Ty, the tea partiers are widely accused of being racist, conservatives in general whenever they are bitched about, racsim is eventually thrown in. Gimme a break by denying this. It is a common theme by those that oppose conservatism.Ty wrote:
Because it's not an accusation that everyone who opposes Obama is racist, you're just saying it implies this. Considering that you're implying that Clyburn's "Obama's problems are due to racism" is an admission of failure you should fully appreciate this sort of thing. Either way, neither are true.lowing wrote:
Well first, I am not pissed. This is a debate forum, and this issue is a debatable topic. Second, you are telling me to direct my frustration at those that do oppose Obama for racism. Why, when direction of my point of discussion is toward those that accuse us ALL as being racist because Obama is a failure?Ty wrote:
I think your anger is legitimate Lowing but you should really be more directing it at the small minority of people who oppose Obama on racist grounds. And they do exist. Considering how politically misinformed people are, (in all countries not just America, although you guys do have the influence of incredibly polarising news media,) of course they will ignore policies and dislike Obama because of other reasons - and his race is one of these for a number of people.
So yes, you should be pissed off but you should be pissed off at those living up to the steriotype, not just those calling it out.
Look, say a small number of fans of sports team X get rowdy at a game and start throwing beer bottles around. The next day a news story says that "fans of Team X were disruptive". If I were a fan of Team X I'd be pretty upset because I know that this would only be a small minority. However the story implys, (but doesn't say,) that all Team X fans were rowdy which gives us a bad name. But why would I be mad at the news story? It just reported what it saw. I would be more mad at the rowdy fans who ruined my reputation as a Team X fan.
Hope I didn't lose anyone there.
I see the same thing happening here. A small number of people who oppose Obama do so on racial grounds. I've seen the polls showing people don't support Obama because they think he's Muslim or Kenyan. I've seen all those people who would never be satisfied with a warehouse full of birth certificates. I've seen comments on news stories or from commentators that subtly drop hints that aim to be derogatory to Obama because of his race. It's not widespread but it does happen. Usually it's from people too stupid to actually learn about policies.
So when people like Clyburn come out with their opinions like this it can imply that the problem is more widespread than it is. That's just how it is.
Which takes me back to my original point: You should be far more or at least equally as angry with those who live up to the accusations, not just those who make them.
sometimes i cant tell the difference between lowing's posts and war man's posts
Tu Stultus Es
Ty wrote:
Because it's not an accusation that everyone who opposes Obama is racist, you're just saying it implies this. Considering that you're implying that Clyburn's "Obama's problems are due to racism" is an admission of failure you should fully appreciate this sort of thing. Either way, neither are true.lowing wrote:
Well first, I am not pissed. This is a debate forum, and this issue is a debatable topic. Second, you are telling me to direct my frustration at those that do oppose Obama for racism. Why, when direction of my point of discussion is toward those that accuse us ALL as being racist because Obama is a failure?Ty wrote:
I think your anger is legitimate Lowing but you should really be more directing it at the small minority of people who oppose Obama on racist grounds. And they do exist. Considering how politically misinformed people are, (in all countries not just America, although you guys do have the influence of incredibly polarising news media,) of course they will ignore policies and dislike Obama because of other reasons - and his race is one of these for a number of people.
So yes, you should be pissed off but you should be pissed off at those living up to the steriotype, not just those calling it out.
Look, say a small number of fans of sports team X get rowdy at a game and start throwing beer bottles around. The next day a news story says that "fans of Team X were disruptive". If I were a fan of Team X I'd be pretty upset because I know that this would only be a small minority. However the story implys, (but doesn't say,) that all Team X fans were rowdy which gives us a bad name. But why would I be mad at the news story? It just reported what it saw. I would be more mad at the rowdy fans who ruined my reputation as a Team X fan.
Hope I didn't lose anyone there.
I see the same thing happening here. A small number of people who oppose Obama do so on racial grounds. I've seen the polls showing people don't support Obama because they think he's Muslim or Kenyan. I've seen all those people who would never be satisfied with a warehouse full of birth certificates. I've seen comments on news stories or from commentators that subtly drop hints that aim to be derogatory to Obama because of his race. It's not widespread but it does happen. Usually it's from people too stupid to actually learn about policies.
So when people like Clyburn come out with their opinions like this it can imply that the problem is more widespread than it is. That's just how it is.
Which takes me back to my original point: You should be far more or at least equally as angry with those who live up to the accusations, not just those who make them.
Kmar wrote:
Not everyone that questions Obama is called a racist. However, making that statement is indeed a way for the accuser to play victim themselves. "Oh look I can't even make a point without being called a racist .. yada yada". That isn't to say that it doesn't happen sometimes, but it goes both ways.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
And Tea Party members/conservatives call Obama and his supporters "communists that are destroying America". (http://www.google.com.au/search?sourcei … ng+america)lowing wrote:
Ty, the tea partiers are widely accused of being racist, conservatives in general whenever they are bitched about, racsim is eventually thrown in. Gimme a break by denying this. It is a common theme by those that oppose conservatism.Ty wrote:
Because it's not an accusation that everyone who opposes Obama is racist, you're just saying it implies this. Considering that you're implying that Clyburn's "Obama's problems are due to racism" is an admission of failure you should fully appreciate this sort of thing. Either way, neither are true.lowing wrote:
Well first, I am not pissed. This is a debate forum, and this issue is a debatable topic. Second, you are telling me to direct my frustration at those that do oppose Obama for racism. Why, when direction of my point of discussion is toward those that accuse us ALL as being racist because Obama is a failure?
Look, say a small number of fans of sports team X get rowdy at a game and start throwing beer bottles around. The next day a news story says that "fans of Team X were disruptive". If I were a fan of Team X I'd be pretty upset because I know that this would only be a small minority. However the story implys, (but doesn't say,) that all Team X fans were rowdy which gives us a bad name. But why would I be mad at the news story? It just reported what it saw. I would be more mad at the rowdy fans who ruined my reputation as a Team X fan.
Hope I didn't lose anyone there.
I see the same thing happening here. A small number of people who oppose Obama do so on racial grounds. I've seen the polls showing people don't support Obama because they think he's Muslim or Kenyan. I've seen all those people who would never be satisfied with a warehouse full of birth certificates. I've seen comments on news stories or from commentators that subtly drop hints that aim to be derogatory to Obama because of his race. It's not widespread but it does happen. Usually it's from people too stupid to actually learn about policies.
So when people like Clyburn come out with their opinions like this it can imply that the problem is more widespread than it is. That's just how it is.
Which takes me back to my original point: You should be far more or at least equally as angry with those who live up to the accusations, not just those who make them.
So what's your point? Are you just trying to point out how ludicrously bi-polar the American political system is?
You see no difference between being accused of a political ideology in the context of politics and being called a racist? If you can't I can not help ya.Little BaBy JESUS wrote:
And Tea Party members/conservatives call Obama and his supporters "communists that are destroying America". (http://www.google.com.au/search?sourcei … ng+america)lowing wrote:
Ty, the tea partiers are widely accused of being racist, conservatives in general whenever they are bitched about, racsim is eventually thrown in. Gimme a break by denying this. It is a common theme by those that oppose conservatism.Ty wrote:
Because it's not an accusation that everyone who opposes Obama is racist, you're just saying it implies this. Considering that you're implying that Clyburn's "Obama's problems are due to racism" is an admission of failure you should fully appreciate this sort of thing. Either way, neither are true.
Look, say a small number of fans of sports team X get rowdy at a game and start throwing beer bottles around. The next day a news story says that "fans of Team X were disruptive". If I were a fan of Team X I'd be pretty upset because I know that this would only be a small minority. However the story implys, (but doesn't say,) that all Team X fans were rowdy which gives us a bad name. But why would I be mad at the news story? It just reported what it saw. I would be more mad at the rowdy fans who ruined my reputation as a Team X fan.
Hope I didn't lose anyone there.
I see the same thing happening here. A small number of people who oppose Obama do so on racial grounds. I've seen the polls showing people don't support Obama because they think he's Muslim or Kenyan. I've seen all those people who would never be satisfied with a warehouse full of birth certificates. I've seen comments on news stories or from commentators that subtly drop hints that aim to be derogatory to Obama because of his race. It's not widespread but it does happen. Usually it's from people too stupid to actually learn about policies.
So when people like Clyburn come out with their opinions like this it can imply that the problem is more widespread than it is. That's just how it is.
Which takes me back to my original point: You should be far more or at least equally as angry with those who live up to the accusations, not just those who make them.
So what's your point? Are you just trying to point out how ludicrously bi-polar the American political system is?
Lowing I've already accepted that the racism call is used unfairly, I've also outlined why and how this can be interpreted to imply that the problem is far bigger than it is. You're yet to even admit that racism is a factor for many people in why they don't support Obama. These accusations of racism aren't drawn from the void, they're based on actual instances. I'm not saying that it hasn't been played up for political gain, that's just the nature of the beast and both/all sides do it.
You said in a post on page one "if you are going to throw accusations, at least has something to back them up." They have been backed up. It exists. Not on a general scale by any means but it's there. You can either deny it and act overly defensive whenever someone brings it up or you can admit that it's problem and look at how to rectify it.
You said in a post on page one "if you are going to throw accusations, at least has something to back them up." They have been backed up. It exists. Not on a general scale by any means but it's there. You can either deny it and act overly defensive whenever someone brings it up or you can admit that it's problem and look at how to rectify it.
[Blinking eyes thing]
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/tzyon
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/tzyon
Oh yea, because they are definitely calling Obama a "communist that is destroying America" because that is descriptive of his policies. The only people calling Obama a communist are people who have very little idea about politics, the political spectrum and Obama's policies specifically.lowing wrote:
You see no difference between being accused of a political ideology in the context of politics and being called a racist? If you can't I can not help ya.Little BaBy JESUS wrote:
And Tea Party members/conservatives call Obama and his supporters "communists that are destroying America". (http://www.google.com.au/search?sourcei … ng+america)lowing wrote:
Ty, the tea partiers are widely accused of being racist, conservatives in general whenever they are bitched about, racsim is eventually thrown in. Gimme a break by denying this. It is a common theme by those that oppose conservatism.
So what's your point? Are you just trying to point out how ludicrously bi-polar the American political system is?
What is so terrible about the word "racist" in America that means it somehow trumps every other insult and is an earth-shattering revelation in politics and society?
We are not talking about the same thing Ty. Of course there are racists in America, both black and white. I am not addressing them, because there is nothing to address. I am speaking of Obama supporters, that accuse ANYONE that opposes him as being a racist. AN entire tea party movement is the perfect example of this. They refuse to acknowledge the issues and dismiss any resistance as racially motivated. You know it is true. Why try to down play it?Ty wrote:
Lowing I've already accepted that the racism call is used unfairly, I've also outlined why and how this can be interpreted to imply that the problem is far bigger than it is. You're yet to even admit that racism is a factor for many people in why they don't support Obama. These accusations of racism aren't drawn from the void, they're based on actual instances. I'm not saying that it hasn't been played up for political gain, that's just the nature of the beast and both/all sides do it.
You said in a post on page one "if you are going to throw accusations, at least has something to back them up." They have been backed up. It exists. Not on a general scale by any means but it's there. You can either deny it and act overly defensive whenever someone brings it up or you can admit that it's problem and look at how to rectify it.
Well hate to break it to you, but when Obama views the private sector as the enemy, and government as the answer to the private citizens wants and needs, yeah well, that is a communist POV.Little BaBy JESUS wrote:
Oh yea, because they are definitely calling Obama a "communist that is destroying America" because that is descriptive of his policies. The only people calling Obama a communist are people who have very little idea about politics, the political spectrum and Obama's policies specifically.lowing wrote:
You see no difference between being accused of a political ideology in the context of politics and being called a racist? If you can't I can not help ya.Little BaBy JESUS wrote:
And Tea Party members/conservatives call Obama and his supporters "communists that are destroying America". (http://www.google.com.au/search?sourcei … ng+america)
So what's your point? Are you just trying to point out how ludicrously bi-polar the American political system is?
What is so terrible about the word "racist" in America that means it somehow trumps every other insult and is an earth-shattering revelation in politics and society?
Again, if you do not know the difference between called say a conservative or a liberal and a racist, I can't help ya.
See how the generalising game works?lowing wrote:
We are not talking about the same thing Ty. Of course there are racists in America, both black and white. I am not addressing them, because there is nothing to address. I am speaking of Obama tea party supporters, that accuse ANYONE that opposes him them as being a racist communists that are destroying America. AN entire tea party movement government is the perfect example of this. They refuse to acknowledge the issues and dismiss any resistance as racially communist motivated. You know it is true. Why try to down play it?
lowing, do you think Obama is a communist?
Xbone Stormsurgezz
To equate Obama's views with communism is insulting to both communist and Obama. Rather than post a wall of text explaining the diferances between communist theory regarding economics and Obama views and actions, I'll just leave this here.
I feel like a tool for posting a political compass graph. I really do.
I think he is more a communist than a capitalist.Kmar wrote:
lowing, do you think Obama is a communist?
So no?lowing wrote:
I think he is more a communist than a capitalist.Kmar wrote:
lowing, do you think Obama is a communist?
Xbone Stormsurgezz
He hates the private sector, he loathes self reliance over govt. control and dependency...You tell me.Kmar wrote:
So no?lowing wrote:
I think he is more a communist than a capitalist.Kmar wrote:
lowing, do you think Obama is a communist?
No. I ask you.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
It's funny that calling people racist is such an effective tool for putting people on the defensive.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
pipe down, racist
Tu Stultus Es
Stop being a Mexicant.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
defensive, yeah thats it.Jay wrote:
It's funny that calling people racist is such an effective tool for putting people on the defensive.
Yup I would say his political ideology favors communism closer than any other political ideology.Kmar wrote:
No. I ask you.
If you have a point just make it already
Last edited by lowing (2011-05-29 18:00:47)
lowing, what is Obama? Stalinist? Marxist-Leninist? Maoist?
You need to be more specific....
You need to be more specific....
So is that a yes?lowing wrote:
Yup I would say his political ideology favors communism closer than any other political ideology.Kmar wrote:
No. I ask you.
If you have a point just make it already
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Sure, marxist, socialist, communist, whatever, call it a yes.. I am not going to sit here and read the dissected definitions of each however. Suffice it to say, his views are in favor of the power of govt. and not the individual.Kmar wrote:
So is that a yes?lowing wrote:
Yup I would say his political ideology favors communism closer than any other political ideology.Kmar wrote:
No. I ask you.
If you have a point just make it already