Fear of a Black President

OK - Let's have us a black president.

0 Replies

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

If you think brutal cops only pick on black kids, you're mistaken. Smart mouth white kids get similar treatment.

You don't have to have a smart mouth if you're Black... or Hispanic for that matter.

T
K
O

0 Replies

.

Nobody Knows The Trouble I've Seen

0 Replies

I think that some people, especially conservatives, point to the failures of black leaders in Africa to support the notion that we must not elect a black.

I feel that this is a racist and invalid argument.

0 Replies

Advocate wrote:

I think that some people, especially conservatives, point to the failures of black leaders in Africa to support the notion that we must not elect a black.

I feel that this is a racist and invalid argument.

Racist and invalid, eh? I'll raise you idiotic to the extreme. I can understand why some of our European friends might think that might be an actual factor: They actually pay attention to world news and know there are such things as black leaders in Africa. American racism requires no such excuse... and the average idiot who may peddle such nonsense could likely name not one African leader as an example (without Googling one up). Do get used to hearing lots of bizarre reasons for not supporting Obama from lefties, though. It seems even anonymous posters like to keep their racism quiet, here. Just look for the obvious logic disconnects... like supporting a white candidate with a nearly identical set of campaign promises. Idea

And definitely get used to righties defending the fallen lefty's idiocy. Why wouldn't they? Were I a righty; I'd be laughing my ass off when out of earshot of one of the lefty dolts I'd no doubt be defending.

I just wonder when the righty's (and racists) will come out with a better knock than calling the politician a politician. Rolling Eyes

Clever one, that. I think it's gonna stick! Shocked

0 Replies

Advocate wrote:

I think that some people, especially conservatives, point to the failures of black leaders in Africa to support the notion that we must not elect a black.

I feel that this is a racist and invalid argument.

Please point to a post by more than one or two conservatives on A2K, or ANY post by a conservative on A2K or ANYWHERE that even remotely suggests that failures of black leaders in Africa support a notion that we must not elect a black to anything.

If you can find a post by somebody ANYWHERE suggesting such a thing, please follow with your evidence that such person is a conservative.

And if you cannot do either of these things, please admit that you made this up wholly out of your own extreme prejudice against conservatives. And then I would refer you to the conservative thread to get an education on what being conservative actually means and entails so you won't make such ignorant statements in the future.

0 Replies

Fox - That argument has been made here on A2K, it's true. You aren't being asked to defend it though. I think that kind of stupidity is not about party affiliations.

T
K
O

0 Replies

Diest TKO wrote:

Fox - That argument has been made here on A2K, it's true. You aren't being asked to defend it though. I think that kind of stupidity is not about party affiliations.

T
K
O

Sure the argument has been made. But I believe that it is unsupported by any evidence of fact and Advocate did specifically attribute it to Conservatives. As that would be such antithesis to anything American Conservatism stands for, I don't think he will ever be able to support it. And personally, I think an honorable person would retract it.

Conservatism and any party affiliation is not synonymous by the way.

0 Replies

We are talking about sentiment though. What "evidence of fact" would you be looking for? You agree that the argument has been made, nobody said that the argument was supported. Some people don't want a black president, and none of the reasons for not wanting one is going to be able to be supported with rational thought. Too bad for us (you included) that that kind of irrational thought doesn't disqualify a voter.

We have to first acknowledge that any two voters have the same power independent of how well they are prepared/educated/motivated. Then we just have to deal with the fact.

The discussion on what a black president will do or how they will act is in itself a very offensive topic for me personally, because it seems like a white majority gets to decide what is and isn't acceptable.

One minute I hear that blacks are voting for Obama because he is black. The next minute, I see a conservative article about a black supporter of McCain with the subtext of "is Obama losing the black vote?" I'm really tired of how the REPUBLICANS are playing the race card. It's as if they attack Obama with race, wait for the response, then when he does respond, they surround him and pretend all he does is talk about race. It would be a whole lot easier for them if he would do that.

T
K
O

0 Replies

Diest TKO wrote:

We are talking about sentiment though. What "evidence of fact" would you be looking for? You agree that the argument has been made, nobody said that the argument was supported. Some people don't want a black president, and none of the reasons for not wanting one is going to be able to be supported with rational thought. Too bad for us (you included) that that kind of irrational thought doesn't disqualify a voter.

We have to first acknowledge that any two voters have the same power independent of how well they are prepared/educated/motivated. Then we just have to deal with the fact.

The discussion on what a black president will do or how they will act is in itself a very offensive topic for me personally, because it seems like a white majority gets to decide what is and isn't acceptable.

One minute I hear that blacks are voting for Obama because he is black. The next minute, I see a conservative article about a black supporter of McCain with the subtext of "is Obama losing the black vote?" I'm really tired of how the REPUBLICANS are playing the race card. It's as if they attack Obama with race, wait for the response, then when he does respond, they surround him and pretend all he does is talk about race. It would be a whole lot easier for them if he would do that.

T
K
O

I do not believe the Republicans are playing the race card. I don't think it is the Republicans who are even tracking the 'black vote'. It sure isn't the GOP that's putting out articles "Black Republicans may vote for Obama" yadda yadda.

I do believe Obama supporters do try to create an image of racism that they hope will advantage their candidate. I will cite Advocate's post as an example of that. As well as yours.

I did object to Advocate's idiotic characterization of Conservatives not that I think he will retract it. As far as racism being a component of this election, of course it is. But my perception is that most references to race and racism have come from the Left, not the Right.

0 Replies

OCCOM BILL wrote:

Advocate wrote:
I think that some people, especially conservatives, point to the failures of black leaders in Africa to support the notion that we must not elect a black.

I feel that this is a racist and invalid argument.
Racist and invalid, eh? I'll raise you idiotic to the extreme. I can understand why some of our European friends might think that might be an actual factor: They actually pay attention to world news and know there are such things as black leaders in Africa. American racism requires no such excuse... and the average idiot who may peddle such nonsense could likely name not one African leader as an example (without Googling one up). Do get used to hearing lots of bizarre reasons for not supporting Obama from lefties, though. It seems even anonymous posters like to keep their racism quiet, here. Just look for the obvious logic disconnects... like supporting a white candidate with a nearly identical set of campaign promises.

And definitely get used to righties defending the fallen lefty's idiocy. Why wouldn't they? Were I a righty; I'd be laughing my ass off when out of earshot of one of the lefty dolts I'd no doubt be defending.

I just wonder when the righty's (and racists) will come out with a better knock than calling the politician a politician. Clever one, that. I think it's gonna stick!

I just wonder how Obama supporters can make this "Of course he's a politician" argument with straight faces.

There is a reason the guy has attracted such support and it's not his policies. We all know they are almost identical to those of Hillary Clinton, so how did this guy come from nowhere and defeat a powerhouse politician who just about every expert assumed, going into the primary season, had the nomination locked up?

He did it by eloquently and vigorously claiming to be a new and different kind of politician. Belief in this claim is what has led to a huge surge of new people becoming interested in this election. If you asked Democrats a month or so ago why they preferred Obama to Clinton or Edwards they would have answered:

1) He's not tied up in the old ways and means of business as usual politics
2) He's an inspiring leader
3) He's black

(It would not have been because of some subtle technical differences in their governmental healthcare plans)

The order might be different, but that he is a New Politician would always be in the top three. Not a maverick like McCain promotes himself, but a brand new kind of politician.

Do you mean to suggest that you really do not see how falling back into the politics of influence and money, and doing a 180 degree on strong positions taken only months to ago in order to move to the center for the genral election, is not a pretty dramatic (if not damaging) turn of events for your candidate?

I was never going to vote for the guy, and his movement towards the center hasn't changed that opinion. An Obama pointed towards the center is still too far left for me.

He's risking losing a lot of those new Democrats who have become interested in this election because of him, not his party. That's fine with me though, but you guys, with this "Of course he's a politician," are whistling past the graveyard.

And it's not just righties and racists who are drawing attention to his dramatic change. So has the NY Times editorial board. They may be racists by they sure aren't righties.

0 Replies

You can preach that crap to the Bear, Finn. Don't bother rolling it on me.

1) He's still a Washington outsider
2) He's still inspiring
3) He's still black

(Forgive me for paraphrasing you back to reasonable.)

Bush, Bush, Clinton, Clinton, Bush, Bush, ?
And McCain's been in Washington just as long...
Yeah, I think it's safe to say Obama is still plenty fresh in Washington compared to Clinton or McCain.

Now as much fun as you've had describing Obama people as fools following a new messiah, I've consistently been laughing at that as the nonsense it is.

Is he 10 times more inspiring than Kerry? Yep.
Is he 10 times more charismatic than Kerry? Yep.
Are these two phenomena related? Yep.
Could this be it, rather than all the Messiah BS? Yep.

From the beginning of his campaign; he's campaigned brilliantly. Change? Good Gawd Finn, does promoting change sound even remotely like a change from any other politician's dog and pony show to you? Really? How many buzz words are there to choose from? And what kind of damn fool politician wouldn't adopt one? That he happens to be charismatic enough to sell it to more people is certainly a change from what the Democrats have fielded lately, but that's about it.

Do I find his more pointed even while less antagonistic way of making his points attractive? Yes I do. Do I think there's a shot he'll behave with his God given intelligence over Party allegiance? I hope so. I'll hope the same of McCain if he wins, btw.

Now being as he hasn't spent the last couple decades in Washington; I am inclined to believe he might not be as thoroughly indoctrinated into the bi-partisan power struggle. This I'm so sick and tired of; I consider new and intelligent better, almost in and of itself. I haven't had a cup of Kool-Aid in about 20 years, but go on with the next brainwashing/messiah talking point that comes to mind.

0 Replies

Taken from an article from the NYT:

By his own admission, Mr. McCain is not a great orator. He is ill-suited to lecterns, which often dwarf his small stature, and he tends to sound as if he is reading his lines, not speaking them. His shortcomings have been accentuated in a two-man race, particularly because the other man - Senator Barack Obama, the presumptive Democratic nominee �- can often dazzle on stage.

***************

Looks like McCain will have plenty of opportunities to mis-pronounce and mis-identify countries as he has in the past. People are gonna wonder if McCain is too old or his memory is going to be a big problem.

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

Taken from an article from the NYT:

By his own admission, Mr. McCain is not a great orator. He is ill-suited to lecterns, which often dwarf his small stature, and he tends to sound as if he is reading his lines, not speaking them. His shortcomings have been accentuated in a two-man race, particularly because the other man - Senator Barack Obama, the presumptive Democratic nominee �- can often dazzle on stage.

***************

Looks like McCain will have plenty of opportunities to mis-pronounce and mis-identify countries as he has in the past. People are gonna wonder if McCain is too old or his memory is going to be a big problem.

Well thanks for that perfect non sequitur CI.

0 Replies

OCCOM BILL wrote:

You can preach that crap to the Bear, Finn. Don't bother rolling it on me.

1) He's still a Washington outsider
2) He's still inspiring
3) He's still black

(Forgive me for paraphrasing you back to reasonable.)

Bush, Bush, Clinton, Clinton, Bush, Bush, ?
And McCain's been in Washington just as long...
Yeah, I think it's safe to say Obama is still plenty fresh in Washington compared to Clinton or McCain.

Now as much fun as you've had describing Obama people as fools following a new messiah, I've consistently been laughing at that as the nonsense it is.

Is he 10 times more inspiring than Kerry? Yep.
Is he 10 times more charismatic than Kerry? Yep.
Are these two phenomena related? Yep.
Could this be it, rather than all the Messiah BS? Yep.

From the beginning of his campaign; he's campaigned brilliantly. Change? Good Gawd Finn, does promoting change sound even remotely like a change from any other politician's dog and pony show to you? Really? How many buzz words are there to choose from? And what kind of damn fool politician wouldn't adopt one? That he happens to be charismatic enough to sell it to more people is certainly a change from what the Democrats have fielded lately, but that's about it.

Do I find his more pointed even while less antagonistic way of making his points attractive? Yes I do. Do I think there's a shot he'll behave with his God given intelligence over Party allegiance? I hope so. I'll hope the same of McCain if he wins, btw.

Now being as he hasn't spent the last couple decades in Washington; I am inclined to believe he might not be as thoroughly indoctrinated into the bi-partisan power struggle. This I'm so sick and tired of; I consider new and intelligent better, almost in and of itself. I haven't had a cup of Kool-Aid in about 20 years, but go on with the next brainwashing/messiah talking point that comes to mind.

Thou protests too much Bill.

I've not accused you of naming Obama your messiah or drinking an ounce of Kool-Aid. I have argued that you place too much importance in eloquence, but that's something entirely different.

If you are able to rationalize away your candidate's backtracking which is so obvious he has been scolded for it by the NY Times, then good for you. You'll be able to hold on to the Obama buzz when you flip the lever for him on November 2nd.

The fact that he hasn't been in Washington for the past two decades is a weak foundation for an assertion that he is a Washington Outsider. Clearly he's a quick learner.

0 Replies

Believe it or not, a couple of conservative friends of mine, who are intelligent and well-educated, referred to African leaders.

It is funny to read the stuff from the right in this thread about how it is so nonbiased. I remember that it was the right that led the opposition to such things as the civil-rights, voter-rights, and other such legislation, as well as a Martin Luther King Day.

0 Replies

Advocate wrote:

Believe it or not, a couple of conservative friends of mine, who are intelligent and well-educated, referred to African leaders.

It is funny to read the stuff from the right in this thread about how it is so nonbiased. I remember that it was the right that led the opposition to such things as the civil-rights, voter-rights, and other such legislation, as well as a Martin Luther King Day.

Spot on! How did you enjoy my "perfect non-sequitur?" LOL

0 Replies

Advocate wrote:

It is funny to read the stuff from the right in this thread about how it is so nonbiased. I remember that it was the right that led the opposition to such things as the civil-rights, voter-rights, and other such legislation, as well as a Martin Luther King Day.

Do you believe that "the left" is unbiased? or, for that matter, that you are unbiased?

The fact is, it was the Democrat party that for decades stood in the way of any legislation intended to break down the systematic exclusion of Blacks from political processes in the South. When the moment for change finally came, it was a coalition of Republicans and northern state Democrats in the Congress that enacted the changes. However, that is merely a matter of demonstrable fact that may get in the way of your prefabricated conclusions on the matter.

As for "civil rights", I suppose much depends on which particular rights you are talking about. "The Left" tends to favor relatively sweeping, coercive mandates governing the behavior of individuals and institutions - mandated racial quotas in schools & universities; even employment and housing patterns are examples - while "the right" tends to resist such restrictions on individual choice, preferring voluntary action as a better long range solution.

However these distinctions all require some thought, reflection, and a willingness to consider other points of view. Some find that very difficult.

0 Replies

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

Thou protests too much Bill.

I've not accused you of naming Obama your messiah or drinking an ounce of Kool-Aid. I have argued that you place too much importance in eloquence, but that's something entirely different.

If you are able to rationalize away your candidate's backtracking which is so obvious he has been scolded for it by the NY Times, then good for you. You'll be able to hold on to the Obama buzz when you flip the lever for him on November 2nd.

The fact that he hasn't been in Washington for the past two decades is a weak foundation for an assertion that he is a Washington Outsider. Clearly he's a quick learner.

Quick learner, yes, and I would have little faith in an outsider who wasn't. The point is; he hasn't had decades to develop his clique... he didn't rise to the top through decades of carefully executed compromise (favor borrowing that will need to be paid)... which inevitably has to erode a politician's free will. This, in my opinion, is the recipe for a commander in chief that leads his party, rather than follows... maybe even in a Teddy Roosevelt kind of way. The buck stops here, etc. I can understand how a confident, competent lefty in chief would be unappealing to you.

But not to lefties.

Of the "insiders", John McCain has earned as much of my respect as any man out there, precisely because he hasn't consistently caved to the party line. The liberals will point to his primary pandering... which will continue through the general, though perhaps to a lesser extent; and scream, "flip-flopper!" But this too, is par for the course, and any man unwilling to compromise will never be in a position to lead.

I didn't mean to suggest that you ever accused me of messianic beliefs, Kool-Aid, etc... but you've ladled that over the Obama group in general for quite some time. Indeed; it is your own past labeling/rhetoric that you now rely on to be incredulous at the stark hypocrisy you now see. This is an effective strategy, so I expect it to continue, just as calling Obama's opponent McSame is utter nonsense to those in the know, but effective just the same.

I'll remind you that the lefties' seeming utter devotion to Obama is nothing new. The only real difference is that their doubtless faith is now in support of Obama, rather than in opposition to George Bush, as it was 4 years ago (this in itself, is a positive change). Even peeps like Rox are no more fanatical than fools like Dookie were then, remember?

As an Independent; I find myself in the unique position of respecting both General candidates a great deal, which affords me the luxury of recognizing their strengths as well as criticizing excesses from either side when I encounter them. Whatever you do; don't take these criticisms personally because they most certainly are not personal.

Regards

0 Replies

OCCOM BILL wrote:

As an Independent; I find myself in the unique position of respecting both General candidates a great deal, which affords me the luxury of recognizing their strengths as well as criticizing excesses from either side when I encounter them.

Perhaps so, however, that doesn't necessarily immunize you from any of the many delusions or errors that beset everyone.

It seems to me that you are far too willing to ascribe racism or other neurotic fears as the necessary explanation for anyone or any group that is presumed to oppose Obama. It seems to me that this is a fairly cheap shot that ignores other evident issues that do indeed have a rational basis; just as is the straw punching bag of the archtype American racist that you so often draw on to illustrate "the opposition" to your favored candidate. These things are, of course, real and true in some cases, but it is far from clear that they represent most of what is going on now. Simply assuming it is true or asserting it repeatedly doesn't make it so.

0 Replies

Fear of a Black President

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know