To what degree do you think resistance to US President Obama's policies are fueled by racism?

Much closer to 0% than 25%.

I'm thinking between 50 and 75%.

> Much closer to 0% than 25%.

Being awfully kind there.

I'm sure there are a few racists out there who would agree with Obama's policies if only he weren't half black. Sure, there must be a few around; we're a very diverse country. However, there is plenty of disagreement in this country for any given political position so jumping to "racism!" as the explanation seems awfully far fetched. The people who don't like the idea of government taking over health care didn't like it any better when Clinton was pushing it.

> I'm sure there are a few racists out there who
> would agree with Obama's policies if only he weren't
> half black. Sure, there must be a few around;
> we're a very diverse country. However, there
> is plenty of disagreement in this country for
> any given political position so jumping to "racism!"
> as the explanation seems awfully far fetched.
> The people who don't like the idea of government
> taking over health care didn't like it any better
> when Clinton was pushing it.

Yet the opposition to health care reform when Clinton was doing was nowhere near this violent. People are bringing guns, posters of Obama as witch doctor, waving signs that say "Hang the Kenyan"... This is ugly like we haven't seen in a long time, and to deny that there is a strong undercurrent of racism is naieve at best.

I don't deny that the undercurrent is there to be found if you go looking for it. Some people want to find racism, they go looking, and they find it. Certainly it's easier to dismiss their arguments if you don't have to address the points they raise because they're just racists anyway. As we all know, that's known argumentum ad hominem. It works well if people allow themselves to be distracted from the point. My take so far is that some people are pushing hard on the racism angle but they're not getting the traction that they expected or hoped for.

Not sure, maybe 50%, but I think there are other factors as well -- like conservatives' resistance to change no matter who proposes it.

I think those people opposed Clinton's plan too, it's just that now, they get to have their idea of 'fun' with the stupid signs. They don't oppose his plan because he's black, but they use their opposition to his plan as a convenient way to splatter their racism on signs.

Extremely miniscule. It's the liberals advertising the race thing. Carter is an idiot.

We don't like Obama's policies and attempt to turn this country into a socialist state. Period. And I don't care if the President is black, white, yellow, green or a woman. Nothing to do with it.

> I'm thinking between 50 and 75%.


Typical liberal bullcrap response. What if Hillary had won? You then woulda cried "sexist"? Get real. No one except white supremacists cares that Obama is black. We just want his policies and him gone, period.

About 3 to 6%. Which is closer to 0 than to 25%, so I pick "Not at all".

> |> I'm sure there are a few racists out there who
> |> would agree with Obama's policies if only he weren't
> |> half black. Sure, there must be a few around;
> |> we're a very diverse country. However, there
> |> is plenty of disagreement in this country for
> |> any given political position so jumping to "racism!"
> |> as the explanation seems awfully far fetched.
> |> The people who don't like the idea of government
> |> taking over health care didn't like it any better
> |> when Clinton was pushing it.
>
> Yet the opposition to health care reform when Clinton was doing was
> nowhere near this violent. People are bringing guns, posters of Obama
> as witch doctor, waving signs that say "Hang the Kenyan"... This is
> ugly like we haven't seen in a long time, and to deny that there is
> a strong undercurrent of racism is naieve at best.
>

People who do that are the minority even among the Tea Party protesters. But they make the news because they're the loudest. Thats kinda like if you go into a biker bar and 2 guys want to kick your ass for no reason other than them being drunk and/or butt-holes and there are 30 people in there. You're going to remember those two, and your perception will tell you that most people there are butt-holes (which I guess is partially true, since the rest didn't try to step in).

> I don't deny that the undercurrent is there to
> be found if you go looking for it. Some people
> want to find racism, they go looking, and they
> find it.

You make it sound as if I had to go searching for it. I didn't. It's right there out in the open. http://rawstory.com/rawreplay/?p=4022

> Certainly it's easier to dismiss their
> arguments if you don't have to address the points
> they raise because they're just racists anyway.

It also helps that a lot fo their points are made up, like death panels, etc.

> As we all know, that's known argumentum ad
> hominem. It works well if people allow themselves
> to be distracted from the point. My take so far
> is that some people are pushing hard on the racism
> angle but they're not getting the traction that
> they expected or hoped for.

And the media point their cameras at those signs because it draws more viewers in.

Yep, especially the more left-leaning ones where the left can do no wrong and the people on the people on the right don't actually believe what they say they do (because gasp, someone might have a different perspective on things), but instead are secretly racists/evil. (cough, MSNBC, cough). In fact, pretty much all the networks are slanted in favor of White House (except for Fox News), as are their audience, so off course they're going to focus on evidence that confirms what they already believe. And its good for ratings too.

Fox News isn't any better. They're just biased in the other direction. Glenn Beck and Hannity make the protesters out to be angels at best, and glorifying them as if they're some sort of saviors at worse. In reality the Tea Party protesters are nothing more than protesters who believe in something-- just like every other protesting group out there. Nothing more, nothing less.

> |> Certainly it's easier to dismiss their
> |> arguments if you don't have to address the points
> |> they raise because they're just racists anyway.
>
> It also helps that a lot fo their points are made up, like death panels,
> etc.
>

What do death panels have to do with racism? Granted, its a crapty point, based on bullcrap; but its people who genuinely believe in the death panels and motivated by trying to stop it, as opposed to closet racists.

>
> |> |> Certainly it's easier to dismiss their
> |> |> arguments if you don't have to address
> the points
> |> |> they raise because they're just racists
> anyway.
> |>
> |> It also helps that a lot fo their points
> are made up, like death panels,
> |> etc.
> |>
>
> What do death panels have to do with racism?
> Granted, its a crapty point, based on bullcrap;
> but its people who genuinely believe in the death
> panels and motivated by trying to stop it, as
> opposed to closet racists.

I was talking about people who can be easily dismissed. I was referring to the racists AND the liars, not saying the two are always mutually inclusive (though they can be).

And besides your earlier argument is hinged on a lie. No one on MSNBC et al is saying that ALL the protestors are racist. In fact, in that video I provided KO summed up the Right's tactic du jour thusly;

If you say any criticism of Obama is racial, your words will be twisted into all criticism of Obama is racial. And if deniers can then prove one instance isn't racial, they will exaggerate that lone proof into proof that all criticism isn't racial.

I point out that a lot of the opposition to Obama is racially motivated. Morons then go on about "how can I say that all criticism of Obama is racist?" These guys say this when I myself have been critical of some of the President's choices, including and especially his continuing of the "Office of Faith based Initiatives," or due to Truth in Labeling law the "Give Government Money to Churches in Violation of the Establishment Cause of the 1st Amendment Office."

Of course the fact that you SoYa, or anyone else can be so casual about this scares me. My grandmother lived in San Fransisco in 1978. She's seen this before; the extreme political rhetoric of the Right that leads to people (such as say a beloved Mayor, and a prominent Gay Rights activist) getting killed. Lots of people like to talk about Left Wing groups in America that are just as extreme yadda yadda. And that was true; back in the late 60s. No Right Winger I've argued with about this has EVER been able to cite an example of Left Wing violence against people that doesn't date back to the Weathermen, and the only contemporary examples they have are the radical environmentalist movement, whose acts are against property not people (not that it makes it OK, but I digress) and who I would imagine don't have a lot of love for Obama either seeing as he's Human and has a decent sized carbon foot print, what with having Air Force One and the Secret Service and all.

None

> None

When you portray the White House with watermelons growing in the front yard, or you attach Obama's face to a picture of an African witch doctor in order to make a point against health care reform or ANY major issue, it IS racist. It's injecting race where it doesn't belong and adds nothing to the debate.

I would say that the 'Birthers' are very much fueled by racism.

But the opposition to Obama's policies is 20% racism, 80% good old-fashioned 'muriken fear of socialism and government deciding whether you live or die.

> I would say that the 'Birthers' are very much
> fueled by racism.
>
> But the opposition to Obama's policies is 20%
> racism, 80% good old-fashioned 'muriken fear of
> socialism and government deciding whether you
> live or die.

Which of course is much much worse than an insurance company accountant deciding whether you live or die.

It's better to vote with your wallet and get what you pay for, than vote with your ballot and be on the losing side.

As much as LJD is wrong by saying there's no racism, you're wrong by saying that it's mostly racist.

For every moran with a "Where's the birth certificate?" sign there are people with signs saying "Waterboard Pelosi" and "Bury Obamacare with Kennedy". There are signs comparing Obama to Stalin, Hitler and Castro and signs comparing Pelosi to Hitler. Clearly, there is a minority of people who think he should fudge off back to Kenya where he 'came from'. But equally clearly there is a majority of people protesting at these events that don't like him simply because he's a Democrat in power and is perceived to be more liberal than Clinton.

> You make it sound as if I had to go searching for it. I didn't. It's
> right there out in the open. http://rawstory.com/rawreplay/?p=4022

Other people sought out the racism for you and packaged it conveniently. How many thousands of Obama protestors did they search through to find those 37 examples? Since your conclusion was that the rate of racism was between 50% and 75%, you must think they only needed 74 protestors at most to find those 37 racists. I am doubtful.

I've been thinking more about my argument that the very same people didn't want government run health care when Clinton was proposing it and your counter that their protesting seems uglier now than then. I think the most likely explanation is that their opposition to government health care is not based on Obama's race but when it comes time to express themselves and make a sign for the protest, some of them (I say a fraction of a percent to a few percent, you say 50% to 75%, but some of them) have a failure of imagination and fall to ugliness. This shows that their political position is not racist but that racism is still floating around in the backs of people's minds to a greater extent than we would want.

> It's better to vote with your wallet and get what
> you pay for, than vote with your ballot and be
> on the losing side.
>
> As much as LJD is wrong by saying there's no racism,
> you're wrong by saying that it's mostly racist.

I'm rounding up.

I really don't think it is that much at all..So much so I can't even choose 25% because that's too much. People of all different races voted for Obama..and people of all different races are thinking his policies suck. That's why his policies are being resisted..because they suck.
It really bothers me to no end that people keep dwelling on racisim..Not to say that it doesn't exist..but not nearly as much as it used to. We're just making everything worse by assuming every time someone doesn't agree with an African American person that they're being racist. Whereas if the person doesn't agree with a white guy...no problem they're just having an opinion. Does anyone see anything wrong with that at all?

There's the saying 'everyone's a bit racist'.

I hate how all these issues are starting to pop out now just because Obama is half black. You didn't hear of non-white people being accused of racism when they opposed to things Bush was doing.

It's hard to estimate the pefcentage, I don't live in the States, and even if I did, my observations would only reflect the area I live in and the people I am surrounded with. I tend not to trust media but rather attempt to draw my own conclusions out of the information I am presented with, so I can't rely on watching CNN or whatever other network to get reliable opinion.

I'm going to go with 10% are fueled by raciasm. But we're looking here at racism as a progression, the top 1% of the population being motivated by racism 60 to 100% and then the amount slowly decreasing.

> I really don't think it is that much at all..So much so I can't even
> choose 25% because that's too much. People of all different races
> voted for Obama..and people of all different races are thinking his
> policies suck. That's why his policies are being resisted..because
> they suck.
> It really bothers me to no end that people keep dwelling on racisim..Not
> to say that it doesn't exist..but not nearly as much as it used to.
> We're just making everything worse by assuming every time someone
> doesn't agree with an African American person that they're being racist.
> Whereas if the person doesn't agree with a white guy...no problem
> they're just having an opinion. Does anyone see anything wrong with
> that at all?


Very well said Llamama! I agree.

Significantly (75%). I'm talking about the furor from the fringe right, not more moderate disagreement with his policies. But I think the birthers, the teabaggers, the "death panel"ists, and the people who call Obama a racist (i.e., all the people who get their information from Glenn Beck) are primarily fueled by racism. I imagine many of them don't think they are at all racist, but it seems clear to me from many of the comments that they have a very deep-seated fear of Obama because he is black, because of his international roots, and because of his name.

> I really don't think it is that much at all..So
> much so I can't even choose 25% because that's
> too much. People of all different races voted
> for Obama..and people of all different races are
> thinking his policies suck. That's why his policies
> are being resisted..because they suck.

Oddly enough, the ones that suck aren't actually his per se, they're the Bush policies that he's chosen to continue.

> It really bothers me to no end that people keep
> dwelling on racisim..Not to say that it doesn't
> exist..but not nearly as much as it used to.
> We're just making everything worse by assuming
> every time someone doesn't agree with an African
> American person that they're being racist.

Sigh. Let's go over this again. We are not saying ALL criticism of Obama is racist. Let me re-post the quote I gave SoYa.

If you say any criticism of Obama is racial, your words will be twisted into all criticism of Obama is racial. And if deniers can then prove one instance isn't racial, they will exaggerate that lone proof into proof that all criticism isn't racial.

This is a very convenient way for the Right Wingers on Hate Radio and at Fux News to deny that racism has any role in it whatsoever.

> Whereas
> if the person doesn't agree with a white guy...no
> problem they're just having an opinion. Does
> anyone see anything wrong with that at all?

What's wrong is your reasoning, as it's central thesis is based on a twisting of the point that people like me, Keith Olbermann, and Jimmy Carter are trying to make.

I'm ignoring your first bullet altogether.

The next two about racism was just a side note. I was just saying how people keep brining up racisim.

> |> You make it sound as if I had to go searching
> for it. I didn't. It's
> |> right there out in the open. http://rawstory.com/rawreplay/?p=4022
>
> Other people sought out the racism for you and
> packaged it conveniently. How many thousands
> of Obama protestors did they search through to
> find those 37 examples?

Didn't take much searching actually, they stood pretty clearly to anyone who isn't a Right Winger.

> Since your conclusion
> was that the rate of racism was between 50% and
> 75%, you must think they only needed 74 protestors
> at most to find those 37 racists. I am doubtful.
>

I think you're being deliberately too literal just to undermine the point. What exactly is the point of trying to ignore the ever more blatant and ever increasing racism and incitement to violence at these things? Bush opponents would get harassed by Secret Service and Fox News if they just turned their back on him. Why the double standards? Why is OK for Right Wingers to try and bring back the days of lynching?

> I've been thinking more about my argument that
> the very same people didn't want government run
> health care when Clinton was proposing it and
> your counter that their protesting seems uglier
> now than then. I think the most likely explanation
> is that their opposition to government health
> care is not based on Obama's race but when it
> comes time to express themselves and make a sign
> for the protest, some of them (I say a fraction
> of a percent to a few percent, you say 50% to
> 75%, but some of them)

Although these rallys aren't as large as the Right Wing likes to say they are, they still number in the thousands when you add them up all across the country. For those signs to stand out in those kind of crowds, especially the ones that are only held at waist level, there'd have to be more than a "fraction of a percent." I may be exaggerating, but that doesn't mean you aren't underestimating

> have a failure of imagination
> and fall to ugliness.

Or they're using the talking points they get from Michelle Bachman and Glenn Beck.

> This shows that their political
> position is not racist but that racism is still
> floating around in the backs of people's minds
> to a greater extent than we would want.

You are doing some pretty creative gymnastics there. Just because the signs are clearly racist doesn't mean the person holding them is? Really? I suppose that means if I see a guy walking down the street in a full on Starfleet uniform I shouldn't just assume he's a Trekkie right?

> I'm ignoring your first bullet altogether.
>
> The next two about racism was just a side note.
> I was just saying how people keep brining up
> racisim.

And it never occurred to you that there's a good reason for that? Ignoring a problem doesn't make it go away. You should be old enough to know this by now, why are you trying to get me to roll back my thinking to what it was when I was 7?

> There's the saying 'everyone's a bit racist'.
>
>
> I hate how all these issues are starting to pop
> out now just because Obama is half black. You
> didn't hear of non-white people being accused
> of racism when they opposed to things Bush was
> doing.

No, we were just called traitors, terrorist sympathizers, stupid, immoral...

And again, it's not "just because" Obama is half black. You see that video link I included a few comments up? Watch it, it explains this whole thing in a way that drives idiots like CK and LJD nuts because they don't like nuance. Or reality for that matter since it tends to interfere with their worldview.

What are you talking about? I haven't like Obama's ideas (for the most part) since he was running and announcing them. Even now..the ones that are his not the ones that he kept from Bush I still don't like.
People need to stop bringing up racism. The world is not nearly as racist as you make it out to be.

> People need to stop bringing up racism. The world
> is not nearly as racist as you make it out to
> be.

By people you mean solely the Left, because when we point out racism, you complain, but when Right Wingers ARE racist, you think it's no big deal and we should just ignore it. So the lesson lllama wants us to take away from this is, Being racist is cool, just don't call people out on it.

And besides, if people like me shut up about it, as you seem to wants us to do (you know, because ignoring festering problems always works, right? http://www.startribune.com/local/11593606.html) then the subject of race in America gets left to people like this guy; http://mediamatters.org/research/200907300019 Is that what you want?

Racism should be confronted. Because left unchecked, it can lead to violence in the streets. You know, TERRORISM! I've joked that Right Wingers were soft on terrorism, provided that said terrorism came form their side. I guess it's not that much of a joke anymore. Just ask Dr. Tiller.

I'm not saying people should ignore blatant racism..But I have a problem when they create it out of nothing. And I never said people weren't racist. Just not nearly as many people are racist as you think.

> I'm not saying people should ignore blatant racism..But
> I have a problem when they create it out of nothing.

I agree. Which is not what I'm doing. You're confusing me with Rush Limbaugh. I am considerably taller than him, you shouldn't make that mistake *rimshot*

> And I never said people weren't racist. Just
> not nearly as many people are racist as you think.

And I still contend that you, SoYa, and Dab are low-balling it.

I dunno, I think you're rounding too far up.

> I dunno, I think you're rounding too far up.

Possible. Keep in mind I'm combining the overtly racist with the subtly racist. If we were to just go by the blindingly obvious I'd say less than 25%. At least for now.

Okay, fair enough

> You are doing some pretty creative gymnastics there. Just because
> the signs are clearly racist doesn't mean the person holding them
> is? Really?

Ah, no, not quite. Perhaps this is an indication that we are just reading the original question differently. I was saying that most of the people who are against Obama's policies hold that opinion for reasons other than racism. In other words, they're not against Obama's policies because he's half black; they have other reasons. I'm not saying they're not racist, however. In fact, I agree with the Avenue Q song: Everyone's a Little Bit Racist.

Also, don't forget that the "people who oppose Obama's policies" include those who want the war in Afghanistan ended and the prison at Guantanamo closed. Are 50% to 75% of those people racist too?

> |> You are doing some pretty creative
> gymnastics there. Just because
> |> the signs are clearly racist doesn't mean
> the person holding them
> |> is? Really?
>
> Ah, no, not quite. Perhaps this is an indication
> that we are just reading the original question
> differently.

Entirely possible, and not without precedent either.

> I was saying that most of the people
> who are against Obama's policies hold that opinion
> for reasons other than racism.

True. There are those who "racist and..." and those who aren't racist at all.

> In other words,
> they're not against Obama's policies because he's
> half black; they have other reasons. I'm not
> saying they're not racist, however. In fact,
> I agree with the Avenue Q song: Everyone's a Little
> Bit Racist.
>

I do love that song.

> Also, don't forget that the "people who oppose
> Obama's policies" include those who want the war
> in Afghanistan ended and the prison at Guantanamo
> closed. Are 50% to 75% of those people racist
> too?

There may be a few, but I doubt it would be that many on those particular issues.

I don't think 25% is a little.

I have no idea.

I did not do what you say was done. The opposition, communists, leftists, liberals, socialists, whatever they call themselves, because they have no other argument, always will bring up racism. What is your definition of racism?

> I did not do what you say was done.

I should've been clearer. I was using the royal "you" on that statement. I apologize for the error.

> The opposition,
> communists, leftists, liberals, socialists, whatever
> they call themselves, because they have no other
> argument, always will bring up racism.

This is a lie, but I expect nothign less from you.

> What
> is your definition of racism?

Ethnic slurs and stereotypes. If you think none of what you see out there is racist, you are either blind or stupid.

> Ethnic slurs and stereotypes.

You're aware, of course, that your definition of racism differs from what other people use. From Merriam-Webster:

1 : a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
2 : racial prejudice or discrimination

So while ethnic slurs and stereotypes may be indications that someone is racist, they are not racism in and of themselves. The distinction seems important to me for one's own clarity of thought if for no other reason.

Frosty, Frosty, Frosty, When have you heard me call a ethnic person by a name? Never, because I don't do that.

Sterotypes? My thoughts, in part, are formed by what I observe, life experiences.

The definition of racism: a belief that some races are by nature superior to others.

We are all different. We all believe our culture is best for us. We all like our own languages. If you want to call me a racist for wanting to protect my race, culture, language, faith...so be it!

I wish no harm to anyone, just wish to live with my own kind, peacefully.

> Frosty, Frosty, Frosty, When have you heard me
> call a ethnic person by a name? Never, because
> I don't do that.
>
> Sterotypes? My thoughts, in part, are formed
> by what I observe, life experiences.
>

There's a slight problem with that as many (most even) people don't share those same experiences. It also doesn't help your case that whenever someone points out that fact you tend to ignore them, or insult them.

> The definition of racism: a belief that some
> races are by nature superior to others.
>

An opinion you've openly espoused in the past.

A great op-ed that illustrates the point I've been trying to make. http://www.newsweek.com/id/215742

I live 30 minutes south from the murder capitol, an ethnos city by in large.

I live 15 to 30 minutes north and east from ethnos cities battered by gangs and thugs.

I have lived in white cities, where we rarely saw violence. So where do you think I want to live?

> I live 30 minutes south from the murder capitol,
> an ethnos city by in large.
>
> I live 15 to 30 minutes north and east from
> ethnos cities battered by gangs and thugs.
>
> I have lived in white cities, where we rarely
> saw violence. So where do you think I want to
> live?

I've lived in predominately Hispanic neighborhoods as a white man for most of my life. Violent crime isn't unheard of here, but it's rare enough to actually make the evening news when it happens. This "ethnos" town as you derisively put it is a perfectly fine place. But not according to you, because you are judging basically the entire world based on just your county.

A very small degree - more than 0% but significantly less than 25%.

As I've said I only know my experiences. I also know that there are fine Ethnos. I know some Mexicans I really like, and those I don't. I have an Asian neighbor, I converse. We have no immediately black nearby, but do, a couple blocks away. As I've said, I prefer living among people I have something in common.

I would say less than the 25%...perhaps 5 or 10% are racists. The pea brains who think that EVERYTHING has to do with race are idiots. One can think that someone (like Obama) is an incompetent, corrupt jerk and his race has NOTHING to do with the decision. Most LWLs (Left Wing Loons) use the word "racist" to silence those who disagree with them. They have cheapened the word and made it mean little to nothing. Like the little boy who cried wolf, people get used to hearing the word racist so when a real one comes along, it means nothing to call them what they are.

> |> I live 30 minutes south from the murder capitol,
> |> an ethnos city by in large.
> |>
> |> I live 15 to 30 minutes north and east from
> |> ethnos cities battered by gangs and thugs.
> |>
> |> I have lived in white cities, where we rarely
> |> saw violence. So where do you think I want to
> |> live?
>
> I've lived in predominately Hispanic neighborhoods as a white man
> for most of my life. Violent crime isn't unheard of here, but it's
> rare enough to actually make the evening news when it happens. This
> "ethnos" town as you derisively put it is a perfectly fine place.
> But not according to you, because you are judging basically the entire
> world based on just your county.

Being half Hispanic, I can fit into both worlds. Personally I dislike most people, no matter what race they may be. Or as a saying I saw once said, "I am not prejudiced I hate everyone equally." I have known people of all races and a few I tolerated and most disliked, the race had nothing to do with the fact that I thought they were a**holes in general and had personalities that sucked.

Well, he is half white also but that still has society calling him "black". If White is suppose to be superior then how does it get watered down so easily or take back seat in the mix if it is equally half and half? I like the guy, actually, he inherited a huge mess and he's left handed. Yea! He wasn't my first choice at first but we could do worse and I did vote for him. He is surprising me with the backbone he is showing.

> As I've said I only know my experiences.

And that's part of the problem. You shouldn't dismiss your experiences out of hand, obviously, but they are not the be all end all either. After all, I've not had the same experience with "ethnos" that you have.

> I also
> know that there are fine Ethnos.

That feels like on of those statments that's usually preceded by the phrase "I'm not racist but..."

> I know some
> Mexicans I really like, and those I don't. I
> have an Asian neighbor, I converse. We have no
> immediately black nearby, but do, a couple blocks
> away. As I've said, I prefer living among people
> I have something in common.

Believe it or not, there is more to life than skin color. I also tend to hang around those like me, but race has nothing to do with it. Black, Whites, Asian, Latino or Mixed, anywhere I go you can bet there will be geeks present. It may blow your mind, but picture if you will an ethnically diverse room of people who all agree on something, like say, a shared love of an author/podcaster. I bet you can't. The idea of being in the same room with all those people who look different but are at the DNA level 99% similar to you, even for a common cause, makes you nervous.

> I would say less than the 25%...perhaps 5 or 10%
> are racists. The pea brains who think that EVERYTHING
> has to do with race are idiots. One can think
> that someone (like Obama) is an incompetent, corrupt
> jerk and his race has NOTHING to do with the decision.
> Most LWLs (Left Wing Loons) use the word "racist"
> to silence those who disagree with them.

Except we don't.

> They
> have cheapened the word and made it mean little
> to nothing.

Like you butt-hole did with Patriotism and Support The Troops?

> Like the little boy who cried wolf,
> people get used to hearing the word racist so
> when a real one comes along, it means nothing
> to call them what they are.

Kinda like you people with the words terrorist and traitor?

Racism has been a sore spot in the side of all human race forever since the species of this planet can remember. Someones' always got to complain about someone else or their opinion they might have, No one's gonna be happy with anyone or their ideas. re>(frortybrand) for one! That age old question, "why can't we all get along?" It will never happen in my life time. So when someones gripes about someones else or their ideas,(frostybrand) There's always going to be differences. Deal with it. We aren't ever going to get along. Screaming Racism because you don't agree on things. is a lame excuse for not agreeing. And it's sad and even ignorant calling names and ridiculous and childish. .

> Racism has been a sore spot in the side of all
> human race forever since the species of this planet
> can remember. Someones' always got to complain
> about someone else or their opinion they might
> have, No one's gonna be happy with anyone or their
> ideas. re>(frortybrand) for one! That age old
> question, "why can't we all get along?" It will
> never happen in my life time. So when someones
> gripes about someones else or their ideas,(frostybrand)
> There's always going to be differences. Deal with
> it. We aren't ever going to get along. Screaming
> Racism because you don't agree on things. is a
> lame excuse for not agreeing. And it's sad and
> even ignorant calling names and ridiculous and
> childish. .

The flaw with your argument here is that it's based on the assumption that the racist things I've called out are not racist and therefore I shouldn't call them that. You want to call people out on lame excuses, go after the Birthers. Hh wait, you are a Birther. Nevermind.

Ezra 9: 1-3 Ezra 9:12 this is our instruction

I can interact with other peoples. I have at rallies. We have people of all races that belong to our group. They can see, what the enemy within are trying to do. Turn this into a third world nation, no rights, lose our freedoms. However, in my personal life, I do not socialize with them. I don't hate them, but choose to be with people of my kind.

> However,
> in my personal life, I do not socialize with
> them. I don't hate them, but choose to be with
> people of my kind.

You have no idea how much you're missing out on. I think back on my life when I only ever listened to English language music, and only watched English language movies, and except for Monty Python only ever watched American made TV shows, and I realize, it was an OK existence, but so hollow compared to what I've seen and done since.

My assumptions are no different than your assumptions. get over it. the liberals assume everyone who disagrees is racist. And what the heck is birthers. Is that a new word for you frostybrand? Everyone is birth, even you. , so I don't get what your saying. if that's an insult, you insulting yourself.lol.

> Except we don't.
>
>
> Like you butt-hole did with Patriotism and Support The Troops?
>
>
> Kinda like you people with the words terrorist and traitor?

Well "butt-hole" fits you and your people as well, just the other side of the coin. I support the troops no matter what, it is the leaders (Democrats AND Republicans who BOTH voted to send them into war) that I DO NOT SUPPORT. And unlike many who are very liberal, I have the good of the country at heart and therefore yes I am patriotic. However, I did not support the war in either Afghanistan or Iraq. We should have waited and made sure where Bin Laden was hiding in Afghanistan and carpet bombed the area. As for Iraq, we should have waited there also, as long as he was killing his own people and not bothering us, we should have left him alone. If he attacked us, then we should turn the country into a crater.

ANYONE who does NOT wear a uniform, and strikes like a coward, creating terror and fear IS a terrorist and that pretty much describes most of the jerks in the ME. And as for "Traitor" ANYONE who gives comfort and support to the terrorists IS a traitor. This includes giving the terrorists "rights" that they do not deserve (They are NOT citizens of the U.S. and therefore DO NOT get the same rights as a citizen!!!).

> My assumptions are no different than your assumptions.
> get over it. the liberals assume everyone who
> disagrees is racist.

No, I've explained this. Repeatedly. In plain English. You, idiot.

> And what the heck is birthers.
> Is that a new word for you frostybrand? Everyone
> is birth, even you. , so I don't get what your
> saying. if that's an insult, you insulting yourself.lol.

The Birthers are the racist morons who insist, despite all evidence to the contrary, that President Obama was not born in the U.S. So not only are you an idiot, you're an idiot with no short term memory.

> And unlike many who
> are very liberal, I have the good of the country
> at heart and therefore yes I am patriotic.

Liberals don't have the good of the country at heart? Wow, you are not just an butt-hole, you're a blind one too. You really don't get out much do you?

> However,
> I did not support the war in either Afghanistan
> or Iraq. We should have waited and made sure
> where Bin Laden was hiding in Afghanistan and
> carpet bombed the area. As for Iraq, we should
> have waited there also, as long as he was killing
> his own people and not bothering us, we should
> have left him alone. If he attacked us, then
> we should turn the country into a crater.
>

Wow, wiping out a whole country, including the people in it who were on our side. yeah, that's not evil and disgusting at all.

> ANYONE who does NOT wear a uniform, and strikes
> like a coward, creating terror and fear IS a terrorist

Yes, exactly. Say for instance, a hippocritical coward who supports war but avoids service in order to send OTHER people to kill and die for them based on lies, and scaring people into accepting it.

> and that pretty much describes most of the jerks
> in the ME. And as for "Traitor" ANYONE who gives
> comfort and support to the terrorists IS a traitor.
> This includes giving the terrorists "rights"
> that they do not deserve (They are NOT citizens
> of the U.S. and therefore DO NOT get the same
> rights as a citizen!!!).

There's this thing called international law you twinkie. There's also the fact that people who aren't terrorists have been caught up in these weeps. Look up a group of people who were in Gitmo for years called the Uigers. If these people in Gitmo actually are terrorists, then put them on trial. Of course, some of them are innocent, and when they get cleared, it'll make you and your friends in the Republican party look bad, so it's better to just have potentially innocent Muslims mixed in with terrorist who now have potential new recruits. Way to go, moron.

Simply put, HOLDING PEOPLE INDEFINITELY WITHOUT TRIAL IS UNAMERICAN YOU SICK FUDGEER!

Holy crap Brian. You just out butt-holed yourself. Damn dude, can't you just make a point without calling people names? Do you have any idea how bad that makes you look?

> Holy crap Brian. You just out butt-holed yourself.
> Damn dude, can't you just make a point without
> calling people names? Do you have any idea how
> bad that makes you look?

I'm the butt-hole? The guy claims to be "more patriotic than thou", the follows it up with the kind of talk that would've gotten him kicked out of Washington's regiment, and I'M the butt-hole?

> I'M the butt-hole?

Yes you are...glad you could finally realized it...

You might be a racist
If you think that a czar is unconstitutional
... you might be a racist!

If you are opposed to a government run health care system
... you might be a racist!

If you think that it is unAmerican to bow before the Saudi King
... you might be a racist!

If you think that the stimulus plan has been an utter failure
... you might be a racist!

If you think that this administration is driving the deficit up at alarming rates
... you might be a racist!

If you think that this is a nation based on Christian values
... you might be a racist!

If you think that communism and socialism are NOT the solution
... you might be a racist!

If you value the 1st Amendment, but think that the media is state-run
... you might be a racist!

If you are sick and tired of the race card being played
... you might be a racist!

If you are a racist according to the current liberal agenda
... you might just be an American!

> You might be a racist
> If you think that a czar is unconstitutional
> ... you might be a racist!
>

If you think that Czar is the actual official title for it, as opposed to a media generated nickname that's been around since Nixon, you might be a moron.

> If you are opposed to a government run health
> care system
> ... you might be a racist!
>

If you oppose a public option on the grounds that as a result we'll get thing that we already have under the broken system, you might be a moron.

> If you think that it is unAmerican to bow before
> the Saudi King
> ... you might be a racist!
>

If you think it's only OK to be polite to world leaders if you're a White Republican, you might be a moron.

> If you think that the stimulus plan has been an
> utter failure
> ... you might be a racist!
>

If you think the stimulus plan has been an utter failure even though it isn't, you might be a moron.

> If you think that this administration is driving
> the deficit up at alarming rates
> ... you might be a racist!
>

If you think that this deficit only started under the current President and wasn't in fact there for the majority of the previous administration, you might be a moron.

> If you think that this is a nation based on Christian
> values
> ... you might be a racist!
>

No, you aren't a racist, just a moron and a liar. http://www.ffrf.org/nontracts/xian.php

> If you think that communism and socialism are
> NOT the solution
> ... you might be a racist!
>

If you use those words without bothering to find out what they mean, you might be a moron.

> If you value the 1st Amendment, but think that
> the media is state-run
> ... you might be a racist!
>

Unless it's run by the GOP (Fox), then it's very American, right? Oh, and if you only think the 1st amendment applies to people who agree with you, you might be a Republican.

> If you are sick and tired of the race card being
> played
> ... you might be a racist!
>

If you want to ignore racism where it exists, you might be a moron.

> If you are a racist according to the current liberal
> agenda
> ... you might just be an American!
>

No, if you're a racist idiot then you are quite UN-American.

Thanks for proving my point. You lie about the post right above yours. Wow, you must think people around here are too stupid to figure out the whole "scroll up" thing.

Oh wait, you're a Right Winger. Of course you think people are stupid. You NEED people to be stupid in order to win.

Fact: Fewer and fewer educated people are becoming Republicans. http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId...

> Thanks for proving my point. You lie about the post right above yours.
> Wow, you must think people around here are too stupid to figure out
> the whole "scroll up" thing.
>
> Oh wait, you're a Right Winger. Of course you think people are stupid.
> You NEED people to be stupid in order to win.
>
> Fact: Fewer and fewer educated people are becoming Republicans. http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId...

LOL I am surprised your brain doesn't squirt out your ears since your mind (what little you have) is so tightly closed. I find that it is tremendous fun poking liberals like you with a stick and then watching you rant and spout the party line drivel. I must say, you do provide excellent comic relief on the board though... Every LWL (Left Wing Loon) I have come across on the various message boards sound exactly the same, do you all go to a class and learn to parrot the Democratic party line and give the same old worn out posts?

Have a nice day... It has been fun seeing how wound up you can get...

> |> Thanks for proving my point. You lie about
> the post right above yours.
> |> Wow, you must think people around here are
> too stupid to figure out
> |> the whole "scroll up" thing.
> |>
> |> Oh wait, you're a Right Winger. Of course
> you think people are stupid.
> |> You NEED people to be stupid in order to
> win.
> |>
> |> Fact: Fewer and fewer educated people are
> becoming Republicans. http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId...
>
> LOL I am surprised your brain doesn't squirt out
> your ears since your mind (what little you have)
> is so tightly closed.

The irony is so thick I can barely breathe.

> I find that it is tremendous
> fun poking liberals like you with a stick and
> then watching you rant and spout the party line
> drivel.

Coming from you, that's hilarious. Hardly a sentence you type isn't one I've seen all over the Right Wing echo chamber.

> I must say, you do provide excellent
> comic relief on the board though... Every LWL
> (Left Wing Loon) I have come across on the various
> message boards sound exactly the same, do you
> all go to a class and learn to parrot the Democratic
> party line and give the same old worn out posts?
>

Projecting much?

> Have a nice day... It has been fun seeing how
> wound up you can get...

Well, liars and morons do that to me.

frostybrand. YOUR STILL A MORON. The word birthers is YOUR made up word. like a few other words, since obama was elected. Not even in the dictionary.

> frostybrand. YOUR STILL A MORON. The word birthers
> is YOUR made up word. like a few other words,
> since obama was elected. Not even in the dictionary.
>

1: It's Frostbrand. Like the sword. Look it up.
2: It's "you're" not "your;
3: When your argument can be disproving by spending 5 seconds on Google, it speaks ill of you. http://www.birthers.org
4: Generally speaking, nicknames of movements and/or conspiracy theories don't make the dictionary. Doesn't prove they don't exist. 9/1 Truther isn't in there either, but we still have them around.

> |> frostybrand. YOUR STILL A MORON. The word birthers
> |> is YOUR made up word. like a few other words,
> |> since obama was elected. Not even in the dictionary.
> |>
>
> 1: It's Frostbrand. Like the sword. Look it up.
> 2: It's "you're" not "your;
> 3: When your argument can be disproving by spending 5 seconds on Google,
> it speaks ill of you. http://www.birthers.org
> 4: Generally speaking, nicknames of movements and/or conspiracy theories
> don't make the dictionary. Doesn't prove they don't exist. 9/1 Truther
> isn't in there either, but we still have them around.

Your posts do more to show exactly what the mentality of LWLs (Left Wing Loons) happens to be. You attack the poster, you attack and nit pick what is written but totally ignore the topic and fail to post anything more than the same drivel over and over like a parrot. I am on many message boards and I swear, almost every LWL is exactly the same, like a bunch of clones, all doing the same thing, saying the same things, attacking the poster, calling names, and nit picking the spelling and wording, but ignoring what the actual post is about. Apparently when one cannot defend ones position, you find a way to deflect away from the topic and attack the "messenger" in hopes of shutting them up. That way you do not have to defend a losing position.

Keep on posting, you are doing more to promote the conservative cause and show just how unintelligent those on the Left are.

> |> |> frostybrand. YOUR STILL A MORON. The
> word birthers
> |> |> is YOUR made up word. like a few other
> words,
> |> |> since obama was elected. Not even
> in the dictionary.
> |> |>
> |>
> |> 1: It's Frostbrand. Like the sword. Look
> it up.
> |> 2: It's "you're" not "your;
> |> 3: When your argument can be disproving
> by spending 5 seconds on Google,
> |> it speaks ill of you. http://www.birthers.org
> |> 4: Generally speaking, nicknames of movements
> and/or conspiracy theories
> |> don't make the dictionary. Doesn't prove
> they don't exist. 9/1 Truther
> |> isn't in there either, but we still have
> them around.
>
> Your posts do more to show exactly what the mentality
> of LWLs (Left Wing Loons) happens to be.

Yes. They happen to be anyone who disagrees with you.

> You
> attack the poster,

Excuse me? Did you even read the post I was responding too? She outright insults me, I correct her spelling, and that makes me the bad guy in this? You must be joking, because that is the only explanation that doesn't make you look bad.

> you attack and nit pick what
> is written but totally ignore the topic

What topic? Was the insult she directed at me her topic? Or was it her ignorance of an issue that she herself has stood for?

> and fail
> to post anything more than the same drivel over
> and over like a parrot.

What post do you think you're responding too?

> I am on many message
> boards and I swear, almost every LWL is exactly
> the same, like a bunch of clones, all doing the
> same thing, saying the same things, attacking
> the poster, calling names, and nit picking the
> spelling and wording, but ignoring what the actual
> post is about.

I bet you're either lying, or just cherry picking.

> Apparently when one cannot defend
> ones position, you find a way to deflect away
> from the topic and attack the "messenger" in hopes
> of shutting them up.

Yes, they do. http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/blogs/ha...

> That way you do not have
> to defend a losing position.
>

You do realize you're actually describing YOUR side, right?

> Keep on posting, you are doing more to promote
> the conservative cause and show just how unintelligent
> those on the Left are.

Even though the Republican party increasingly is made up of the least educated Americans, somehow the LEFT are the stupid ones. Man, it must be sad to live in your world. Thankfully, I live in reality.

> Keep on posting, you are doing more to promote
> the conservative cause and show just how unintelligent
> those on the Left are.

Well said.

I have no idea. I suspect any opposition is primarily fueled by that quirky American tendency to pretend that Republicans and Democrats have vastly different political beliefs.

> Much closer to 0% than 25%.

I agree with that.

Obama is a Narcistic, Marxist.
I really can not believe how little people have studied his past and him.

> Obama is a Narcistic, Marxist.

Do you even know what a Marxist actually is, or are you just another twinkie parroting Glenn "Stasi uniform" Beck?

Can we get over this?

There's more hype about it than there is racism, I'm sure.

Not at all. Presidents no longer make policy. They are merely the mouthpiece of the "special interest groups" that really run the country.