Is opposing Obama racist?

[M.Dancer]

and what about communists?

Same goes. They are as alike as syphilis and gonorrhea.

[Guest American Woman]

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!).

That's your belief. Doesn't make it true. But here's another. For every person who would vote for him simply because he's Black, there was a person who wouldn't vote for him simply because he was Black. That type of mindset isn't unique to one side.

As has been pointed out repeatedly now, Gore got only 5% less of the Black vote than Obama did, yet I've never heard your explanation for that. If it were some freak happening for the Democrat to get high support from Blacks, you might have a leg to stand on. As it is, Obama's 95% compared to Gore's 90% is hardly earth shattering, front page news.

People were celebrating and fascinated with this election BECAUSE OF THE RACIAL ELEMENTS.

Oh please. "People" were celebrating this election because it meant No More Bush/Cheney and Company. It was also "fascinating" because of all the 'possible firsts,' the first Black president being only one possibility.

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?

Palin winning as the first female VP would also have been an historical moment in history, but she didn't win. People weren't voting for "historical" reasons; the voters weren't going to the booth to make history. We have to live in this country, so we wanted the best person for the job.

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

You have your head wrapped around some notion that exists in your mind, and you think anyone who disagrees, even though they show you the facts, is in some kind of denial-- while it's you who's living in some alternate universe that you've created.

CHANGE? HOPE?

for what? of what?

Are you serious? You truly need that explained to you??

"Change" from the last 8 years, to begin with. "Change" from the typical politician. "Hope" for a better tomorrow for Americans. "Hope" for a better world.

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

Only someone who sees the world as you do would see "Change" as replacing a white face with a Black one. It's unbelievable, really.

[lictor616]

Palin winning as the first female VP would also have been an historical moment in history, but she didn't win. People weren't voting for "historical" reasons; the voters weren't going to the booth to make history. We have to live in this country, so we wanted the best person for the job.

Again, race is a heavier and far more important reality then gender (especially to black people and racial liberals) racism always trumps sexism...

so the choice between a white VP woman... and BLACK president ... in the eyes of do gooding egalitarians is an obvious one. ESPECIALLY to racial minorities.

[Guest American Woman]

Again, race is a heavier and far more important reality then gender (especially to black people and racial liberals) racism always trumps sexism...

What about to women? You think race means more to women than gender?

And again, there are many more women in the U.S. than there are Blacks. And again, Gore got 90% of the Black vote compared to Obama's 95%, so there's no "WOW-what-a-huge-percentage-of-Black-votes-Obama-got! I-can-hardly-believe-it! There's-only-one-explanation! Obviously-Blacks-voted-for-him-only-because-he's-Black" factor involved. Except in your head.

so the choice between a white VP woman... and BLACK president ... in the eyes of do gooding egalitarians is an obvious one. ESPECIALLY to racial minorities.

I think I understand where you are coming from. Race is such a huge factor in your mind that you assume it is in everyone else's mind too. But here's what I think: Feeling as you do about Blacks, I honestly believe that if you are honest, you will admit that you would never vote for a Black man -- simply because he's Black. Now knowing that about yourself, you have to admit that you know there are others out there who also wouldn't vote for a Black simply because he's Black. So if there are some who voted for him just because he's Black, there's a counter-balance from those who didn't vote for him simply because he's Black. And again, I believe that if you are honest, you will admit that you know that's true.

[lictor616]

What about to women? You think race means more to women than gender?

for "women of color" yes, race absolutely trumps gender... every lefty socialist will tell you the same... are you actually disputing these facts?

[lictor616]

I think I understand where you are coming from. Race is such a huge factor in your mind that you assume it is in everyone else's mind too.

its obviously a huge factor in your mind as well if your rushing to any thread that deducts the obvious conclusions about the 08 election... calling it historical and "special" for reasons anyone with half a brain can understand... RACE

[lictor616]

Feeling as you do about Blacks, I honestly believe that if you are honest, you will admit that you would never vote for a Black man -- simply because he's Black. Now knowing that about yourself, you have to admit that you know there are others out there who also wouldn't vote for a Black simply because he's Black.

If Ron Paul were a black crippled lesbian, i'd still vote for him 1000 times over before I ever would even think of casting my ballot for a George Bush or McCain...

Unfortunately he's white, and is anti big government... and every good parlor pink liberal knows that that is a BIG no-no...

and honestly why do you care about how I feel about blacks? Individually I know many and even befriend some. but why say that i'm some sort of swinish defective, because I don't hypocritically say that I love all of them? and don't make excuses for them... Am I wrong for looking at the forest for the trees sometimes?

Edited October 23, 2009 by lictor616

[Guest American Woman]

If Ron Paul were a black crippled lesbian, i'd still vote for him 1000 times over before I ever would even think of casting my ballot for a George Bush or McCain...

So if you feel that way about Bush and McCain, why can't you understand that others do, too? And understand that that's why Obama won.

Unfortunately he's white, and is anti big government... and every good parlor pink liberal knows that that is a BIG no-no...

I honestly think you are losing your grip on reality. Obama won only because he's Black, and Ron Paul didn't win only because he's White. Got'cha.

and honestly why do you care about how I feel about blacks?

I don't, actually, except in regards to your thoughts/posts/beliefs about Obama and the 2008 election, since that's what's being discussed.

Individually I know many and even befriend some.

They should be so lucky.

but why say that i'm some sort of swinish defective, because I don't hypocritically say that I love all of them?

Say what?? That's not the issue here -- whether or not you love all Blacks. I'm guessing even Blacks don't love all Blacks. Any more than Whites love all Whites. Who on this earth does love "all [insert race here]?"

and don't make excuses for them... Am I wrong for looking at the forest for the trees sometimes?

What does 'not making excuses for them' have to do with claiming Obama won the election just because he's Black?

Seems to me your trees are preventing you from seeing the forest. In other words, your preconceived belief that Obama won only because he's Black overshadows the facts; overshadows anything that doesn't support your belief.

[GostHacked]

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

What we have seen cannot be unseen. Your edits, they do nothing.

[lictor616]

What we have seen cannot be unseen. Your edits, they do nothing.

oh so true,

the absolute horror of reading the dread syllables of "shuck & jive" can be soul destroying for tender and flower souled humanitarians such as jbg, M.,Dancer and Toadbrother... who love everyone so much that they want to rip the guts out of anyone who doesn't love everyone as much as they do!

[GostHacked]

for "women of color" yes, race absolutely trumps gender... every lefty socialist will tell you the same... are you actually disputing these facts?

I find the term 'women of colour' to be demeaning. They are black. Call them what they are. I am white, not a person of non-colour. Or technically I am caucaision and they are negroid.

Race only means something to you based on the thread about race in another section of this forum. Who the hell do you think YOU are fooling? And it seems that you got people on both sides of this debate uniting against you. That's a noteworthy accomplishment.

[lictor616]

So if you feel that way about Bush and McCain, why can't you understand that others do, too? And understand that that's why Obama won.

I honestly think you are losing your grip on reality. Obama won only because he's Black, and Ron Paul didn't win only because he's White. Got'cha.

Obama, Bush and McCain are a difference in degree not kind.

I assert again... HISTORIC, UNPRECEDENTED MOMENTOUS... would not have been words used to describe a democratic nomination if the president elect would have been A WHITE HETEROSEXUAL MALE. The central differentiating characteristic is race.

And let's not even delve into policy issues, we've already ascertained that the american public is utterly ignorant of ANY political platform. especially (i'm sorry to say) minorities.

We already know about voter eligibility and that (as contained in Just How Stupid Are We by Rick Shenkman ) just read his "voter mistakes section"

"Voter mistakes fall into four categories: (1) the "drunkards search", like a drunk looking for lost car keys only where the light is, voters pick up information passively without working to uncover new information (2) voters remember personal information about candidates and not hard facts about issues (3) voters prefer yes/no answers and abhor uncertainty, but most difficult issues involve uncertainty (4) voters can't see connections between actions and results -- for example, if the economy improves, they'll credit the president, even though there may have been no relation."

AGAIN!

Even Hellary herself went on record saying that if she looses the democratic nomination primary: "because many black voters will side with Obama".

And even bill clinton (the great welfare father) said "race, gender to decide vote" http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/elec...l-clinton_N.htm

for those too indolent to research the american voter:

[lictor616]

I find the term 'women of colour' to be demeaning. They are black. Call them what they are. I am white, not a person of non-colour. Or technically I am caucaision and they are negroid.

Race only means something to you based on the thread about race in another section of this forum. Who the hell do you think YOU are fooling? And it seems that you got people on both sides of this debate uniting against you. That's a noteworthy accomplishment.

well that's just the lunacy of our present plight... I've been reprimanded 3 or 4 times for using the word "black" instead of african american (even here)...

what does that say about race relations when we can't even name who we're talking about without offending people...

I've long passed the point of caring about the supremely sensitive ears of liberals though. and by the way if you're so outraged at the concept of "women of color"

why don't you complain to massah obama himself: http://my.barackobama.com/page/group/WomenofColorforObama

snip---

"Women of Color for Obama is an interest group for African-American Women, who are dedicated to helping Senator Barack Obama become the first African-American President. Our goals will focus on voter awareness, GOTV, fundraising, and other grassroots efforts."

see what I mean?

apparently race doesn't only mean something to me... (it obviously does to you, and many many an Obama voter)...

[PocketRocket]

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.

Ummm.....yes, I did notice that.

Did you not notice that I said you were right???

[PocketRocket]

After re-reading this thread, and a long slog it was, I am somewhat baffled by some of the comments denouncing those who consider Obama's election "historic" because a black man was elected.

At least one of these people has accused others of being racist because they agree with this view.

A person does not have to be racist to make a comment based on race.

And the fact that a black man was elected to the highest office in the USA IS a historic event.

It is historic because this is in a country where less than 50 years earlier, blacks had to sit in the back of the bus. Were not allowed in some restaurants. Were treated as a lower class of citizen, or even, arguably, as a lower life form.

How can one not notice the progress which has culminated in this moment, and not consider it historic???

And yes, when the first female president is elected, that will also be historic. And the first oriental, and the first hispanic and the first transvestite and so forth.

[Guest American Woman]

Ummm.....yes, I did notice that.

Did you not notice that I said you were right???

Ummmmm......This is what I noticed:

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

So you're saying neither lictor nor I "can see it." Obviously, if I can see that it happened in regards to those who opposed Bush "to the same extent" that it's happening to those who oppose Obama, I'm not "too caught up in [my] mindset" to "see it."

[PocketRocket]

So you're saying neither lictor nor I "can see it." Obviously, if I can see that it happened in regards to those who opposed Bush "to the same extent" that it's happening to those who oppose Obama, I'm not "too caught up in [my] mindset" to "see it."

Both right in that in the cases of both presidents, there were those who cast (figurative) stones at anyone who spoke out against the president.

The difference lay only in the cards that were played; in Obama's case, his supporters sometimes play the race card. With Bush, his supporters played the "treason" card.

AW: you are an intelligent person, and a good debater. Let's not quibble over small potatoes.

[jbg]

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

It had more to do with the September/October financial market crackup than anything. Obama took states that almost never, in post-1964 America, go Democratic.

[jbg]

You really do think we're idiots.

Lictor616 sure is, and racist garbage as well.

[GostHacked]

well that's just the lunacy of our present plight... I've been reprimanded 3 or 4 times for using the word "black" instead of african american (even here)...

African-American to me is also demeaning. I've called black people black, and guess what .. they agree with me. I lived with one black guy from St. Lucia. I don't refer to him as St. Lucian-Canadian. And the parties he held, awesome. SOCA has that rythm that makes you want to shake dat ass.

what does that say about race relations when we can't even name who we're talking about without offending people...

I also lived with another black guy who claimed to be a Muslim who did not follow his faith. He thought me and my other white roomate were racists against him, he kind of went loopy with the drugs and alcohol abuse. End up cleanin my roomate out and stole a few items of mine when I kicked him out. He was using the line that 'ah you don't know what it's like to be black'. And guess what I NEVER WILL!!! Because I am NOT black . So anyways.

I've long passed the point of caring about the supremely sensitive ears of liberals though. and by the way if you're so outraged at the concept of "women of color" why don't you complain to massah obama himself: http://my.barackobama.com/page/group/WomenofColorforObama

To me it is demeaning, to others it may not be. And I'd call him Mr. President (my sister had a dog she named Mr. President), not 'massah'.

apparently race doesn't only mean something to me... (it obviously does to you, and many many an Obama voter)...

Race, and gender don't mean squat to me. I want the best quallified person for that job. If he happens to be black, I am not gonna hold that against him!!

[lictor616]

To me it is demeaning, to others it may not be. And I'd call him Mr. President (my sister had a dog she named Mr. President), not 'massah'.

Race, and gender don't mean squat to me. I want the best quallified person for that job. If he happens to be black, I am not gonna hold that against him!!

Oh so now its only your humble opinion that "women of color" is offensive... see? I show you an instance where obama supporters use the word women of color and all of sudden its okay....

and since you thin that gender and race don't mean squat to you.,.. you must be a stauch ooposer of affirmative action and similar schemes no?

[GostHacked]

Oh so now its only your humble opinion that "women of color" is offensive... see? I show you an instance where obama supporters use the word women of color and all of sudden its okay....

I never said it was anything other than my personal 'humble' opinion. You will come to know that most of what I post are my opinion. And well, I stand by my opinions. And if the previous post I state that using the term 'person of colour' is dumb, what the hell makes you think that I'd be for using the term 'women of colour' ???

and since you thin that gender and race don't mean squat to you.,.. you must be a stauch ooposer of affirmative action and similar schemes no?

Correct. I am against it. I want the most qualified people for that position. I don't care if you are black, white, yellow, red, woman or man. If you have the right credentials and work history, you are hired!! Affirmative action just means that positions have a better chance of being filled by someone who is simply not qualified for the position. We need a _____ (caucasion, negroid, mongoloid, native ect ect) person to fill this job, but all the ______ applicants simply have none of what we are looking for, as an example.

Yes I am against affirmitive action.

We had a woman working with us in our warehouse. She recently quite and went on to something better. The job is heavy physical labour and this woman outpaced 75% of the guys in the warehouse without even trying. She is a looker as well, and when I saw her driving the forklift one day, I got a lil hot under the collar. I like a woman who can handle her heavy equipment. We have hired other women as well, the others just could not handle the pace.

Affirmative action suck in our Canadian government as well. English speakers need to know french to get into most government positions. English only? Tough luck. There are a good deal of french speakers who do NOT know english, and are in those government positions that demand bilingualism. They get a pass. So yes affirmative action absolutely fails.

Affirmative action does not promote gender or race equality.

As I stated before, to answer the question of this thread.. it is NO, oppossing Obama is NOT racist.

Edited October 23, 2009 by GostHacked

[lictor616]

I never said it was anything other than my personal 'humble' opinion. You will come to know that most of what I post are my opinion. And well, I stand by my opinions. And if the previous post I state that using the term 'person of colour' is dumb, what the hell makes you think that I'd be for using the term 'women of colour' ???

Correct. I am against it. I want the most qualified people for that position. I don't care if you are black, white, yellow, red, woman or man. If you have the right credentials and work history, you are hired!! Affirmative action just means that positions have a better chance of being filled by someone who is simply not qualified for the position. We need a _____ (caucasion, negroid, mongoloid, native ect ect) person to fill this job, but all the ______ applicants simply have none of what we are looking for, as an example.

Yes I am against affirmitive action.

We had a woman working with us in our warehouse. She recently quite and went on to something better. The job is heavy physical labour and this woman outpaced 75% of the guys in the warehouse without even trying. She is a looker as well, and when I saw her driving the forklift one day, I got a lil hot under the collar. I like a woman who can handle her heavy equipment. We have hired other women as well, the others just could not handle the pace.

Affirmative action suck in our Canadian government as well. English speakers need to know french to get into most government positions. English only? Tough luck. There are a good deal of french speakers who do NOT know english, and are in those government positions that demand bilingualism. They get a pass. So yes affirmative action absolutely fails.

Affirmative action does not promote gender or race equality.

As I stated before, to answer the question of this thread.. it is NO, oppossing Obama is NOT racist.

then you are only rational and consistent in that case.

I have no reprimand and no come back to tell you...

[GostHacked]

then you are only rational and consistent in that case.

I have no reprimand and no come back to tell you...

You simply had no game to begin with. But i'll let that slide .. also I picked up more Bavaria, here have one.

[lictor616]

You simply had no game to begin with. But i'll let that slide .. also I picked up more Bavaria, here have one.

well at least as far as affirmative action is concerned...

i'll trade you a bavaria for a Paulaner.. fair?