BF2S Forums 4 years of racism

[TUF]Catbox wrote:

I'm afraid to have an opinion...

I am not, especially when it is correct, and politically incorrect.

I'm sorry, how is this racism?

FEOS wrote:

Spark wrote:

I'm sorry, how is this racism?

It's not. Which is lowing's point.

I bet a good deal of Obamas opponents would like to see him fail just because he is black, racism is not dead in the US and your representatives do reflect the population ... so are you really sure that non of the arguments against Obama is not racially motivated?

Varegg wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Spark wrote:

I'm sorry, how is this racism?

It's not. Which is lowing's point.

I bet a good deal of Obamas opponents would like to see him fail just because he is black, racism is not dead in the US and your representatives do reflect the population ... so are you really sure that non of the arguments against Obama is not racially motivated?

You gotta be shitting me.

Someone disagrees with the man's policies and--just because he's black and the "disagreer" is white--it's automatically racist? Give me a fucking break. THAT is what perpetuates racism: making people afraid of disagreement because of another person's skin color.

The arguments about Obama's policies are based on just that: his policies. If someone wants to throw out a clearly racist statement like "he's not qualified to be President because he's black" then they should be rightly excoriated for it. But to throw out the race card simply because of differences in policy is flat wrong. That's trying to shut down debate and disagreement instead of addressing the issue(s).

Are there people who hate Obama simply because he's black? Of course there are. And that population is not limited to the US and for them it has nothing to do with his position of President. The fact that those people exist has no impact on other peoples' ability to disagree with him based on his policies.

Varegg wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Varegg wrote:

I bet a good deal of Obamas opponents would like to see him fail just because he is black, racism is not dead in the US and your representatives do reflect the population ... so are you really sure that non of the arguments against Obama is not racially motivated?

You gotta be shitting me.

Someone disagrees with the man's policies and--just because he's black and the "disagreer" is white--it's automatically racist? Give me a fucking break. THAT is what perpetuates racism: making people afraid of disagreement because of another person's skin color.

The arguments about Obama's policies are based on just that: his policies. If someone wants to throw out a clearly racist statement like "he's not qualified to be President because he's black" then they should be rightly excoriated for it. But to throw out the race card simply because of differences in policy is flat wrong. That's trying to shut down debate and disagreement instead of addressing the issue(s).

Are there people who hate Obama simply because he's black? Of course there are. And that population is not limited to the US and for them it has nothing to do with his position of President. The fact that those people exist has no impact on other peoples' ability to disagree with him based on his policies.

Nu uh ... I shit you not ...

I didn't use the term automatically, you did ... I don't exclude the fact that sometimes it can be racially motivated, it may not be but you exclude that it can be ...

No, I don't. I simply reject the notion that the default argument should be racial.

Varegg wrote:

Even you say that people may hate him because he is black, and the chance that one of those people also holds a seat in congress is huge ... so how can blatantly exclude racism in congress?

On what do you base your analysis here? You are ignoring the vetting process that occurs when people start running for office. If that particular skeleton was in their closet, it's more likely than not that it would come to light during the campaign.

Varegg wrote:

So of course his policies can be disagreed upon based on racism ... I'm not saying thats what happend but you simply can't exclude it ... politicians are just humans after all ...

I'm not excluding it. I'm arguing that using the race card--absent any indication of racism--instead of examining the policy differences is weak, intellectually dishonest, and cowardly on the part of those playing the card.

FEOS wrote:

Varegg wrote:

FEOS wrote:

You gotta be shitting me.

Someone disagrees with the man's policies and--just because he's black and the "disagreer" is white--it's automatically racist? Give me a fucking break. THAT is what perpetuates racism: making people afraid of disagreement because of another person's skin color.

The arguments about Obama's policies are based on just that: his policies. If someone wants to throw out a clearly racist statement like "he's not qualified to be President because he's black" then they should be rightly excoriated for it. But to throw out the race card simply because of differences in policy is flat wrong. That's trying to shut down debate and disagreement instead of addressing the issue(s).

Are there people who hate Obama simply because he's black? Of course there are. And that population is not limited to the US and for them it has nothing to do with his position of President. The fact that those people exist has no impact on other peoples' ability to disagree with him based on his policies.

Nu uh ... I shit you not ...

I didn't use the term automatically, you did ... I don't exclude the fact that sometimes it can be racially motivated, it may not be but you exclude that it can be ...

No, I don't. I simply reject the notion that the default argument should be racial.

Varegg wrote:

Even you say that people may hate him because he is black, and the chance that one of those people also holds a seat in congress is huge ... so how can blatantly exclude racism in congress?

On what do you base your analysis here? You are ignoring the vetting process that occurs when people start running for office. If that particular skeleton was in their closet, it's more likely than not that it would come to light during the campaign.

Varegg wrote:

So of course his policies can be disagreed upon based on racism ... I'm not saying thats what happend but you simply can't exclude it ... politicians are just humans after all ...

I'm not excluding it. I'm arguing that using the race card--absent any indication of racism--instead of examining the policy differences is weak, intellectually dishonest, and cowardly on the part of those playing the card.

Nope ... I'm neither ignoring it nor am I excluding anything ... Carter may be wrong but he may also be right ...

Wilson did apologize for his outburst and imo that was the correct thing to do no matter what his agenda was ...

its not just carter

Didn't say it was.

I'll stay where I am then, kthx.

ghettoperson wrote:

I thought this thread was going to be lowings 4 year anniversary on the forum.

Or Flaming Maniac's, seeing as how he banned me for supporting the black power movement

Predicting the race card will be used by some people when talking about the nations first African American president isn't exactly tough to do.

Obviously race is a factor in all this stuff. It would be foolish to dismiss it outright.

Obviously not nearly as foolish as Jimmy Carter and the nonsense he's been spouting about it, but there will be a level of racially motivated hostility towards Obama - but nothing even remotely like what has been suggested by Democrats.

no racism here, move along, nothing to see here, there is definitely no racism here

Pictures speak louder than words sometimes. But, "you lie, boy" is pretty bad too. If Joe Wilson used the word boy, then they should impeach the little prick. Talk about lack of respect for the office of the president, and to think that the GOP is always trading on their "patriotism."

Looks to me like PBO's election win scratched the thin veneer that a lot of people in the US use to hide their racism. IMO its really sad. Its better to pick the scab and live with a healed scar than leaving the wound infected. I hope these ideas of these cowardly racists are brought to the surface so they can be addressed head on, instead of this garbage shadow fighting.

So while I agree that all opposition to health care reform can not be labelled racists, there are a good number of people who have injected their racist beliefs to further their opposition and to marshall support from other racists. Those people need to be confronted and the debate should be based on the facts of the proposal.

BTW Why aren't any of the GOP members loudly condemning these protesters who hold up racists posters. Unless, of course, there is no racism here /sarcasm.

Last edited by Diesel_dyk (2009-09-17 15:41:51)