AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

@Foxfyre,

Foxfyre wrote:

okie wrote:

Right, it is safer than attacking Frances Rice, but they would if she ran for a high office. I will tell you who really deserves special admiration and respect, it is the black people that stand up and declare their conservatism. If they run for office, they are attacked with a vengeance seldom witnessed in politics, often by their own constituencies in the black community, such as the NAACP, etc., which are nothing more than socialist organizations.

Agreed. I really REALLY wanted the first black President to be Republican or Independent, because I wanted him to lead by example that would finally dissolve most of the last vestiges of racism in America. Those same vestiges of racism espoused by Cyclop and his ilk. But because that racism is alive and well, no black conservative can escape the organized politics of personal destruction. All will be portrayed as "Uncle Toms" or 'hanky heads' or poor representatives of their race or worse and will not be allowed to express any message unrelated to race.

The leftist Democrats and their annointed leaders will continue to nurse and nurture racism because it is one of the most powerful cards in their deck of tricks.

Oh, so you've moved on now to calling me a racist! Very well done.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Again I would caution you against adding words to my posts. It makes you look exceedingly uncareful.

I don't expect you to have the ability to comprehend the concept, but it is possible to unwittingly espouse racist views without being an intentional racist. You have done that this morning yes, which I pointed out at the time. I don't know if you yourself are intentionally racist. I only know you are capable of espousing racist views and can appreciate that you probably can't see how they are racist.

2 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Quote:

In other news, Robert Novak has passed on.

Another piece of **** makes its way down the sewer pipe that is Washington.

0 Replies

@Foxfyre,

Foxfyre wrote:

Again I would caution you against adding words to my posts. It makes you look exceedingly uncareful.

I don't expect you to have the ability to comprehend the concept, but it is possible to unwittingly espouse racist views without being an intentional racist. You have done that this morning yes, which I pointed out at the time. I don't know if you yourself are intentionally racist. I only know you are capable of espousing racist views and can appreciate that you probably can't see how they are racist.

How nuanced of you; perhaps you could explain which views I espoused which were racist in any way? I highly doubt you can, but I'd love to see how much rope you're willing to play out on this issue.

Typical Republican tactic you've done here, though: when you don't have any cogent defense of your words, and were even caught in a lie about what you said earlier, you instead accuse your opponent of the thing YOU are being accused of, and attempt to move to the offensive in the conversation. However, it will not work. Beck called Obama a racist, you agreed with him, but you are unable to produce examples of his racism at all. Smears and lies of the worst sort from you today, Fox.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

@Foxfyre,

Foxfyre wrote:

Some people would consider the President expressing racist views as a rather unAmerican thing to be. If George Bush can be accused of being racist--and he was so accused often--then President Obama cannot be exempt from such characterizations purely because he considers himself black. Wouldn't you say?

you have not established that Obama is expressing racist views
nobody says that Obama should somehow be exempt from criticism - but you seem to argue that those who criticise him shouldn't have to face any consequences

Foxfyre wrote:

And some Americans also accuse those protesting any views of the President and the Democrats as unAmerican. So goes politics in the USA.

And you have repeatedly been complaining about that characterisation, e.g. when people protesting health care reform were the target of it.

Foxfyre wrote:

old europe wrote:
Some people would say that companies pulling their ads from a program that propagates that kind of message is the free market at work.

Yup. And it is done often, almost exclusively by the Left who often believe free speech is reserved only for them and should not be allowed or tolerated by anybody else.

I don't think that what happened was "the Left" using the government to outlaw advertising on Glenn Beck's program - which is what the 1st Amendment is about.

Companies like Wal-Mart, Procter & Gamble, CVS, Best Buy or Geico withdrew from Beck's program because they didn't want to be associated with somebody who openly calls the President a "racist". These companies don't want to lose customers over an idiot who voices his extremist opinions on TV. Which is really the sensible thing for them to do, if they want to make money. Which is what the free market is all about.

Foxfyre wrote:

Perhaps you would care to elaborate why such an observation is not non sequitur to this discussion?

Well, you're whining about how people protesting and shouting at town hall meetings are simply making use of their freedom of speech rights, while simultaneously protesting that people who are doing pretty much the same vis-a-vis a TV host who calls the President a "racist" are trying to stifle freedom of speech.

It very much appears that you seem to think that freedom of speech is reserved to those who agree with your political views - namely that Obama should publicly called a "racist".

0 Replies

@Foxfyre,

Foxfyre wrote:

Again I would caution you against adding words to my posts. It makes you look exceedingly uncareful.

I don't expect you to have the ability to comprehend the concept, but it is possible to unwittingly espouse racist views without being an intentional racist. You have done that this morning yes, which I pointed out at the time. I don't know if you yourself are intentionally racist. I only know you are capable of espousing racist views and can appreciate that you probably can't see how they are racist.

I'm sure that goes for everyone, right? You're not exempt from that, right? You, too, are capable of espousing racist views and you'd still be unable to see how they are racist, right?

1 Reply

@old europe,

old europe wrote:

Foxfyre wrote:
Again I would caution you against adding words to my posts. It makes you look exceedingly uncareful.

I don't expect you to have the ability to comprehend the concept, but it is possible to unwittingly espouse racist views without being an intentional racist. You have done that this morning yes, which I pointed out at the time. I don't know if you yourself are intentionally racist. I only know you are capable of espousing racist views and can appreciate that you probably can't see how they are racist.

I'm sure that goes for everyone, right? You're not exempt from that, right? You, too, are capable of espousing racist views and you'd still be unable to see how they are racist, right?

Actually I think I would be able to see that my views are racist if or when they are. However, if I inadvertently made a racist statement somewhere, please point it out. Be cautioned, however, that I do not consider criticizing a person of color or any other minority group to necessarily be racist or any other kind of -ist. I DO think those ARE racist who think a black person is criticized only because he is black or that the one doing the criticizing 'hates blacks'. I DO think those who see black people as needing special protection as the most insidious racists of all and far more dangerous than those who simply despise people different from themselves.

1 Reply

@Foxfyre,

Just to repeat the question: perhaps you could explain which views I espoused which were racist in any way?

And to expand on it: perhaps you could explain which views Obama espoused which were racist in any way?

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Just to repeat the question: perhaps you could explain which views I espoused which were racist in any way?

And to expand on it: perhaps you could explain which views Obama espoused which were racist in any way?

Cycloptichorn

To infer that a black person cannot be racist toward other blacks or that white people cannot be racist toward other whites is in itself a racist statement. You did that and I referred to it at the time.

There are numerous racist statements cited by Obama in that link to the National Black Republicans that you say nobody gives a damn what they think.

1 Reply

@Foxfyre,

Foxfyre wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Just to repeat the question: perhaps you could explain which views I espoused which were racist in any way?

And to expand on it: perhaps you could explain which views Obama espoused which were racist in any way?

Cycloptichorn

To infer that a black person cannot be racist toward other blacks or that white people cannot be racist toward other whites is in itself a racist statement.

First of all, I didn't say that they 'cannot' be racist, but that it's a farcical idea; that is to say, people generally are not racist towards their own groups, b/c it's a self-defeating concept.

Second of all, this is not a racist idea. I'm starting to wonder if you know what the word racist means, in addition to the word Exponential. Perhaps you believe words mean whatever you want them to?

Quote:

You did that and I referred to it at the time.

There are numerous racist statements cited by Obama in that link to the National Black Republicans that you say nobody gives a damn what they think.

No, no; don't outsource this and try and dodge responsibility. YOU stated that he acted in a racist manner, YOU tell me what leads YOU to that belief. This is a typical way in which you attempt to avoid explaining silly claims you've made.

Cycloptichorn

2 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Foxfyre wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Just to repeat the question: perhaps you could explain which views I espoused which were racist in any way?

And to expand on it: perhaps you could explain which views Obama espoused which were racist in any way?

Cycloptichorn

To infer that a black person cannot be racist toward other blacks or that white people cannot be racist toward other whites is in itself a racist statement.

First of all, I didn't say that they 'cannot' be racist, but that it's a farcical idea; that is to say, people generally are not racist towards their own groups, b/c it's a self-defeating concept.

Why is it self defeating? Because you see them as different from each other? Because a race looks out for its own? And you don't see that as a racist concept?

I prefer to think of skin color as no different than hair color or eye color or height, weight, or ability to memorize information. I prefer to allow people to relate to each other as people instead of as members of a group. I want my President to look at people as people instead of as members of a group too.

Quote:

Second of all, this is not a racist idea. I'm starting to wonder if you know what the word racist means, in addition to the word Exponential. Perhaps you believe words mean whatever you want them to?

Any time you compartmentalize people based on race, it is a racist idea. One form of racism is seeing people different from yourselves as subservient to yourself and therefore in need of your rescue and protection. A well-meaning racist is often unable to see that such an attitude about people purely based on them being a member of a particular race subjects such people to a special kind of slavery that is counter productive for all concerned.

Quote:

Quote:
You did that and I referred to it at the time.

There are numerous racist statements cited by Obama in that link to the National Black Republicans that you say nobody gives a damn what they think.

No, no; don't outsource this and try and dodge responsibility. YOU stated that he acted in a racist manner, YOU tell me what leads YOU to that belief. This is a typical way in which you attempt to avoid explaining silly claims you've made.

Cycloptichorn

I'm not dodging responsibility. I would use many or most of the same illustrations they did. I agree with every one they used. It just saves me time typing them out to refer you to what is already there.

0 Replies

@Foxfyre,

Foxfyre wrote:

Do I agree with Beck? On some of his views no. On whether Obama is racist in some of his views, I do agree with that

Glenn Beck said:

Quote:

This president I think has exposed himself as a guy OVER AND OVER AND OVER again who has a deep-seated hatred for white people or the white culture . . . .

I'm saying he has a problem. He has a -- this guy is, I believe, a RACIST!

Foxfyre wrote:

I have frequently said that Obama argues from a racist point of view. Which is what Beck said re a different issue. If that is the same thing as saying that Obama can be racist, then yes, I say that Obama can be and sometimes is racist. Which is what Beck said relative to a specific (and different) issue being discussed.

0 Replies

Fox, you agree with this?

Quote:

The intimidation tactics by Black Panthers are a chilling reminder about how the Democrats not long ago used the Ku Klux Klan, the terrorist arm of the Democratic Party, to intimidate and terrorize Republican voters, black and white.

This is from your 'black republicans' link. Do you think the KKK are the 'terrorist arm' of the Democratic party?

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

They certainly were when they were doing terrorist acts. Look up some quotations from Democrats in Congress from the mid-50's back. And then perhaps you'll understand the reference and why people such as Strom Thurmond or Robert Byrd's strong racist backgrounds did not disqualify them from being elected to high office back then.

1 Reply

@Foxfyre,

Foxfyre wrote:

They certainly were when they were doing terrorist acts. Look up some quotations from Democrats in Congress from the mid-50's back. And then perhaps you'll understand the reference and why people such as Strom Thurmond or Robert Byrd's strong racist backgrounds did not disqualify them from being elected to high office back then.

I think that the point when you start accusing the KKK of being the 'terrorist wing' of the Democratic party, is the point which you lose some credibility. Yup. I'm going to have to be pretty firm on this one. It would be much, much better for your position if it was backed up by someone who isn't an obvious idiot and extreme partisan; and you should wonder how that reflects upon you, as well.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Changing the focus from Obama's racists statements are we? Imagine that. That must have become uncomfortable for you.

But do check out some of the stuff on this website. Perhaps it will give you an idea why conservative black people who have studied their history might think that the Democrats, who did NOT formally denounce the KKK until the last half of the 20th century, could be seen as endorsing the KKK's efforts to "keep the Negroes in their place" etc.

http://brianakira.wordpress.com/2008/02/10/the-kkk-wing-of-the-us-democrat-party/

While you're at it, consider Chris Dodd's endorsement of Robert Byrd that didn't generate a single murmur of criticism - and compare that with an innocuous statement by Trent Lott complimenting his friend, Strom Thurmond, on his 100th birthday. Lott was forced to resign his Senate leadership position based on that single statement.

1 Reply

@Foxfyre,

Foxfyre wrote:

Changing the focus from Obama's racists statements are we? Imagine that. That must have become uncomfortable for you.

Actually, it hasn't at all, and I'd love to circle back around to that. I'd like you to tell me which statements you consider to be racist, exactly, and why, specifically. I am willing to be you cannot do this, or are too cowardly to do so, because the truth is that he has not made statements of this type to any real degree.

Quote:

But do check out some of the stuff on this website. Perhaps it will give you an idea why conservative black people who have studied their history might think that the Democrats, who did NOT formally denounce the KKK until the last half of the 20th century, could be seen as endorsing the KKK's efforts to "keep the Negroes in their place" etc.

http://brianakira.wordpress.com/2008/02/10/the-kkk-wing-of-the-us-democrat-party/

Nah, I'm cool. See, none of this 'analysis' points out the fact that many of the racist 'Dixiecrats' switched parties when it became clear that they weren't going to be comfortable in the Dem party any longer. This is an attempt on your part to not acknowledge which party in America is now home to the racist beliefs held by these groups.

Why you feel the need to back up your opinions by linking to small blogs ran by crazy folks, I just don't know. Is this really where you get your news and history from? I mean, jeez. I know the MSM gives you a little too much realism, but the last two links you've presented are a little out there, to say the least.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Yup. You can't rebut any of it, so you turn back to attacking me. Smile

I win. I win. I win.

2 Replies

Meanwhile, Bob Beckel, one of the Democratic Party talking head advocates that I actually like, chimes in on malpractice insurance. And good for him.

Quote:

August 18, 2009
Dems' Ace in the Hole on Health Care: Tort Reform
By Bob Beckel

"It will be tough to make some of these changes if doctors feel like they're looking over their shoulders for fear of lawsuits... some doctors may feel the need to order more tests and treatments to avoid being legally vulnerable." (President Obama, American Medical Association June 2009).

"Anyone who denies there is a crisis in medical malpractice is probably a trial lawyer."
(Barack Obama 1996 Illinois State Senate race).

"I'm not advocating caps on malpractice awards." (President Obama, AMA convention June 2009).

The first two statements are right on Mr. President, reconsidering the third may well save healthcare reform.

It won't be easy. We Democrats have benefited mightily from the trial lawyers support and vice versa, but its time for these boys and girls to put some skin in the healthcare reform game and accept caps on pain and suffering malpractice awards. Why? Because Democrats advocating medical tort reform will fundamentally change the healthcare reform debate and in the process may save universal healthcare legislation.
MORE HERE:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/08/18/dems_ace_in_the_hole_on_health_care_tort_reform_97919.html

0 Replies

@Foxfyre,

Foxfyre wrote:

Yup. You can't rebut any of it, so you turn back to attacking me.

I win. I win. I win.

Declaring 'I win' in an online argument is usually a sign of defeat.

It's fallacious to say that I 'can't rebut any of it,' as I specifically did that in my last post. I've also requested three times now, for you to specifically address your allegations of racism on the part of Obama; you have all three times failed to do so. In debate, this is known as dropping points, and you would be penalized heavily on your score for doing so.'

As I predicted, you will not back up your cowardly accusations, b/c you can't do so. It's much easier to make hit-and-run statements against someone you don't like, declare 'I am right and you are wrong,' and move on to whatever new flavor of craziness you are having pimped out to you by your chain-emails and right-wing blogs today.

Or, prove me wrong; detail the specifics of what you consider to be Obama's racism. I dare ya.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know