Liberal insanity/disagree with a minority, your a racist!

Why is it, every single time, I see any non liberal disagree with, or say somthing negative about anyone that is a non white male, the first line out of the libs mouths are, racist, bigot, sexist..etc...

It seems really ignorant to me, there are many reasons to disagree besides racism or sexism, yet that is the very first thing to come out of their mouths, on every single occasion, unless the are the ones doing it.

Just for example, this whole Susan Rice deal, libs all over the country, on the net, the TV, the radio, are saing the same thing. Yet they completely fail to address the facts, she did go out on all the sunday talk shows, and did lie about the embassy attack.

Now I understand, there are plenty of cases where she might not have known she was saying untrue things, but anyone in her position, should not be out running their mouths about things the are uninformed about, if they dont know the facts.

All I have seen, from my perspective, is that many are asking the appropriate quaestions, like, why did the Obama admin send her out to spew obvious lies? Or, how could she have not known the truth?

Yet every lib in the country, including the POTUS, are once again playing the race card, and the sex card. As if the only reason anyone would question this is because she is female, or black.

Personally, I would love to know the reason, as it is blatant lies, and very obvious. I couldnt care if she was pink with pokadots, and had both or either set of genitals. I dont think asking these questions are being asked of a black woman, they are being ask of a government official that happens to be a woman, and black.

I believe it was the intent of the dems to play this card the entire time, and so Obama sent out a "black woman" to say these obvious lies, so that when it came to light, that they were all lies, the could then play this out in a manner that would take attention away from the real issue ( the obvious lying to American citizens about the deaths of 4 Americans that could have and should have been avoided) and now has it as a, "why are the repubs always racist?" issue.

Not to say it wasnt a beautifully played political theater moment, I as well as many others already know obama is a master of the political arena, I just find it to be disgusting, and entirely unbecoming of a statesman.

I would just personally like someone to explain this to me, as we have all seen it, and we all know it is happening on a daily to weekly basis.

Is it simply politics, or do liberals really think that the only reason to ever question someones actions is race and or sex based?

Because it is the right attacking her, and the right has been wallowing in sexism and racism these days.

And there is no proof that she lied. She just gave the talking points she was given.

If she was a white male from the republican party, would she be receiving the same accusations and scrutiny?

Originally posted by nixie_nox
If she was a white male from the republican party, would she be receiving the same accusations and scrutiny?

This is a rhetorical question, right? If a white male republican did exactly the same thing, the lame stream media would excoriate, or even crucify him. You know it, I know it.

reply to post by nixie_nox


I dont care if it was a blonde haired blue eyed man, or Mexican, or Chinese, or Cuban..........

She went out on national TV on 5 different sunday shows and told absolute lies about what happened, nothing she said was true at all, besides there was an attack on the embassy.

So either Obama, sent her out on purpose to knowing lie about it, or she was out running her mouth off about things she knew nothing about. All while Obama sat back and made no correction, or refuted her BS in any way at all to clear up the record.While being quite well informed, for almost a week about the true actions that took place.

Either way, Obama is lying, or she is incompetent, or both are lying and incompetent, or some other mix of the 2.

There is not one way of saying this where these questions shouldnt be being asked, no matter the source. Americans died, government officials lied about it, all while knowing the truth, or allowing one of their senior officials to lie, and did nothing to stop it, or correct it.

It has nothing to do with race or sex, you guys do remember the bush admins failing with the whole Pat Tillman incident dont you. They were nailed to the wall over that, and rightly so, as they lied about what happened. How is this any different, other than it was a repub in office then, and now it is a dem?

reply to post by inverslyproportional
They have to pull the [insert bias here] card because there is no real defense or explanation for their actions. Thus they deflect and try to put the onus upon the attacker to explain why he hates [insert target victimized group here] and exactly when he stopped wearing his sheet/hood in public. They are totally pathetic, yet the sheeple buy it; hook, line and sinker every time.

Originally posted by nixie_nox
Because it is the right attacking her, and the right has been wallowing in sexism and racism these days.

And there is no proof that she lied. She just gave the talking points she was given.

If she was a white male from the republican party, would she be receiving the same accusations and scrutiny?

Is that a serious question?

You think people wouldnt jump all over any "official" who gave incorrect information about the deaths of 4 Americans?

Any logical, sane, and intelligent person would be able to differentiate between racism and holding an administration accountable for giving out false information.

Then again, its not like many on the left or the right could be described as logical, sane, & intelligent. Especially the left, they hold the record for crazy.

reply to post by nixie_nox

If she was a white male from the republican party, would she be receiving the same accusations and scrutiny?

Yes.

Benghazi was a serious event, that result in death. Contradictions and plain lies we're caught and exposed and they would have been questioned regardless.


"I did not have sexual relations with that women" ring a bell?

reply to post by inverslyproportional


I would like to point out that, technically I think whites might be the minority now, so does that mean white people can make the same type of statement because they are the minority, or will they be allowed to when they are? I mean we're all about equality right? That means it goes both ways.

Originally posted by GrimReaper86
reply to post by inverslyproportional

 

I would like to point out that, technically I think whites might be the minority now, so does that mean white people can make the same type of statement because they are the minority, or will they be allowed to when they are? I mean we're all about equality right? That means it goes both ways.

"Equality" means that the straight white man is always wrong by virtue of being straight white and male.

It is exactly as you say it is op. Liberals only support free speech if it is speech that the party commissars find acceptable, and does not expose any ugly truths in their pink, and fluffy pretty lies.

Originally posted by DarthMuerte
reply to post by inverslyproportional

 

They have to pull the [insert bias here] card because there is no real defense or explanation for their actions. Thus they deflect and try to put the onus upon the attacker to explain why he hates [insert target victimized group here] and exactly when he stopped wearing his sheet/hood in public. They are totally pathetic, yet the sheeple buy it; hook, line and sinker every time.

This is basically exactly what it looks like to me also, I honestly dont see any other reasonable explanation for the fake "outrage" other than that.

It seems like this is the most obvious question that everyone should be asking, but they are acting like it is a nonissue, and only race or sex is the reason.

I just cant wrap m mind around this at all. Unless it is from a psychological view point, where libs are actually always concerned about sex and or race, thus they assume everyone else is also equally obsessed all the time.

It is called projection in psychology, where one assumes others think just like them, therefore they say outrageous things, not realizing that they are not commonly accepted.

Again, where is the proof that she lied?

reply to post by inverslyproportional


What you are witnessing is hyper-active compartmentalization. PEOPLE in general in regards to politics usually put others in a nice mental box with a shinny label. This label may say liberal, democrat, conservative, republican, independent, conspiracy theorist, nut-job, right wing, left wing...so on and so forth. ONCE someone is put in that box and labeled mentally they are dismissed with the according counter disagreements.

This is psych 101 really. Politically were at such a rate of mental decay that people are too lazy to discuss topics and too eager to dismiss and ridicule...this is why "nothing ever gets done" and nothing ever gets accomplished. The discussion goes nowhere because no one was ever really interested in a discussion in the first place...they were merely interested in being right and painting the other as wrong.

Its like a bunch of children really...Just because they are talking about something like politics doesn't mean they are automatically adults...they are really children having a child like disagreement over Tonka Trucks in the sandbox but dress it up in adult words so they don't have to address the fact their acting like children...

The racism thing is really low on the intellectual rebuttal totem pole...its like the worst most desperate card in the deck to play when trying to dismiss or derail a discussion.

Usually the first person to bring up race is the real closet racist...because if people truly believe race doesn't matter then it should be treated as such...but to continually bring it up over and over and over is to imply that not only does it matter...its the ONLY thing that matters.

I find I can go from being called a liberal republican to a conservative democrat left wing/right wing nut job in the course of a 10 minute discussion with some of these people...their labels don't mean anything its just something they do to keep their head from imploding...it simplifies the issues so they can pretend to participate in the discussion...

my2c

Originally posted by GrimReaper86
reply to post by inverslyproportional

 

I would like to point out that, technically I think whites might be the minority now, so does that mean white people can make the same type of statement because they are the minority, or will they be allowed to when they are? I mean we're all about equality right? That means it goes both ways.

I believe you are correct, i believe 'white males" are a minority now, but it doesnt matter, as only whites can be racist, which is why there is the term "reverse racism". Which in and of itself implies one can only be racist if the are white.

Otherwise it would just be called racism no matter the group it targets.

Originally posted by nixie_nox
Again, where is the proof that she lied?

Would you like me to post her comments verbatim and show how they do not match up with what actually happened?

It doesn't seem that you actually know the definition of the word "lie".

She stated X happened, when Y was what really happened.

Since Y is what happened, her statement that X happened is therefore false.

Pointing out her falsehoods is not racist or sexist, it is pointing out a lie.

Originally posted by nixie_nox
Again, where is the proof that she lied?

Nixie you have just highlighted the central point of the op, in this reply and your previous one by ignoring what was actually said, and continuing on ignoring the fact that an administration is meant to jointly accountable for its individual, and collective actions.

reply to post by inverslyproportional


Your being racist against people that are anti-racist!!!

See, you just can't win. The "racism card" is one of those impossible to defend against arguments.

It's why I've declared and decided that anyone that disagrees with me must be doing so because they are a bigoted racist. I'm pretty sure I'll win every argument from now on!!!

Liberals will always make it about race when it doesnt go in their favor. *race card gets pulled

Condoleezza Rice (R), appointed national security adviser by g w bush. Then becomes the first
black women to be appointed secretary of state
--------------
She was called "uncle tom" by the liberals while in office.

reply to post by Sly1one


Your 2c ?
More like your 200$ worth.

Very nice high quality post, keep it up.

And to the OP, you created a very interesting discussion. Thanks

Ok this will be a real intellectual challenge finally.

I am going to the drawing board to devise methods of undoing the race card.
I am gonna go outside the box here as this is very tricky.

Lets be creative, utilize reverse psychology, whatever will work.

Time to brainstorm on this most difficult prospect.
If I get lucky and come up with anything viable I will alert yall asap.

Ill be needing some additional brain power here, in case anyone is game.