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.

 

Opposition To Obama Speech Possibly Based On Skin Color

page: 8
35
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 01:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Indigo5

So you acknowledge that there is a racist segment of the Republican party?



There's a "racist segment" of any and all populations and groups.

Where you and other libs make a HUGE mistake is trying to paint all members of a group because of the actions of just a few.

Again, let me remind you that I doubt if you or anyone else would call the U.S. Senate a racist organization because 1% of its members - democrat Byrd form West Virginia - was once a member of the KKK. Or would you?

So if even IF 1% of any organization is racists, they're ALL still racists?

##snip##






posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 01:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by centurion1211

Originally posted by Indigo5

Originally posted by centurion1211

But do you deny that many (millions of?) people also voted for obama because he was black?

How is that also not racist?

You don't get to have it both ways by ignoring one form of racism while complaining about another.




Do you think President Obama was the first Black Man to ever run for office?

Shirley Chisholm, Jesse Jackson, Lenora Fulani, Alan Keyes, Carol Moseley Braun, Al Sharpton and lets not forget Frederick Douglas.

If someone simply had to be Black to win, it is strange that it took 200+ years for it to happen.

Ignoring the role that race played in electing the previous 43 WHITE presidents seems obtuse.

You don't get to have it both ways



Except for all the people that have admitted voting for obama because he was black and/or "because it was time" (same thing), and not anything to do with his political views - which are BTW ruining this country.


To be fair... there were plenty of people who voted for McCain because he wasn't black. At least just as many so... you can't really say Obama got in because he's a black guy. Or in spite of it. I personally think he was elected indifferent to the fact that he's black.



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 01:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by centurion1211

Originally posted by Aggie Man

Originally posted by centurion1211
I'm just not buying into the current campaign by democrats to try and paint ANYONE who doesn't agree with obama's polices as a racist.


I must have missed the press release on that one. Got a link? Surely, there must have been an official statement, made by DNC, making such accusations, no?


Got a link?



Try searching ATS for all the threads including the word racism.


Or try searching the recent news for all the democrats screaming racism and saying things like "tea party members want to hangs blacks from a tree".

It's quite obviously part of the democrat's campaign efforts.

You also, don't be a fool on this ...



That may be the campaign effort of some Democrats, but that segment of the party is small. Perhaps as small as the segment of righties that actually ARE racists.

Still, perhaps those making those statements feel justified in some way. I seriously doubt their justification is simply due to folks opposing President Obama's policies.

Unless you can show me an official press release stating specifically "ANYONE who doesn't agree with obama's polices as a racist.", then your statement is nothing but opinion....and a foolish one at that.



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 02:03 PM
link   
reply to post by centurion1211
 



1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.
2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.
3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.


Ok...I see nothing that would indicate that a demographic that always votes for Democrats voted for Democrats in a slightly larger percentage would be acting racist.

Now if Obama was the first black man ever to run for President...and he ran as a Republican...and 90% of blacks voted for him....you MIGHT have an argument. But with this you have NOTHING.

Oh no...blacks voted EXACTLY how they always vote...must be racism



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 02:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by centurion1211

Except for all the people that have admitted voting for obama because he was black and/or "because it was time" (same thing),


uh huh...and people have admitted voting for McCain because he was the White candidate.

9% of voters said that the candidate’s race was an important factor
and of those
53% voted for Obama
47% voted for Mccain

thesocietypages.org...

Personally I can somewhat understand those less politically educated and involved wanting to see a historic first for the country more than those that simply voted for the "white guy", but of course an educated vote on the issues is neccessary.

Either way...amongst those voters who considered race it was a wash between voters...so you can drop that bit of "Pres Obama got elected because he was black" bit....It's a racist tact to take



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 02:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by centurion1211

Originally posted by Indigo5

So you acknowledge that there is a racist segment of the Republican party?



There's a "racist segment" of any and all populations and groups.


True, but the inescapable fact that the GOP base includes the South, precisely because of the civil rights bill, speaks to a much greater proportion of racists in the GOP than the Democratic party.

Doesn't make the entire GOP party racist, but it does neccesitate GOP strategists to appeal to that significant racist segment within their base..and the rhetoric of Welfare for Blacks, Abolishing parts of the Civil Rights bill etc. is all playing to those folks along with a whole lot of subtle and not so subtle appeals.


Originally posted by centurion1211

Again, let me remind you that I doubt if you or anyone else would call the U.S. Senate a racist organization because 1% of its members - democrat Byrd form West Virginia - was once a member of the KKK. Or would you?


Byrd certainly wasn't the only member of the Senate to have membership in the KKK. There was a period in history where a politicians endorsement form the KKK was a prerequisite in the south.

But more to the point...do you nkow what the current percentage of Black Senators is? Zero....less than 1%
edit on 2-9-2011 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 02:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Indigo5
 


Why would the fact that a person from a minority group of 13% not be elected President reflect racism? Given the population size and those within that population elegible for the office the percentage of the overall population of blacks who could legitimately compete for the job is tiny. You have a far stronger case with sexism than racism.

Name me a country on this planet where a small minority has achieved anywhere close to what blacks have achieved in the US

-the presidency

-highest levels of government including Attorney General, Secretary of Defense, Secretary of State, National Security Advisor

- highest level of politics including the US Senate (beginning in 1870), the House of Representatives, Governorships of Virginia, New York, Massachuetts and Louisianna

-higheset level of military leadership - Chairman of the Joint Chiefs

-Highest levels of corporate leadership including the chairmanships of Merril Lynch, IBM, American Express, Merck, Delphi Corp, Aetna, Xerox, Citigroup and Alcoa. These CEOs are particularily instructive. They have led the largest and most iconic firms in the country. How did they get their jobs? Because rich white people on boards of directors who represent predominately rich white investors gave them their jobs. Why? Because they were the best person for the job.

-highest level of entertainment. Black entertainers have been among the most successful and wealthiest in the entertainment industry, reaching iconic status

Go ahead and name me one country on this planet where a minority of 13% have achieved anything close to what African Americans have achieved. Is there racism in the US? Clearly. There is racism in every culture from every segment of that culture. Unfortunately it is the order of things and it must be fought. But to suggest that folks don't want Obama to be successful, thus in essence working against their personal interests is outrageous.
edit on 2-9-2011 by dolphinfan because: (no reason given)

edit on 2-9-2011 by dolphinfan because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 02:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by dolphinfan

But to suggest that folks don't want Obama to be successful, thus in essence working against their personal interests is outrageous.
edit on 2-9-2011 by dolphinfan because: (no reason given)

edit on 2-9-2011 by dolphinfan because: (no reason given)


I wasn't until the end of your post until I was able to figure out what you were accusing me of...and am still not sure what you were getting at.

My position is that President Obama is treated with less respect than other presidents and that part of that is due to the evolving nature of our politics, our economic situation and yes...without a doubt the fact that he is Black.

Muslim, terroist, kenyan anyone?

Now, to return to your last line...That seems naive. Mitch McConnel, the Republican Leader in the Senate unashamedly declared the GOP strategy..

"making Obama a one-term President is my single most important political goal along with every active Republican in the country"

Of course people don't want him to be sucessful. The debt limit debate and subsequent downgrade was pure proof of where the GOPs priorities are. Do not hand him a victory no matter what...even if it would benefit the country. They would be pleased as punch to have the economy suffer until the 2012 election. It works in their favor.


edit on 2-9-2011 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 02:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Indigo5
 


My point is obviously that when given a choice, people choose African Americans for significant positions far beyond there percentage of the population. they choose them with their votes, they choose them as leaders and they choose them with their pocket books as it relates to entertainers.

People do want him to fail. They want him to fail because he is pushing leftist, statist and in many cases socialist (remember "spread the wealth around") policies. They want him to fail because they don't like his ideology and where that ideology is taking the country. Simply put, they don't want him to have another 4 years, 4 years with nothing to loose to push an agenda they are fundamentally opposed to. To the extent that they believe that his agenda would be harmful to the country they have a moral obligation to oppose him at every step when he is pushing that agenda. It would not matter if he was purple



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 03:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by dolphinfan
To the extent that they believe that his agenda would be harmful to the country they have a moral obligation to oppose him at every step when he is pushing that agenda. It would not matter if he was purple


Different debate, but I will briefly indulge you.

If that agenda includes an economic recovery that he can take credit for in 2012?

Do they still have a "moral obligation to oppose him at every step" then?

The answer to that question is what separates patriots from ideologues whether they be citizens or politicians.

We have been told directly by the GOP leadership both in words and actions what they believe the answer to that question is.

The employment numbers were just released today. We showed 0% job growth for the first time in decades. EVERY economist agrees it is a result of lack of demand driven by failing consumer confidence and that consumer confidence took a huge blow with the debt ceiling debate and the subsequent downgrade.

The plans offered up in that debate by Democrats would be outrageously conservative to any other congress. As it stands Boehner barely got the votes to raise the ceiling at all, even with the crappy plan that warranted a downgrade. See many republicans, including all but one of the current GOP Presidential contenders would have rather seen no debt ceiling raise at all.

If a crappy bill to raise the ceiling caused a downgrade and a huge blow to the economy and consumer confidence…what do you think default would have done?

Damn the country, Obama must fail. It used to sound outrageous a couple years ago. Now everyone in this nation just takes it as a given goal of the GOP.

edit on 2-9-2011 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 03:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Indigo5
Damn the country, Obama must fail. It used to sound outrageous a couple years ago. Now everyone in this nation just takes it as a given goal of the GOP.


I'm certain you have seen this thread from 2009, but still, it's worth linking in this particular discussion.

"Damn The Country, Obama Must Fail"


edit on 2-9-2011 by Aggie Man because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 04:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Indigo5
 


There are few economists other than self identified ideologues like Krugman who believe that the Obama economic policies will lead to job growth - they actually want him to go further into debt. The issues with the economy are three fold. Small business is going to hammered with Obama's tax policy and simply not have the money to hire, the hyper regulatory burden he is driving is placing burdens on business and most importantly that he has shown his hand. He is through his own admission a redistributionist. He fundamentally believes not in equal opportunity, but rather equal outcomes. At some level, I guess that due to his ideology folks want him to not succeed if that is what it takes to get him out of office. He will be really dangerous in a second term when he can govern with nothing to loose

Next week, he will likely push a few themes

- extending unemployment, thus paying folks not to work.
- tax policy that makes the rich (those who make over $250K/year) and forces them to "pay their fair share". Now the vast majority of those folks are owners of small businesses, who create the majority of jobs. That makes sense. Pay folks not to work and take more money out of the hands of the folks who could actually provide work.
- green jobs. Green jobs does not work. If green jobs was a viable economic policy, the industry would be booming absent government intervention. The majority of green companies are unsuccessful with a number of those he touted and received stimulous funds out of business.
-mass transit. Mass transit projects are typically massively over budget, wasteful and in the majority of cases the cost per rider outrageous, essentially meaning that those riders are being heavily subsidized from those who don't use mass transit.

His policies don't work. People have no confidence that he can execute them - he did not execute them when he controlled congress, why would folks expect him to be able to execute them when he would actually have to compromise? The business community has no faith, significant uncertainty and they are going to sit on their hands until he is out of office.

Why is it different this time? Why are folks so resistant to his policies? There is an old saying "the straw that broke the camel's back". We have spent to the threshold of what we can spend. We are in debt to a level that will take decades to get out of. Our unfunded mandates are going to break the bank. More spending is not the answer. Families know it each month when they pay their bills, small business knows it, large corporations know it and the leaders of European countries know it. The administration and congressional democrats are the only folks it seem don't know it.

He's off to Camp David today for a bit more leisure time. I gather its time since he just got off vacation a couple of days ago. The best thing he could do for the economy would be to come out and tell folks he plans to stay there until the beginning of 2013.



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 04:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kaploink
For a group that clams not to be racist, the right sometimes seems a little too defensive on the issue. The outrage always seems a little too manufactured. Take it as you will, but it does make me wonder sometimes.


I disagree completely. Of course the right is "defensive" on the issue. We are NEVER the ones to bring race into any of our gripes, but ALWAYS labeled racists!!! How frustrating....

Here's a very small list of reasons to dislike Obama that have NOTHING to do with his race:

He has done the exact opposite on virtually every campaign promise he made, he takes vacations every other day while the country swirls the drain, he launched an illegal war in Libya, his past is eerily secretive, and he is a Marxist who has surrounded himself with fellow Marxists throughout his entire life. Obama's policies are in direct opposition with all the beliefs I hold dear.

Obama believes in the state taking care of people from the cradle to the grave, supports redistribution of wealth, opposes the second amendment, and is convinced the government is more qualified to manage our lives than we are. He is not only Un-American, but Anti-American.

Even if my assessments of Obama are off base or are untrue, none of them have been derived from the melanin levels in his skin, but from my interpretations of the words that come out of his mouth.

You present me with a white man who appears to be an Anti-American, Marxist, know-it-all, proven liar/hypocrite...and I promise you that I will hate that person too....

Come to think of it... Al Gore f'ing sucks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 04:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Atzil321
As a non-American looking in from the outside, it does seem that Obama has more
opposition to anything he wants to do than any other president in history... and you have
to ask is race a factor in what we are seeing? Even the office of the president of the united
states does not seem to carry as much respect for a lot of americans since a black man
was elected.
edit on 1-9-2011 by Atzil321 because: (no reason given)


Gimme a break!

He experiences opposition to everything because he's not a big fan of the United States of America and believes that we have risen to greatness on the backs of the less fortunate.

IOW, he's an ignorant Marxist who can go straight to hell!



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 04:56 PM
link   
Tempers are getting a little heated in the thread I see.... Relax and enjoy the Holiday weekend. You might as well save your energy till next week. There will be plenty more to talk about then. I'm reading rumblings that President Obama is actually considering trying a second round of stimulus money, never mind that we don't have said money or that the House will never pass it. He has some pretty clueless advisors around him. So much for tacking to the center for President Obama.

All I have to say on the matter is that when, as a President, the President you get compared to most is Jimmy Carter, you are in BIG re-election trouble.



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 05:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Indigo5

Originally posted by dolphinfan

But to suggest that folks don't want Obama to be successful, thus in essence working against their personal interests is outrageous.
edit on 2-9-2011 by dolphinfan because: (no reason given)

edit on 2-9-2011 by dolphinfan because: (no reason given)


I wasn't until the end of your post until I was able to figure out what you were accusing me of...and am still not sure what you were getting at.

My position is that President Obama is treated with less respect than other presidents and that part of that is due to the evolving nature of our politics, our economic situation and yes...without a doubt the fact that he is Black.

Muslim, terroist, kenyan anyone?

Now, to return to your last line...That seems naive. Mitch McConnel, the Republican Leader in the Senate unashamedly declared the GOP strategy..

"making Obama a one-term President is my single most important political goal along with every active Republican in the country"

Of course people don't want him to be sucessful. The debt limit debate and subsequent downgrade was pure proof of where the GOPs priorities are. Do not hand him a victory no matter what...even if it would benefit the country. They would be pleased as punch to have the economy suffer until the 2012 election. It works in their favor.


edit on 2-9-2011 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)

Let's not forget he is White as well.
edit on 2-9-2011 by Daedal because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 05:36 PM
link   
They keep throwing that race card again and again, hoping it will stick.

They're too dumb to realize people aren't buying it.

My opposition to Obama isn't because he's half black. It's because he's a former community organizer (whatever the hell that is) and has clearly shown he is in over his head with this presidential gig.



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 05:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by dolphinfan
[

People do want him to fail. They want him to fail because he is pushing leftist, statist and in many cases socialist (remember "spread the wealth around") policies.


Name these leftist policies. I love reading people spout off this garbage GOP talking point and provide next to nothing to back up this false claim.

Yes. Obama being a lap dog for wall street, big pharma, the insurance industry, etc, escalating wars and falling back on his commitment to the environment shows that he's a bleeding heart liberal

some of you guys are ridiculous.



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 06:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by MiloNickels

Originally posted by Kaploink
For a group that clams not to be racist, the right sometimes seems a little too defensive on the issue. The outrage always seems a little too manufactured. Take it as you will, but it does make me wonder sometimes.


I disagree completely. Of course the right is "defensive" on the issue. We are NEVER the ones to bring race into any of our gripes, but ALWAYS labeled racists!!! How frustrating....

Here's a very small list of reasons to dislike Obama that have NOTHING to do with his race:

He has done the exact opposite on virtually every campaign promise he made, he takes vacations every other day while the country swirls the drain, he launched an illegal war in Libya, his past is eerily secretive, and he is a Marxist who has surrounded himself with fellow Marxists throughout his entire life. Obama's policies are in direct opposition with all the beliefs I hold dear.

Obama believes in the state taking care of people from the cradle to the grave, supports redistribution of wealth, opposes the second amendment, and is convinced the government is more qualified to manage our lives than we are. He is not only Un-American, but Anti-American.

Even if my assessments of Obama are off base or are untrue, none of them have been derived from the melanin levels in his skin, but from my interpretations of the words that come out of his mouth.

You present me with a white man who appears to be an Anti-American, Marxist, know-it-all, proven liar/hypocrite...and I promise you that I will hate that person too....

Come to think of it... Al Gore f'ing sucks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Barack Obama is neither a marxist or a socialist, he is a CORPORATIST. A shilling, lying corporatist scum that nurtures this environment of crony capitalism and corporatism that has destroyed this nation.

At least know what you're talking about before saying stuff like this.



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 06:11 PM
link   
reply to post by illuminatislave
 


How about funding the illegal distribution of firearms over the border? Gun control is a leftist agenda and the money for operation fast & furious came from his stimulus!link

For an additional amount for ‘State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance’, $40,000,000, for competitive grants to provide assistance and equipment to local law enforcement along the Southern border and in High-Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas to combat criminal narcotics activity stemming from the Southern border, of which $10,000,000 shall be transferred to ‘Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, Salaries and Expenses’ for the ATF Project Gunrunner



new topics

top topics



 
35
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in

join