PDA

View Full Version : Obama African Americans for Obama


HonestChieffan
02-17-2012, 07:08 AM
How does this strike you? I know that his goal is to get elected at any price but is this the post racial America he talked about in the last go round?

http://www.barackobama.com/african-americans/

blaise
02-17-2012, 07:16 AM
"I have your votes. Now I need your money, too."

Bob Dole
02-17-2012, 07:21 AM
Look forward to the ads on Bounce TV.

Garcia Bronco
02-17-2012, 08:24 AM
The inferiority complex amongst a large majority of black americans is amusing.

notorious
02-17-2012, 08:40 AM
"White Americans for anyone but Obama."


Doesn't have the same ring to it.......

listopencil
02-17-2012, 11:28 PM
It's part of a chain. I saw nine groups total, each of them being some group "for Obama". Looks like a slick way to collect contributions as quickly as possible.

Slainte
02-18-2012, 12:38 AM
And no White History month either, right?

mikey23545
02-18-2012, 04:23 AM
As I have always maintained, there is no one more racist or more divisive than a modern American liberal.

stevieray
02-18-2012, 12:40 PM
As I have always maintained, there is no one more racist or more divisive than a modern American liberal.

....and perfectly lllustrated in the previous post.

La literatura
02-18-2012, 12:51 PM
As I have always maintained, there is no one more racist or more divisive than a modern American liberal.

LMAO

There's no easier way to admit ignorance than to say that.

La literatura
02-18-2012, 01:07 PM
Slave owner: this black person is my property, undeserving of the guarantees of the Constitution.

Modern liberal: I support affirmative action methods to help increase black people's education.

Mikey and stevieray: the second person is more racist than the first person. He feels his race is inherently superior to the black person.

mikey23545
02-18-2012, 01:22 PM
Slave owner: this black person is my property, undeserving of the guarantees of the Constitution.

Modern liberal: I support affirmative action methods to help increase black people's education.

Mikey and stevieray: the second person is more racist than the first person. He feels his race is inherently superior to the black person.

Jesus...LMAO You feel conservatives are equivalent to slave owners?

Listen you stupid little shit, the only modern day slave holders are the liberals who have tried to turn blacks into social cripples with their horrendous government programs designed to instill in the minds of minorities that they are inferior to whites and incapable of achieving success without handouts and special breaks.

They use them as political pawns with the "divide and conquer" strategy of convincing every minority that the hobgoblin white male is their bitter enemy, and that all conservatives are demons, and that only the Democrat Party can save them. It is a filthy, disgusting tactic that appeals to the weaknesses in the human soul. When successful they have guaranteed votes for life from people who are dependent on the government for their existence.

Terribly effective, and terribly devastating to millions of victims.

La literatura
02-18-2012, 01:31 PM
Jesus...LMAO You feel conservatives are equivalent to slave owners?

LMAO You don't read no good, eh? I say nothing about conservatives in my post, yet you act all pissed off about my alleged equating of conservatives with slave owners. AND THIS IS AFTER YOU SAY THAT MODERN LIBERALS ARE MORE RACIST THAN ANYONE EVER (which must include slave owners)!

Instead of retracting, like a normal human being would, you continue: liberals are modern day slave holders (which is ambiguous, but could be read as liberals = people who turn blacks into social cripples):

Listen you stupid little shit, the only modern day slave holders are the liberals who have tried to turn blacks into social cripples with their horrendous government programs designed to instill in the minds of minorities that they are inferior to whites and incapable of achieving success without handouts and special breaks.

They use them as political pawns with the "divide and conquer" strategy of convincing every minority that the hobgoblin white male is their bitter enemy, and that all conservatives are demons, and that only the Democrat Party can save them. It is a filthy, disgusting tactic that appeals to the weaknesses in the human soul. Terribly effective, and terribly devastating to millions of victims.

La literatura
02-18-2012, 01:41 PM
How I know the voice of a divisive partisan who doesn't care about minorities: when affirmative legal measures for irradicating racial discrimination is not recognized as a rational -- not best, not better, but mere rational -- means for helping eliminate racial inequality.

Yes, I support Brown v. Board and Loving v. Virginia. I support the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

This is liberalism, and according to some of the more despicable people in this forum, I am worse than a slave-holding Southern racist of the 19th century.

La literatura
02-18-2012, 01:53 PM
In 1967, President Johnson signed Executive Order 11246, which in part, commanded government contractors to take affirmative action to promote equal opportunity for women and minorities when hiring for projects. This regulates a placement goal for women and minorities.

I support the Order. This, it is said, is more racist than a slave-holding plantation master of the 19th century. There is zero decency, and zero integrity in that charge.

La literatura
02-18-2012, 02:00 PM
A typical modern liberal viewpoint supports a state university's medical school admission process that includes setting aside 16 of the 100 seats for blacks, in order to, in part 1) reduce the historical deficit of minorities in medical professions 2) counter the effects of social discrimination . . .

This, it is charged, is more racist than the slave master who looked upon his slaves as property, meant for no other purpose than increase the profit of the plantation.

Deberg_1990
02-18-2012, 02:03 PM
I want to see African Americans for Romney get some run on CNN and FOX

Donger
02-18-2012, 02:03 PM
Man jenson. You sure have a lot of White guilt.

La literatura
02-18-2012, 02:10 PM
It is impossible to take an honest and objective study of American history and conclude that black people have historically not been disadvantaged in multiple ways. Is that guilt, or is just that honesty?

In my view, racial classification, even in its positive sense, is often-misguided or distracting in today's society. Nevertheless, I will defend against the charge that holds it is worse, or equal to, or on same degree remotely similar to, slavery.

blaise
02-18-2012, 02:15 PM
Is there a lot of former slave owners still alive or am I missing something?

La literatura
02-18-2012, 02:20 PM
Is there a lot of former slave owners still alive or am I missing something?

Slave owners? You're worried about slave owners? Apparently, you are missing something. American is currently facing a more greater evil than slave-owning: supporting affirmative action.

Donger
02-18-2012, 02:24 PM
It is impossible to take an honest and objective study of American history and conclude that black people have historically not been disadvantaged in multiple ways. Is that guilt, or is just that honesty?

In my view, racial classification, even in its positive sense, is often-misguided or distracting in today's society. Nevertheless, I will defend against the charge that holds it is worse, or equal to, or on same degree remotely similar to, slavery.

Historically, yes. That is accurate. Whether or not you feel guilt about being the member of the race who put Blacks at a disadvantage is up to you.

La literatura
02-18-2012, 02:29 PM
Historically, yes. That is accurate. Whether or not you feel guilt about being the member of the race who put Blacks at a disadvantage is up to you.

I feel absolutely no personal guilt or responsibility for it. Personal guilt and responsibility is a subject for the judicial system (and I feel confident in my innocence). Social policies are a matter for the legislature, which is graced with the benefit of collectivism and historical context.

La literatura
02-18-2012, 02:37 PM
How does this strike you? I know that his goal is to get elected at any price but is this the post racial America he talked about in the last go round?

As far as the actual issue of this thread, I view it as one of campaign administrative convenience and effectiveness. I have no strong feelings against it.

But, for honesty's sake (which I know you will appreciate), Barack Obama never talked about a post-racial America in his last campaign. Consider this segment from his most prominent speech on race in his first campaign:

"But race is an issue that I believe this nation cannot afford to ignore right now. We would be making the same mistake that Reverend Wright made in his offending sermons about America - to simplify and stereotype and amplify the negative to the point that it distorts reality.

The fact is that the comments that have been made and the issues that have surfaced over the last few weeks reflect the complexities of race in this country that we've never really worked through - a part of our union that we have yet to perfect. And if we walk away now, if we simply retreat into our respective corners, we will never be able to come together and solve challenges like health care, or education, or the need to find good jobs for every American."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWe7wTVbLUU&feature=player_embedded

So why do you say Obama talked about post-racial America? I don't think it's you actually trying to deceive people, for once. I think you legitimately think Obama talked about post-racial classifications as a result of his presidency in his first campaign. Why?

Donger
02-18-2012, 02:38 PM
I feel absolutely no personal guilt or responsibility for it. Personal guilt and responsibility is a subject for the judicial system (and I feel confident in my innocence). Social policies are a matter for the legislature, which is graced with the benefit of collectivism and historical context.

Oh, well that's good. Does it give you pride to be such a staunch and vocal opponent of historical Black persecution?

La literatura
02-18-2012, 02:51 PM
Pride, in what sense? In the sense that I feel comfortable knowing that of several paths of analysis of American history, I support the one that finds historical black persecution wrong and immoral, then yes. In the sense that I am in love with myself because of that support, then no. It takes very little effort for me to sit here and condemn black persecution. It's almost like defending the greatness of beauty of Michelangelo's Sistine Chapel or landing on the moon.

Let me ask you a question: do you equate modern liberal policies of affirmative action as something more evil or an equivalence of evil with slavery, as mikey and stevieray do?

mikey23545
02-18-2012, 03:07 PM
Slave owners? You're worried about slave owners? Apparently, you are missing something. American is currently facing a more greater evil than slave-owning: supporting affirmative action keeping minorities down on the State plantation.

More greater? LMAO

Anyway, FYP.

Donger
02-18-2012, 03:13 PM
Pride, in what sense? In the sense that I feel comfortable knowing that of several paths of analysis of American history, I support the one that finds historical black persecution wrong and immoral, then yes. In the sense that I am in love with myself because of that support, then no. It takes very little effort for me to sit here and condemn black persecution. It's almost like defending the greatness of beauty of Michelangelo's Sistine Chapel or landing on the moon.

Let me ask you a question: do you equate modern liberal policies of affirmative action as something more evil or an equivalence of evil with slavery, as mikey and stevieray do?

Does it make you feel like you are a better person than those who do not share your views (or choose not to be as vocal)?

I don't know that mikey or stevieray believe that.

La literatura
02-18-2012, 03:20 PM
Does it make you feel like you are a better person than those who do not share your views (or choose not to be as vocal)?

No feelings of superiority at all, in terms of wholeness of my person. Would you like me to feel superior? Would that please you? Would it make you feel like a better person if I said it made me feel like a better person?

But, on the particular subject of disfavoring white supremacy, I find my support a much greater, more moral, position than those who don't find anything wrong with slavery and racism.

I don't know that mikey or stevieray believe that.

Do you equate modern liberal policies of affirmative action as something more evil or an equivalence of evil with slavery? And what is your interpretation of this: "there is no one more racist or more divisive than a modern American liberal."

La literatura
02-18-2012, 03:23 PM
More greater? LMAO

Anyway, FYP.

It would be a much different question if your position was "Affirmative action hurts minorities." However, you have indicated a different strain of thought, one that can be said like this: "Modern liberals want to hurt minorities by enacting affirmative action measures."

The first is a legitimate argument. The second is pathetic. Your posts in this thread are utterly pathetic, even if your grammar is satisfactory.

Donger
02-18-2012, 03:32 PM
No feelings of superiority at all, in terms of wholeness of my person. Would you like me to feel superior? Would that please you? Would it make you feel like a better person if I said it made me feel like a better person?

But, on the particular subject of disfavoring white supremacy, I find my support a much greater, more moral, position than those who don't find anything wrong with slavery and racism.

And that doesn't give you pride, eh? I think it does (which is fine).

Do you equate modern liberal policies of affirmative action as something more evil or an equivalence of evil with slavery? And what is your interpretation of this: "there is no one more racist or more divisive than a modern American liberal."

I don't see how you can read that statement and equate it with modern-day racism with slavery, honestly.

Donger
02-18-2012, 03:34 PM
It would be a much different question if your position was "Affirmative action hurts minorities." However, you have indicated a different strain of thought, one that can be said like this: "Modern liberals want to hurt minorities by enacting affirmative action measures."

The first is a legitimate argument. The second is pathetic. Your posts in this thread are utterly pathetic, even if your grammar is satisfactory.

Do liberals have a vested interest in maintaining a historically-Democratic voting block, namely Blacks?

La literatura
02-18-2012, 03:37 PM
And that doesn't give you pride, eh? I think it does (which is fine).

I already discussed the issue of pride, and told you it depended on what you mean by pride, a term that has a lot of different meanings.

I don't see how you can read that statement and equate it with modern-day racism with slavery, honestly.

You don't see how I can read that statement and think mikey equates modern American liberals with historical racism?

stevieray
02-18-2012, 03:37 PM
Slave owner: this black person is my property, undeserving of the guarantees of the Constitution.

Modern liberal: I support affirmative action methods to help increase black people's education.

Mikey and stevieray: the second person is more racist than the first person. He feels his race is inherently superior to the black person.

no coincidence you brought up the term racist

you are racist...your need to keep them a victim serves only you. you think they need people like you to succeed/stand up for them. if you spewed this crap to black people, they would tell you to STFU for pretending to think you know their plight.

that said, can't fault you for your white gulit..it's been spoonfed to you your whole life, what I can fault you for is bragging about your knowledge of history when you don't shit about the history and the contribution of blacks since the days of the revolution.

you want to be a lawyer, right? First black Judge was Wentworth Chestle in 1768

La literatura
02-18-2012, 03:40 PM
Do liberals have a vested interest in maintaining a historically-Democratic voting block, namely Blacks?

Could you rephrase this to make it more clear?

La literatura
02-18-2012, 03:50 PM
no coincidence you brought up the term racist

you are racist...your need to keep them a victim serves only you. you think they need people like you to stand up for them. if you spewed this crap to black people, they would tell you to STFU for pretending to think you know their plight.

I didn't call you a racist, nor did I call mikey a racist. However, you and mikey imply modern liberals are racists, and you flat out call me a racist. That's where you want this conversation to go, which is unfortunate. Affirmative action does not serve me in any way. If affirmative action does more detriment to minority equality, then I support its removal. But I don't think it does. I think it's a policy of secondary best. My feelings are subject to change depending on the facts.

that said, can't fault you for your white gulit..it's been spoonfed to you your whole life, what I can fault you for is bragging about your knowledge of history when you don't shit about the history and the contribution of blacks since the days of the revolution

you want to be a lawyer, right? First black Judge was Wentworth Chestle in 1768.

I have no personal guilt or feelings of responsibility for the historic racism towards blacks in America. But do not try to whitewash American history. It was filled with racism, slavery, and hatred towards blacks. And the single person of Wentworth Cheswell does nothing to disprove that.

It seems as if you dispute that racism was a prevailing and significant force in American history, which would be absurd. That blacks have contributed to America since the Revolution (and before, as you point out) does not change the historical truth that racism is one of the most important and unfortunate chapters of America's historical identity. Do you dispute that?

Donger
02-18-2012, 04:21 PM
You don't see how I can read that statement and think mikey equates modern American liberals with historical racism?

You mentioned slavery and slave-owners, specifically. Now, you are changing that to just "historical racism?"

Donger
02-18-2012, 04:24 PM
Could you rephrase this to make it more clear?

No.

La literatura
02-18-2012, 04:28 PM
You mentioned slavery and slave-owners, specifically. Now, you are changing that to just "historical racism?"

Slavery and slave-owners are a part of "historical racism." I am not narrowing the description.

Mikey said "there is no one more racist or more divisive than a modern American liberal."

No one. As in, slave-owners are less racist or equally racist than a modern American liberal. As in, the Ku Klux Klan is less or equally racist than a modern American liberal. As in, today's skinheads, neo-Nazis, and white supremacy gangs are less or equally racist than a modern American liberal.

Donger
02-18-2012, 04:32 PM
Slavery and slave-owners are a part of "historical racism." I am not narrowing the description.

Mikey said "there is no one more racist or more divisive than a modern American liberal."

No one. As in, slave-owners are less racist or equally racist than a modern American liberal. As in, the Ku Klux Klan is less or equally racist than a modern American liberal. As in, today's skinheads, neo-Nazis, and white supremacy gangs are less or equally racist than a modern American liberal.

Are you aware of any modern-day, American slave-owners?

La literatura
02-18-2012, 04:34 PM
No.

Then tell me if this is somewhat what you are asking: "Do most liberals have an interest in seeing a robust Democratic party, including keeping a majority of blacks voting Democrat?"

Donger
02-18-2012, 04:34 PM
Slavery and slave-owners are a part of "historical racism." I am not narrowing the description.

No, you aren't narrowing the description. You are widening it. From the specific (slave-owners) to the general (historical racism).

Donger
02-18-2012, 04:35 PM
Then tell me if this is somewhat what you are asking: "Do most liberals have an interest in seeing a robust Democratic party, including keeping a majority of blacks voting Democrat?"

Okay, if that makes you happy, sure.

La literatura
02-18-2012, 04:36 PM
Are you aware of any modern-day, American slave-owners?

I am not. Does that change the meaning of mikey's statement? "there is no one more racist or more divisive than a modern American liberal."

A "modern American liberal". Not just an American liberal, which suggests to look only in modernity, but a modern American liberal, which suggests a comparison of different eras can be made.

La literatura
02-18-2012, 04:36 PM
No, you aren't narrowing the description. You are widening it. From the specific (slave-owners) to the general (historical racism).

LMAO Correct. That's what I said. I am not narrowing the description.

Donger
02-18-2012, 04:41 PM
I am not. Does that change the meaning of mikey's statement? "there is no one more racist or more divisive than a modern American liberal."

A "modern American liberal". Not just an American liberal, which suggests to look only in modernity, but a modern American liberal, which suggests a comparison of different eras can be made.

Well, it sounded like you were trying to make the case that modern-day slave-owners were being equated with racist liberals, no? If there are no modern-day slave owners, what was your point?

La literatura
02-18-2012, 04:41 PM
Okay, if that makes you happy, sure.

Okay, I think that's accurate. Most liberals have an interest in the Democratic party being strong, and would prefer to keep blacks voting Democratic. I think most liberals would believe that today's Democrats care more about racial issues and helping minorities than Republicans. It is believed by many that Republican leaders play to or allow racial undertones in order to maintain support.

Donger
02-18-2012, 04:41 PM
LMAO Correct. That's what I said. I am not narrowing the description.

I didn't state that you were narrowing the description.

Donger
02-18-2012, 04:43 PM
Okay, I think that's accurate. Most liberals have an interest in the Democratic party being strong, and would prefer to keep blacks voting Democratic. I think most liberals would believe that today's Democrats care more about racial issues and helping minorities than Republicans. It is believed by many that Republican leaders play to or allow racial undertones in order to maintain support.

Do they care about racial issues because they really care or do they pretend to care because they want to maintain a hold of their reliable voting block? I would guess somewhere in the middle.

mikey23545
02-18-2012, 04:43 PM
Slavery and slave-owners are a part of "historical racism." I am not narrowing the description.

Mikey said "there is no one more racist or more divisive than a modern American liberal."

No one. As in, slave-owners are less racist or equally racist than a modern American liberal. As in, the Ku Klux Klan is less or equally racist than a modern American liberal. As in, today's skinheads, neo-Nazis, and white supremacy gangs are less or equally racist than a modern American liberal.

Take things a little too literally, do you?

First of all, I was not speaking of all humans back to the days of Homo Sapiens vs Neanderthal man. Use your young undeveloped brain to infer context once in a while.

I was obviously comparing modern day liberals to modern day conservatives in the political arena. How you could possibly take that to mean I was comparing a 21st century liberal to a slave owner from a few hundred years ago is beyond me.

I certainly feel for your law school professors in the coming years.

La literatura
02-18-2012, 04:44 PM
Well, it sounded like you were trying to make the case that modern-day slave-owners were being equated with racist liberals, no? If there are no modern-day slave owners, what was your point?

Oh, you misunderstood. I never tried to make the case that modern-day slave-owners are being equated with racist liberals.

Here is my point: It is ridiculous to say that "there is no one more racist or more divisive than a modern American liberal" because that would mean that modern American liberals are more racist or just as racist as 1) slave-holders of the 19th century; 2) opponents of civil rights, and proponents of Jim Crow, after the Civil War, like the KKK; 3) today's racist, skinhead, neo-Nazi, white-supremacy groups.

La literatura
02-18-2012, 04:45 PM
I didn't state that you were narrowing the description.

I never stated you did state I was narrowing the description.

La literatura
02-18-2012, 04:46 PM
Do they care about racial issues because they really care or do they pretend to care because they want to maintain a hold of their reliable voting block? I would guess somewhere in the middle.

I think most American liberals actually have a sincere concern about racial equality.

Donger
02-18-2012, 04:46 PM
Oh, you misunderstood. I never tried to make the case that modern-day slave-owners are being equated with racist liberals.

Here is my point: It is ridiculous to say that "there is no one more racist or more divisive than a modern American liberal" because that would mean that modern American liberals are more racist or just as racist as 1) slave-holders of the 19th century; 2) opponents of civil rights, and proponents of Jim Crow, after the Civil War, like the KKK; 3) today's racist, skinhead, neo-Nazi, white-supremacy groups.

I can understand 2 and 3, but not 1. Since there are no modern-day slave owners, see? Mikey was obviously referring to modern times. That is why he wrote, "modern."

Donger
02-18-2012, 04:47 PM
I never stated you did state I was narrowing the description.

Why did you widen it?

Donger
02-18-2012, 04:47 PM
I think most American liberals actually have a sincere concern about racial equality.

That's nice.

La literatura
02-18-2012, 04:49 PM
Take things a little too literally, do you?

First of all, I was not speaking of all humans back to the days of Homo Sapiens vs Neanderthal man. Use your young undeveloped brain to infer context once in a while.

I was obviously comparing modern day liberals to modern day conservatives in the political arena. How you could possibly take that to mean I was comparing a 21st century liberal to a slave owner from a few hundred years ago is beyond me.

I certainly feel for your law school professors in the coming years.

"there is no one more racist or more divisive than a modern American liberal."

Yes, a literal reading of this suggests that no one is more racist or more divisive than a modern American liberal, including slave-owners of the 19th century.

And then you say: "the only modern day slave holders are the liberals . . ."

You are a poster-child for vague generalizations. If you want to be taken seriously, tighten up your sentences.

La literatura
02-18-2012, 04:51 PM
I can understand 2 and 3, but not 1. Since there are no modern-day slave owners, see? Mikey was obviously referring to modern times. That is why he wrote, "modern."

Writing "modern" actually seemed to me to invite comparisons to "non-modern" groups. Had he just said, "No one is more racist than American liberals," that would seem to be to actually narrow the scope into modern-day people.

In which case, I would still think it's absurd.

But he was very ambiguous. It is not "obvious" as you say.

La literatura
02-18-2012, 04:53 PM
Why did you widen it?

It was unconscious.

La literatura
02-18-2012, 04:57 PM
That's nice.

Do you think Republicans are too passive about addressing racism in their own constituencies, or do you not think there is any problem of racism in Republican constituents?

alanm
02-18-2012, 05:08 PM
Take things a little too literally, do you?

First of all, I was not speaking of all humans back to the days of Homo Sapiens vs Neanderthal man. Use your young undeveloped brain to infer context once in a while.

I was obviously comparing modern day liberals to modern day conservatives in the political arena. How you could possibly take that to mean I was comparing a 21st century liberal to a slave owner from a few hundred years ago is beyond me.

I certainly feel for your law school professors in the coming years.Oh Gawd.. That's all this country needs is another f*cking lawyer. :shake:

mikey23545
02-18-2012, 05:19 PM
"there is no one more racist or more divisive than a modern American liberal."

Yes, a literal reading of this suggests that no one is more racist or more divisive than a modern American liberal, including slave-owners of the 19th century.

And then you say: "the only modern day slave holders are the liberals . . ."

You are a poster-child for vague generalizations. If you want to be taken seriously, tighten up your sentences.

If you want to be taken seriously, tighten up your ability to reason.

No thinking person could have interpreted my statement the way you did.

mikey23545
02-18-2012, 05:22 PM
Do you think Republicans are too passive about addressing racism in their own constituencies, or do you not think there is any problem of racism in Republican constituents?

There is certainly far more racism in the ranks of Democrats. The blatant over-reaction and over-compensation in their words and actions makes it quite apparent.

La literatura
02-18-2012, 05:26 PM
If you want to be taken seriously, tighten up your ability to reason.

No thinking person could have interpreted my statement the way you did.

"the only modern day slave holders are the liberals who have tried to turn blacks into social cripples with their horrendous government programs designed to instill in the minds of minorities that they are inferior to whites and incapable of achieving success without handouts and special breaks.

They use them as political pawns with the "divide and conquer" strategy of convincing every minority that the hobgoblin white male is their bitter enemy, and that all conservatives are demons, and that only the Democrat Party can save them. It is a filthy, disgusting tactic that appeals to the weaknesses in the human soul. When successful they have guaranteed votes for life from people who are dependent on the government for their existence.

Terribly effective, and terribly devastating to millions of victims."

Is it unreasonable to think you view modern American liberals as severely racist, who hate black people, and have virtually enslaved them to a particular voting pattern?

And is it unreasonable to think that the attitudes inherent in a group that would do that is just as racist as the attitudes inherent in a group that would shackle, sell, and drive the black person into working on a plantation?

La literatura
02-18-2012, 05:31 PM
There is certainly far more racism in the ranks of Democrats. The blatant over-reaction and over-compensation in their words and actions makes it quite apparent.

I doubt there is more racism in the ranks of Democrats, who nominated a black man for president. After all, it was the Republican party that developed the Southern Strategy, and in 2005, the Republican Chairman actually apologized for the party's exploitation of racism.

I personally don't think racism is a huge motivator of Republicanism today, but many that study the issue would say it still is important in the South.

mikey23545
02-18-2012, 06:37 PM
I doubt there is more racism in the ranks of Democrats, who nominated a black man for president. After all, it was the Republican party that developed the Southern Strategy, and in 2005, the Republican Chairman actually apologized for the party's exploitation of racism.

I personally don't think racism is a huge motivator of Republicanism today, but many that study the issue would say it still is important in the South.

There is certainly far more racism in the ranks of Democrats. The blatant over-reaction and over-compensation in their words and actions makes it quite apparent.


.

mikey23545
02-18-2012, 06:52 PM
Is it unreasonable to think you view modern American liberals as severely racist, who hate black people, and have virtually enslaved them to a particular voting pattern?

And is it unreasonable to think that the attitudes inherent in a group that would do that is just as racist as the attitudes inherent in a group that would shackle, sell, and drive the black person into working on a plantation?

Colloquial English for Dummies

The fun and easy way® to improve your common sense when communicating with a normal human being

Enhancing your colloquial English skills helps in everyday situations, such as writing a paper for school, giving a presentation to a company's bigwigs, or communicating effectively on an internet bulletin board. Colloquial English For Dummies, 2nd Edition gives you the latest techniques for improving your efficiency with everyday English that most people master by the third grade. Only the exceptionally rigid-minded and seriously self-important blowhards are candidates for this book.

If grasping the nuances of everyday English has always escaped you, causing you public embarrassment and feelings of inadequacy, Colloquial English for Dummies is for you!

La literatura
02-18-2012, 07:07 PM
Colloquial English for Dummies

The fun and easy way® to improve your common sense when communicating with a normal human being

Enhancing your colloquial English skills helps in everyday situations, such as writing a paper for school, giving a presentation to a company's bigwigs, or communicating effectively on an internet bulletin board. Colloquial English For Dummies, 2nd Edition gives you the latest techniques for improving your efficiency with everyday English that most people master by the third grade. Only the exceptionally rigid-minded and seriously self-important blowhards are candidates for this book.

If grasping the nuances of everyday English has always escaped you, causing you public embarrassment and feelings of inadequacy, Colloquial English for Dummies is for you!

Okay, so you don't actually believe the things you say. That's good to know.

La literatura
02-18-2012, 07:09 PM
.

So voting for a black man goes to show that Democrats are racist towards blacks?

HonestChieffan
02-19-2012, 06:19 AM
Urban Unity must be a better deal than a country united?



http://weaselzippers.us/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/unity-500x500.jpg

President Obama and the Democratic National Committee (DNC) might have the makings of a new slogan for the 2012 election cycle, as the DNC announced that a design called “Urban Unity” will be the poster for the DNC convention in Charlotte, N.C

ThatRaceCardGuy
02-19-2012, 07:48 AM
White people arguing about black politics......

notorious
02-19-2012, 07:48 AM
Why in the hell do you guys group everyone together?


We could gather and post hundreds of racist comments and actions from Pubs and Dems, but that still makes them a very small minority of each party.

Get a grip. JFC.

notorious
02-19-2012, 07:51 AM
White people arguing about black politics......

My best friend is black, and by that simple fact I know everything there is to know about black people. /DC

ThatRaceCardGuy
02-19-2012, 07:59 AM
My best friend is black, and by that simple fact I know everything there is to know about black people. /DC

Well I mean yah of course. Same way as HCF knows everything because he copies and past lol... The fact is most black voters are conservative by nature. You would think that would be good for the conservative GOP. But black voters haven't trusted the GOP since the civil rights movement. Regonomics was great for the rich, but for the poor and disadvantaged it made things worse. The GOP has a long history of ignoring valid issues minorities have. You look at the mouth pieces for the GOP today...Rush, Fox "News" , and other conservative out lets, and the message is not very welcoming for minorities..

Ask yourself HCF why most Christians vote republican....or why most NRA members vote republican...its the same damn thing, but its only a problem with HCF because its black people NOT voting for the GOP. You have no issue with why a large number or rural white Americans vote Republican do you ? You have no issue why most white Christians vote republican do you..but only an issue with the "black vote?"

ThatRaceCardGuy
02-19-2012, 08:10 AM
Dear "Honest Chiefs Fan" ..god the irony of your name always makes me laugh. What a fool you are . You copy and paste , and copy and paste, but never really have an original thought. Everything you post is "The GOP good and the liberal is evil." Narrow minded individuals like yourself , are the reason why America has gone to shit. You're a zombie, who worships at the alter of your political party, never questioning, only obeying . You only see things in shades or GOP Red. You're no better then the zombie liberals you bitch and moan about... You're brain is on auto pilot..****ing idiot.

HonestChieffan
02-19-2012, 08:13 AM
Well I mean yah of course. Same way as HCF knows everything because he copies and past lol... The fact is most black voters are conservative by nature. You would think that would be good for the conservative GOP. But black voters haven't trusted the GOP since the civil rights movement. Regonomics was great for the rich, but for the poor and disadvantaged it made things worse. The GOP has a long history of ignoring valid issues minorities have. You look at the mouth pieces for the GOP today...Rush, Fox "News" , and other conservative out lets, and the message is not very welcoming for minorities..

Ask yourself HCF why most Christians vote republican....or why most NRA members vote republican...its the same damn thing, but its only a problem with HCF because its black people NOT voting for the GOP. You have no issue with why a large number or rural white Americans vote Republican do you ? You have no issue why most white Christians vote republican do you..but only an issue with the "black vote?"

I have no issue with how anyone votes.

I often am amazed that they vote the way they do.

When you look at the impact Obamas term has had on the poor, black, white....why would they in mass want to reelect him? If the guy was a car he would be trashed under the lemon laws.

The vast majority of people are poorly informed, don't care, don't read, and accept what they are told without question.

Therein lies the real strength of the democrat party.

ThatRaceCardGuy
02-19-2012, 08:14 AM
I have no issue with how anyone votes.

I often am amazed that they vote the way they do.

When you look at the impact Obamas term has had on the poor, black, white....why would they in mass want to reelect him? If the guy was a car he would be trashed under the lemon laws.

The vast majority of people are poorly informed, don't care, don't read, and accept what they are told without question.

Therein lies the real strength of the democrat party.


You are so full of shit.

notorious
02-19-2012, 09:01 AM
I am amazed that poor white people vote Republican. The Dems are trying to shovel money to them, yet they stick to their guns. (No pun intended)


See, I grouped a mass of people together. I fit in now!

dirk digler
02-19-2012, 09:11 AM
It's part of a chain. I saw nine groups total, each of them being some group "for Obama". Looks like a slick way to collect contributions as quickly as possible.

Shocking hcf is being dishonest again. Let see the groups listed:

1. Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders
2. Jewish Americans
3. Latinos
4. LGBT Americans
5. People of Faith
6. Veterans and Military Families
7. Women
8. Young Americans
9. African Americans

I have a feeling hcf is disappointed they don't have a group for him and Mittens called the traitor group or yellow belly group.

HonestChieffan
02-19-2012, 09:27 AM
Taxpayers for Obama would likely not have much membership. Small Business for Obama would be short as well I expect.

dirk digler
02-19-2012, 10:18 AM
Taxpayers for Obama would likely not have much membership. Small Business for Obama would be short as well I expect.

I don't know why you feel left out you are still represented with LGBT group.

mikey23545
02-19-2012, 10:25 AM
Urban Unity must be a better deal than a country united?



http://weaselzippers.us/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/unity-500x500.jpg

President Obama and the Democratic National Committee (DNC) might have the makings of a new slogan for the 2012 election cycle, as the DNC announced that a design called “Urban Unity” will be the poster for the DNC convention in Charlotte, N.C


Couldn't they just call it "People Who Pay No Income Tax United"?

dirk digler
02-19-2012, 10:33 AM
Couldn't they just call it "People Who Pay No Income Tax United"?

:spock: So people that live in cities don't pay Income Tax?

mikey23545
02-19-2012, 10:38 AM
:spock: So people that live in cities don't pay Income Tax?

Are you really that dense?

dirk digler
02-19-2012, 10:43 AM
Are you really that dense?

I guess so. Maybe you should look up the word urban

mikey23545
02-19-2012, 10:46 AM
I guess so. Maybe you should look up the word urban

You are that dense! LMAO

dirk digler
02-19-2012, 10:53 AM
You are that dense! LMAO

I was trying to give you the benefit of the doubt I guess I shouldn't have.