It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Kerry visits with the Rainbow Coalition

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 2 2004 @ 05:17 PM
link   
Reverend Jesse Jackson introduced Senator Kerry by saying, "I am on a low-CARB diet: No Cheney, no Ashcroft, no Rumsfeld, no Bush and very little Rice."

To which Senator Kerry quipped, "African-American unemployment is now 10% double the rate of whites. In New York, 50% of the African-Americans are unemployed. We can do better."

Kerry targets minority voters

If minority voters would turn out en massse, then Kerry would have a verygood chance of beating Bush. The problem is making the connection with these voters. If a voter feels adequately safe from terrorism with Bush, why change to an unkown?




posted on Jul, 2 2004 @ 10:37 PM
link   
this sickens me. playing the race card to get votes? politicians are vote vampires, they make victims of us all.

pit one group of people against another just to gain a vote. brilliant idea kerry!


i feel like throwing up.



posted on Jul, 2 2004 @ 10:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThePrankMonkey
this sickens me. playing the race card to get votes? politicians are vote vampires, they make victims of us all.

pit one group of people against another just to gain a vote. brilliant idea kerry!


i feel like throwing up.


Jesus Christ man, are you okay? All presidential candidates do this. Bush does it. They visit various interest groups. Hispanic groups, church groups, mothers groups, etc. It's not a matter of playing one group of people against each other, it's just politics. Each candidate has to look like he or she represents the interests of all of these groups.

On a more partisan note, what's more disgusting, Kerry visiting a civil rights' group or Bush speaking at some corporate dinner and saying "Some people call you the wealthy elite, but I call you my base"? Eh?



posted on Jul, 2 2004 @ 11:18 PM
link   
It seems that you are both saying the same thing, only different.


What is it going to take, so that our politicians compete on the basis of how their ideas will lift us all. If a specific group (e.g.racial, geographic, age) needs extra assistance, it should make sense to all of us. In our system the majority rules, but the rights of the minority (not racial) are preserved.

We've already had New York City attacked, and still the politicians seek to pit us against each other. What is it going to take to change the rules, to encourage other types of contenders, to ellicit the best in our candidates, and ourselves?



posted on Jul, 2 2004 @ 11:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Flinx
Jesus Christ man, are you okay? All presidential candidates do this. Bush does it. They visit various interest groups. Hispanic groups, church groups, mothers groups, etc. It's not a matter of playing one group of people against each other, it's just politics. Each candidate has to look like he or she represents the interests of all of these groups.

On a more partisan note, what's more disgusting, Kerry visiting a civil rights' group or Bush speaking at some corporate dinner and saying "Some people call you the wealthy elite, but I call you my base"? Eh?



well who are in these groups? people! thats right people! and i guess its too hard to simply refer to them as people and treat them as such.

ugh and bushing doing that would no different IMO.

because its done doesnt make it right. class warfare is what they're using. divide us and conquer us. just politics? BS!


this is why i hate most politicians, playing whatever song on their fiddle whatever special interest group wants them to play. if this isnt a prime example of how they're just manipulating us to get into power for themselves then i dont know what is.

you keep saying "its just politics" and i'll keep speaking out against it. you run with the sheep i'll run in a different direction.



posted on Jul, 2 2004 @ 11:24 PM
link   
I thought the rainbow coalition was the gay community. Silly me - Once I was on a flight from NYC to Atlanta and I saw this dude in a ministers frock and I asked the stewardess if that was James Brown - she laughed at me and said no Thats Al Sharpton.



posted on Jul, 2 2004 @ 11:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by BOHICA
It seems that you are both saying the same thing, only different.


What is it going to take, so that our politicians compete on the basis of how their ideas will lift us all. If a specific group (e.g.racial, geographic, age) needs extra assistance, it should make sense to all of us. In our system the majority rules, but the rights of the minority (not racial) are preserved.

We've already had New York City attacked, and still the politicians seek to pit us against each other. What is it going to take to change the rules, to encourage other types of contenders, to ellicit the best in our candidates, and ourselves?


i'm going to say this and i know many will dismiss this as BS and think i'm just wrong looney, whatever....but...

what is it going to take? US. WE need to wake the hell up, get out of this dreamworld they want us to be in where they make us feel as though we need to be catered to with their lies in order to give them our support.

as far as i'm concerned if your message or idea only effects a few people then you're reaching the wrong people. we are not groups, we are a nation full of individuals who want many of the same things and that makes us a WHOLE group of people.

but is this their fault for what they do or our fault for letting them do this? i believe the answer lies in blaming ourselves. we allow ourselves to be divided, we allow ourselvs to be lied to. we allow the status quo to be just that and never change it. WE have the power to make change and nothing will change as long as we allow things to remains as they are. in a dynamic world that which stagnates either locks into the time in which is was made or it rots from within. things change, they should and they must. everything is a progression, an evolution if you will. everything we do is a step to the next step. sadly our government and those we put in charge of it are stagnant. their tactics are stangant and their ideals are stagnant.

they lie to us and make it seems as THEY can make everything alright and make things better. but they been in power for a long time now. how is THIS better? is this better? all they do is argue with each other while they're in office pass more laws we dont need then they blame each other during election time and guess what? so do we! we fall right into that game because thats THEY want us to do. heavan forbid we should be fully autonomous free thinkers who dont need the government for every little thing in our lives. as it is now people look more and more to the government for the answers and guess what? the more we rely on them the more they control us. the more we need them the more power they posess. without this they wouldnt exist, WE would be in charge and we ARE still in charge although not directly anymore. THEY are in control and they have seen fit time and again to tell us what is good for us instead of letting us as free people decide for ourselves.

they are pandering, nothign more. they arent getting their ideas and plans out for the p[eople to see. they are spewing the same BS they've been spewing for as long as i can remember just so they can garner an extra vote. they say whatever it takes to stay in control and we let them do it!

but we cant change everyone mind and open their minds can we? not by saying we cant. not by not trying we cant. nothing will get done that way. so does it hurt to try? no. does it hurt to at least attempt to gain the control back for those we're suppose to get along with? arent we suppose to look out for each other and trust each other more than the politicians? is this whats happening? no! we're fighting with each other and the cynicism we give each other is misdirected. we act as though the other person is lying and has an agenda. no we dont, none of us are trying to get a vote. none of us have an office to lose in congress or the senate. THEY do. not us. THEY have everything to lose and we have everything to gain but we wont as long as we continue down the road we're heading.


go ahead. dismiss everything i said. ignore me and act as if i'm just a crack pot. pay no heed to what i say and watch what happens in the future. see what happens when you give a government too much power. see what happens when the government that cant give it all to you can take it all away. see what happens to us when they win and keep us divided.

if i'm wrong we have nothing to worry about...but if i'm right...we're playing right into their hands.



posted on Jul, 3 2004 @ 12:25 AM
link   
No TPM, you are not a crack pot. You have put into plain words of action, the what we have been asking ourselves lately: don't you just feel like something is wrong. (Please permit me to reuse a previous post)

Maybe placing the discussion into the Social Contract context would help.

Social Contracts thoery builds on the concept of natural law and natural rights (i.e. life liberty, pursuit of happiness) and forms the basis for a government's legitamcy and authority.

Simply put, government derives its legitimacy and authority from our willing consent. This is a contract between the governors and the governed. As opposed to kings, who derived their right to govern from God.

Through this contract, we give government the power to enforce nature's laws (our natural rights) and to punish those who break said laws.

However, if the state itself violates natural law, then the contract is null and void. The government loses its legitimacy and authority.

Now then, we must ask ourselves: has the current (Bush) administration violated our natural rights (life, liberty, pursuit of happiness) and if so, do we cancel the contract with it (the administration)?

You may already know this; We answer that very same question every time we vote.

[edit on 3-7-2004 by BOHICA]



posted on Jul, 3 2004 @ 12:39 AM
link   
but isnt just bush. it isnt JUST kerry. it isnt just both of them. its a far bigger picture.

now lets exmaine kerry and his visit to rainbow for a second.

a rich white man telling some black people the only way to fix the problem he brings up is to vote for a rich white man with left leaning ideologies.

thats it in a nut shell. an elite telling the common man the only way to make change is to put another elite into power. or am i the only person on the planet that sees this for what it is????

what i'm saying and what i've been saying is, people dont need him or bush or even the government to do this for them. rather than relying ON the government to do things for us we need to do them ourselves. and its not just about kerry visiting some company jackson started. this goes far deeper than that. they make it seem to everyone that things just wont get done and things will never change without THEM in office. but things havent gotten better have they? but people continue to believe the NEXT candidate or the NEXT president will be different but its not. its lip service and people believe it works and its not working! its working for them, not us.

it isnt about these two candidates its about these elites who pull the wool over our eyes, use us as tools for their own gain and guess who suffers? US. all of us.

its not the vote, the government or the system, its those in control of the government and the system that is the problem and to further that problem we vote for them. THEY are the true elite. WE are under their thumb. you trade one set of people doing business with each other and screwing us over for another set. thats all we're doing at this point. there was a time the politician stood up for their people, not themselves.

now imagine this.

what if we dont vote. i mean not one of us voted. i HATE what if games but indulge me for a minute.

what if during this next election noone voted. not a single person. what do you think would happen? how do you think THEY would react? imagine how powerful a message THAT would be.

now i still believe in voting for the lesser of two evils but i dont think the evils are all that different from each other any more. a vote for them is a vote for them now a days, not a vote for us.

[edit on 3-7-2004 by ThePrankMonkey]



posted on Jul, 3 2004 @ 12:52 AM
link   
I get what you're saying PM, and I agree.

I think that the candidates that aren't part of the elite, that aren't career politicians (liars) get bumped out early in the race or never get started at all. We miss our chance to shake things up every time there's an election. We've missed our chance this time.

Of course, I'm not so sure we really even have a chance to change things. I've become conviced that we don't really have democracy (or a Republic). We live in a plutocracy. The same old people in the same old familes that use the same old tactics(on both sides) run for office and win. It seems like if you aren't born to a wealthy political family you have it much harder in Washington than if you are. I mean, the most you can hope for is to get elected to the House. As for the Senate or Presidency, unlikely.

Eh, it's all a big mess. I guess I'll just keep voting and pretend like I'm making a difference....



posted on Jul, 3 2004 @ 12:56 AM
link   
thats what i mean flinx.

the old "oh this has been going on so long it'll never change" attitude.

and you're right, it wont change if noone tries.

i'm still speaking out against it and i will continue to do so. i am going to keep trying and even if what i say only changes one persons mind then i've done something to help US and not them.

we will never have what we never try to acheive.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join