Carter: Race Plays Role in Obama Dislike - UPDATED: White House rejects racism claim

Originally posted by Open_Minded Skeptic
Sadly, it is not necessarily a valid assumption that because the criticism was coming from a black man that it was not racially motivated (I'm not saying it was).

I have spoken to more than one black person who was quite up front about having no use for "N.....s". Their word. And I used to work for a guy from Korea who also was right up front about the fact that he did not like Asian people.

So if a discussion is taking place on policy, then any reference to race, religion etc. is suspect of being just there for distraction.

Getting back to the original question, I also agree with Carter. I'm not sure I agree the racial motive is "overwhelming", but it is in my opinion considerable.

That is a valid point. However, let's imagine the speaker of those words was white. The EXACT same words used, but it was said by a white male. Would you agree that you would consider the white person much more likely as having racially-based opposition to Obama than a black male doing the same? Aren't you automatically assuming it is a racial issue BECAUSE he is white? And you are automatically assuming it probably is not racist because he is black?

Please read the following paragraph carefully, and really think about the words:

It is politically acceptable to say anything positive about non-whites, but anything negative is racist. It is politically unacceptable to say anything positive about whites because this is racist, whereas it is politically acceptable to say everything negative about whites.

It seems many posters agree that the above is what is taking place at the moment. Racism is not the issue at heart for most people.

[edit on 16/9/2009 by Dark Ghost]

If the US is full of so many racist people, how the heck did Obama win the election in the first place?

Maybe it's the people using the racist card every chance they get, maybe THEY are the real racists people.

Pot calling the kettle black maybe?

Let me remind everyone, Obama is not black. So he has to deal with even MORE racism because he gets it from both whites and blacks.

But yet, he won the election. He has the support of about 50% of the population.

Gee, isn't 50% of the nation democrat and the other 50% republican, give or take for the independents?

No, it's racism. It's racism I tell you! Listen to me or I'll call you a racist to. I'll call everybody a racist, bwa ha ha ha ha ha!

So a country full of angry mobs of racists elected a President who is of mixed decent over a POW hero. Does that sound racist?

There is always an extremist for a video camera to laugh at. Did you hear the ACORN lady yesterday brag about how she killed her husband? THE MAN IS ALIVE! (the lady is coo-coo)

The vast majority of the population have not jumped off the cliff to insanity. Most people, minus a few personal setbacks, are relatively okay in the head.

Why is it not okay to disagree with someone who doesn't share your skin tone?

So again, all those people that protested Bush didn't do it because they were against the war. They did it because they are racists. They just hid behind the war thing. They are really racists. Why? Because I say so. I don't need reasons. I just need to point my finger to make them go away.

But don't accuse me just because I accuse you. You don't know me (never mind that I don't know you either).

What's upsetting the race police is the fact that most people aren't buying it.

Remember, if you disagree with me, your racist. It doesn't have anything to do with my opinions. Your just racist because I say so.

They were hoping if they race baited the people who don't agree with Obama, it would make those people go away. But that old, tired, been-there-done-that tactic isn't working anymore.

So now what do they do?

Over the years, I've come to like Carter but I have to disagree with him on this.

Two of the country's most notable racists, Al Sharpton and Jessie Jackson, support Obama even though he is half-white. So you can't really say that all racists oppose Obama.

Originally posted by Dark Ghost
It is politically acceptable to say anything positive about non-whites, but anything negative is racist. It is politically unacceptable to say anything positive about whites because this is racist, whereas it is politically acceptable to say everything negative about whites.

I totally disagree with the above. For example:

I oppose President Obama on the following issues:

1) His expansion of US presence in Afghanistan, with no clear definition of what we are trying to accomplish there.

2) His support of the Patriot act and warrantless wiretapping, both of which in my opinion are violations of the US Constitution and provide no value.

3) His continuation of the Dept. of Homeland Security, which in my opinion is a needless bureaucracy that does not provide sufficient value to justify its cost.

I believe Obama is flat wrong in his position on all of the above.

I supported President GW Bush on the following issues:

1) His efforts to make a positive difference regarding the AIDS epidemic in Africa. While I am not convinced of the actual value gained from those efforts, I applaud and support the attempt.

2) His effort to keep taxes from being applied to Internet based sales. Excessive taxation of that avenue would tend to suffocate the growth of online commerce.

Now, without knowing my race (maybe you do, maybe you don't but pretend you don't) would you be able to honestly say you suspect that race plays a role in either the opposition to the black politician or the support of the white one?

Now, this is opposed to what we see so often these days, things along the lines of:

"I oppose Obama's health care plan because he is a Socialist and wants to have government take over all health care and kill my grandma."

Or:

"George W Bush does not care about black people."

It seems many posters agree that the above is what is taking place at the moment. Racism is not the issue at heart for most people.

It may be true that race is not the issue at heart for most people. But it is not being communicated that way in far too many cases.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

They cannot speak further than the talking points that Glenn Beck has fed them. So, why do they hate? What's underneath this? Is it as simple as Obama being a Democrat? I don't think so.

I hate Clinton and the Democrats who ratified WTO and NAFTA. I hate Clinton, Bush and Obama for supporting the criminals from Monsanto, Cargill, Conagri.. who have poison people in the USA and then swept it under the rug despite not one but two Congressional hearings. I hate Gore and Clinton and Bush and WTO and NAFTA and the biofuel scam that have caused the starvation of millions that has forced 75% of the farmers in Mexico, 60% of the farmers in Portugal off their land. Monsanto who has a farmer in India suiciding every eight minutes!

Good Golly Stan Painter, chairman of the National Joint Council of Food Inspection, a union that represents 6,000 federal food inspectors told a congressional committee that the Agriculture Department tried to intimidate him and other employees who reported violations of regulations, an allegation denied by the agency despite TEN POUNDS worth of ignored violations that backed him up! So WHERE IS OBAMA!!!

What does the Democrats and Obama do? Clean up the mess? put people in jail for murder (and it was murder) get rid of the WTO regs called HACCP that puts the Corporations in charge of food safety?

Heck no Obama is going to appoint Mike Taylor, a Monsanto lawyer as food Czar and Rosa Delauro and Henry Waxman are pushing through bills written by the Agri/Pharma Cartel that will make it impossible for anyone but the Cartel to grow and/or sell food. Bills that also allow the corporations to continue doing their own food safety testing.

the USDA decided to move to the HACCP system of inspection. Based on the idea that the plant operator knows the plant better than the USDA, the responsibility for designing an inspection system was turned over to each individual plant.

According to John Munsell, Manager, Foundation for Accountability in Regulatory Enforcement (FARE), when USDA “officials initially described HACCP to the industry in the mid-90’s, the agency made the following enticing promises:

* “Under HACCP, the agency will implement a ‘Hands Off’ role in meat inspection.
* “Under HACCP, the agency will no longer police the industry, but the industry will police itself.
* “Under HACCP, the agency will disband its previous command and control authority.
* “Under HACCP, each plant will write its own HACCP Plan, and the agency cannot tell plants what must be in their HACCP Plans.”

As a result, the plant operator was required to identify potential hazards and the critical points in the process where those hazards could come into play. The plan would then identify procedures that would be used to minimize the hazard risk at those control points. The plant would be responsible for the implementation of the plan.

As a result, the inspector was no longer responsible for what was happening on the plant floor: that was left to company personnel. The new role of the inspector was to make sure that plant personnel were carrying out their duties in a manner consistent with the HACCP plan. In many cases this amounted to making sure that all of the paper work was in the proper order.
www.agpolicy.org...

This racist junk is nothing but a pile of road apples used to deflect people from what is happening to our food supply, and our economy. But you and the other left wingers fall for the banker/corporate media crap every time. Farmers have been screaming at a bunch of deaf media-whores for several years about this. Independents have been screaming about the Fed and its counterfeiting and Ponsi schemes. But you and the other left wingers fall for the racist or other crap every time. Do you think the media is going to actually publish what is really happening or what the people opposed to Obama are really saying?

Monsanto is 85% controlled by the financial industry does that surprise you?? Monsanto got three reporters fired does this really surprise you? So why believe the racist crap in the mass media???

reply to post by Gools


I'm not getting your point...

Are you trying to get us to agree that racism is the key?

For you to say that we cannot challenge the source of this argument (the peanut farmer) is extremely closed minded.

Former Pres. Carter has spewed many a racist statement, met with many a dictator, and generally attacked those who are against his party.
This statement comes from a man who was THE WORST PRESIDENT EVER. However, he is also a stalwart democrat, and he would do anything to defend his party of do-nothings.

Racism is better represented by the overwhelming majority of black voters supporting a (half)black man. That is provable.

Carter's opinion cannot be proven, therefore it is speculation.

Condi Rice, Clarence Thomas, Colin Powell...

They were attacked violently from the left, and their placement in the upper echelons of power were ignored, or treated as "tokens".

Your OP is based on an idiot, but your follow-up question is ridiculous, especially for a Mod. You know that your question is biased, and can only lead to bashing, yet you focus attention on it?


Wake me up in three years, when this is over, and I can finally criticize my gov't in peace. (of course, I said that three years ago as well....)

Isn't it interesting that we were called unpatriotic for years, and now racist?
It's like they know how to push those buttons, don't they....

Poor little Jimmy still has white guilt over his grandfather fighting in the Confederate Army during the Civil War, I see.

I find it very telling that possibly the biggest blunder ever to serve as president prior to the current adminsitration is also becoming the largest mouthpiece for and proponent of said current administration. Carter's legacy will always be two things...
1. Selling the Panama Canal for a handfull of magic beans
2. Malaise and stagflation

The current administration seems to be approaching a point where we're going to need to sell off some assets just to keep the country running and currently "malaise" and "stagflation" look appealing compared to disaster and depression.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Originally posted by Bullhorn
All right, if these guys represent all white people

I don't believe anyone said anything about "all white people".

My point is that if the criticisms about Obama were about his policy, then people would be talking about his policy, but they can't. Many of these people literally don't even know what they're talking about. They criticize the health care bill, the czars, "socialism, fascism, communism" (they're all the same, you know)... but when asked what specifically they don't like, they're stumped. They cannot speak further than the talking points that Glenn Beck has fed them. So, why do they hate? What's underneath this? Is it as simple as Obama being a Democrat? I don't think so.

Ahhhh, BH.

Once again, you amuse me with your arguments.
Let's dissect your statement, shall we?

First, the subtle "Glen Beck" statement.
I don't watch fox news, much less their political commentators. As a matter of fact, barely a couple million do. Yet here you are again, saying that we only disagree with the Pres. because "Fox News told us to".
That is the point of the Glen Beck comment, right?
So does this mean I can start dismissing your points, or validating my arguments by saying you only watch MSNBC?

As for talking about his policies, I would argue that you are dead-wrong.

The President has lied SOOOOOO much about what he would do in office, and what he has done. You know this, I know this, and EVERYONE HERE knows this.

Do I need to be an expert on health care policy to distrust a liar?

I think not.

Do I need to be a racist to hate a liar?

Nope.

You seem to forget that MILLIONS of people, 47% of our country, voted against him AND his "ideas". Did you think we would all just fall in line when the rest of you put this idiot in office?

Many of us have "specifically" pointed out the reason we dislike this man and his intentions. Based on his record. Based on his decorum. Based on his lack of experience. Based on his LIES. Based on his actions.

I'm sorry that you have spent so long defending this man, that you are starting to sound like a Bush supporter in '07!

When "everything" is racist, the term will lose it's value. The label will mean everything to those who issue it, and will mean nothing to those who are branded.

The implications of this are paramount.

Originally posted by Gools


Well this is interesting.

What proportion of opposition to Obama's presidency can be attributed to racists hiding behind the "anti-liberal" banner?

Is it a factor at all?

Some including former Presidents of the United States believe it is to a certain extent.

What say you ATS?
.
firstread.msnbc.msn.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

What I say every time Carter tries to inject himself into some issue, whether foreign or domestic. And that is that Carter is nothing but a senile, old fool trying to rescue the legacy of a failed presidency. Trouble is that if anyone bothers to check, even his "accomplishments" after he was voted out of office are all crumbling to dust. Doesn't matter if your talking about the houses he helped "build" or the "treaties" he helped "negotiate".

Now, just when the "people who don't like obama are all racists" agenda is turning into noise most people are ignoring, carter tries to regurgitate it again. (words chosen carefully)



[edit on 9/16/2009 by centurion1211]

Originally posted by Gools
Four pages of replies in under 4 hours and only 6 flags and 5 stars eh?

Interesting.

I guess this is not an important topic on ATS or anywhere else at the moment.

Not that I'm fishing mind you, just making an observation about what types of threads make it to the top of the ATS pages lately.

.
edit: spelling

[edit on 15 Sep 09 by Gools]

It's not you fault Gools,

It Carters. lol

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic


If it were about policy, most of the criticisms of him would be about his actual policy and not about him.

Pay closer attention, most of the criticisms are about the policies that obama and his liberal minions are pushing.

I must ask you, though, when it was Bush, did you and all the others here at ATS confine your criticisms to Bush's policies, or weren't most of your comments actually directed at Bush himself (the person)?

Deny hypocrisy ...

Originally posted by loam
I'm sick of the accusation.

I think it serves as a convenient excuse to avoid addressing the substance of the opposition.

If I'm forced to wildly speculate about race, then I'll note the unprecedented, nearly universal, and unwavering support he apparently enjoys from blacks despite his actual political positions or accomplishments.

This is plain politics and nothing else... I'm insulted by the implication that because I'm not "with him", then its because I'm a racist-- even if I don't realize it.

Reminds me of another "your either with us or against us" president.

Same bag of tricks, different player.

How sad for us....

[edit on 15-9-2009 by loam]

I think Carter got the email along with NBC.
Play the race card everywhere!!!
The GOP members are all racists!
The independents who oppose ObamaCare are all a bunch of racists!
Everybody is a racist.
Oh, ....alright. How about this? If you give us ObamaCare, we will
stop playing the "race card" all over the place. Deal???
That is desperate and pathetic.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Originally posted by Bullhorn
All right, if these guys represent all white people

I don't believe anyone said anything about "all white people".

My point is that if the criticisms about Obama were about his policy, then people would be talking about his policy, but they can't. Many of these people literally don't even know what they're talking about. They criticize the health care bill, the czars, "socialism, fascism, communism" (they're all the same, you know)... but when asked what specifically they don't like, they're stumped. They cannot speak further than the talking points that Glenn Beck has fed them. So, why do they hate? What's underneath this? Is it as simple as Obama being a Democrat? I don't think so.

But I've said my piece. I don't want to hijack the thread. Suffice it to say that I agree with Carter on this.

BH, I'll come right out and ask you. What is the source of your news and opinions - MSNBC, CNN, NY Times, Washington Post, etc.? Once known, can we not discount everything you say afterwards as you being nothing more than a mouthpiece for your liberal-biased sources?

If you don't want to have to deal with that, how about you and all the others that can't see past Fox News dropping the "Fox News as the reason (for you) for all the evil in the world" BS? But then would many of you actually have much to say if you quit blaming Fox News ...?


[edit on 9/16/2009 by centurion1211]

These remarks are utterly offensive, i am sick of tired stereotypes, saying that if you do not like a black person your a racist. I hated g w bush, because he was a murderer,a nd i do not like obama because he is a murderer.

Simple logic, seems to fly past alot of people

Just an observation. I don't recall anybody ever saying that all people who oppose Obama are racists, or that all objections to Obama's policies are based on race.

The questions and speculations raised are that race plays more of a part in the intensity of the opposition than is recognized.

Why the attempts to change this perfectly legitimate question / speculation into a global claim that "everybody that opposes Obama is a racist"?

That is the same kind of mis-representation that is going on so much of the time regarding Obama's actual policies, and makes the debate considerably more difficult to carry on.

reply to post by Open_Minded Skeptic


That is all they have left.
Look at the polling data.
A clear majority are voting thumbs down on ObamaCare.
The libs are simply swinging wildly by playing the race card everywhere.
It is sad and pathetic.
The Acorn disgrace is smothering the liberal games being played.
Another Acorn video is coming out in a few hours. Stay tuned.

Race doesn't seem to play as huge a role as it used to. Otherwise, BO would not have been elected or otherwise.

I would think if his wife had been white, he may have leaned more towards the white peoples views. One way or another, we're all geting an education with an African American as president. I tend to lean more towards him having been groomed for this job long ago. At least they don't have him tap dancing.

BO isn't finishing off the country because of his color, but no doubt there are those who would use him as a scapegoat. I'm somewhat surpirsed there hasn't been more southern white hatred spilling out in protests. Maybe we just don't hear so much about it in the media? If the country was saved, somehow BO wouldn't get the credit for it, but if it fails, he'll likely be blamed.

The Clintons were also sensitive towards blacks and minorites.

Somehow it all reminds me of the Titanic instead of the Love Boat.

[edit on 16-9-2009 by aleon1018]

reply to post by aleon1018


Exactly, the ObamaCare loons are rearranging the deck chairs
on the Titanic. The more Obama talks about it the worse it gets.
Check Rasmussen Reports. 55% are against ObamaCare.
The word from the American people is "go after all that fraud
and abuse that you have been ignoring for the last 9 months
then we will listen some more."

reply to post by Eurisko2012


My thoughts on healthcare lean more towards preventive healthcare with cheaper or actually low costs and available screening. These are the tests that apparently overburden the system, such as after the fact. I think we need to keep things simpler for now. The math doesn't make sense to me that they're using. ( not that I was ever good at math)

[edit on 16-9-2009 by aleon1018]