or a terrorist supporter or a traitor or guilty of treason to the same extent that those who don't support Obama are racists.

By qualifying that it was "to the same extent," I'm recognizing that there are some who are always going to make these types of accusations; I'm pointing out that it's not limited to Obama supporters.

Edited October 23, 2009 by American Woman

[lictor616]

No one is arguing what ToadBrother said. Your point, however, seems to be that it means he won because he is Black. You are taking two completely different issues and trying to make them one.

Yes, it was historic that a Black man won. That doesn't in any way, shape, or form "validate" your claim that he won because he's Black.

his victory was called HISTORIC because of the racial elements... obvious (you even concede that).... and many people voted for him FOR THAT VERY REASON... because he would show the world a "different face" one taht isn't white (and oh isn't that a wonderful thing!).

People were celebrating and fascinated with this election BECAUSE OF THE RACIAL ELEMENTS. The people who voted for obama WANTED A HISTORICAL moment in history. Why pretend as if this wasn't a motivating factor as you do?

again, who do you think you're fooling here?

CHANGE? HOPE?

for what? of what?

CHANGE was to replace the white face as president with a black one... that's what the message communicated was!

[Topaz]

Wouldn't depend on WHY you are opposing him?

[GostHacked]

Correct.....not opposing Obama would also be "racist". As POTUS, he should expect and be subjected to all the challenges that have met his predecessors, and I am sure he wouldn't want it any other way.

So while the others are still trying to figure this out, I am gonna grab a beer and continue to watch this trainwreck of a thread. I got, Baravia, Mill Street Ale, Grasshopper, and a couple Dortmunders. What'll y'all have??

[ToadBrother]

Correct.....not opposing Obama would also be "racist". As POTUS, he should expect and be subjected to all the challenges that have met his predecessors, and I am sure he wouldn't want it any other way.

And now that the honeymoon is over, it appears that he is.

[ToadBrother]

his victory was called HISTORIC because of the racial elements... obvious (you even concede that).... and many people voted for him FOR THAT VERY REASON... because he would show the world a "different face" one taht isn't white (and oh isn't that a wonderful thing!).

Well yes. In a country that 150 years ago would have had him a slave, and that even forty years ago would have made his capacity to achieve any elected position in most places unlikely, it is historic.

People were celebrating and fascinated with this election BECAUSE OF THE RACIAL ELEMENTS. The people who voted for obama WANTED A HISTORICAL moment in history. Why pretend as if this wasn't a motivating factor as you do?

I'm sure for many blacks it was important, just like JFK's election was important for many Catholics. I'm sure you would be rooting for David Duke if he was running again for President.

again, who do you think you're fooling here?

The real question is who do you think you're fooling. You hate blacks, fear them, think they're criminals by genetics, but actually want to pretend such horror that someone else meant feel some racial reason to vote for someone.

But believe me, Obama didn't get elected because he was black. He got elected because the GOP had utterly run out of credibility.

CHANGE? HOPE?

for what? of what?

CHANGE was to replace the white face as president with a black one... that's what the message communicated was!

If you didn't hate blacks so much, you might be able to get past that question yourself. The reason he won, as I stated, was because of George W. Bush. McCain never really stood much of a chance.

[GostHacked]

If you didn't hate blacks so much, you might be able to get past that question yourself. The reason he won, as I stated, was because of George W. Bush. McCain never really stood much of a chance.

I had always thought McCain/Palin were going to win. But it seems like the US actually was ready for change.

[bush_cheney2004]

So while the others are still trying to figure this out, I am gonna grab a beer and continue to watch this trainwreck of a thread. I got, Baravia, Mill Street Ale, Grasshopper, and a couple Dortmunders. What'll y'all have??

You better have a case, because some of these folks will beat this race turd into the ground. Hell, Obama is "multi-racial", not "black".

[ToadBrother]

I had always thought McCain/Palin were going to win. But it seems like the US actually was ready for change.

I knew McCain wasn't going to win once he selected that religious nut Palin. Rather than trying to build bridges like Obama's team had done, McCain's team seemed to remain obsessed with shoring up the base. Maybe McCain would have lost if all the Evangelicals had stayed home, but then again, maybe he would have been able to make a more compelling case that he wasn't in the hands of the old guard. By picking Palin, McCain pretty much abandoned his maverick reputation.

And let's not forget here that Obama built what is probably the single most effective campaign machine in modern history. The guy and his campaign strategists did a brilliant job.

Edited October 23, 2009 by ToadBrother

[M.Dancer]

and boy did you see all those crying blacks at inauguration shucking and jiving in a state of trance

This should be reported. It is racism at its most mundane.

Edited October 23, 2009 by M.Dancer

[bush_cheney2004]

I knew McCain wasn't going to win once he selected that religious nut Palin....

Many Americans knew McCain wasn't going to win long before that. The political inertia he had to overcome just to get the party nomination was telling, and he became the "Comeback Kid". Palin was just a 5 hour energy drink for a campaign that ran into a buzz saw of fund raising, cult-of-personality (Obama), Bush backlash, and self imposed stumbles along the way.

Frankly, I am surprised McCain did as well as he did.

[lictor616]

So while the others are still trying to figure this out, I am gonna grab a beer and continue to watch this trainwreck of a thread. I got, Baravia, Mill Street Ale, Grasshopper, and a couple Dortmunders. What'll y'all have??

scrap all of these, go for Duvel, Paulaner, Fin Du Monde or Postel.... everything else is urine. lol I kid I kid. go for BAVARIA (correct that typo)

[lictor616]

This should be reported. It is racism at its most mundane.

shucking and jiving is racist?

and maundanity is a forum transgression? trying to silence people who don't have the same opinions as you eh? a true liberal extremist you are.

[ToadBrother]

shucking and jiving is racist?

and maundanity is a forum transgression? trying to silence people who don't have the same opinions as you eh? a true liberal extremist you are.

You really do think we're idiots.

[M.Dancer]

shucking and jiving is racist?

Why would you stop playing stupid now....

... trying to silence people who don't have the same opinions as you eh? a true liberal extremist you are.

Oh give it up. Fascists have as much in common with freedom of expression as rocks do with brains.

[lictor616]

You really do think we're idiots.

for the love of god! i'll change it then! (i'll edit the post...)

[lictor616]

Oh give it up. Fascists have as much in common with freedom of expression as rocks do with brains.

and what about communists?