Disagree with Obama? You're obviously a racist!

[Guest H0TSH0T]

not intending this to be a racist statement, but if it looks like , sounds like ,and smells like , i bet it probably is . and don't try to make me eat it.

[Guest Ralph G. Briscoe]

To automatically assume that all whites are inherently racist is... Anyone? Anyone? Buehler?

>>>Funny new wingnut strategy--accuse all liberals off assuming all whites are racist. Who have you heard accuse all whites who criticise Obama of being racist? If you want to deny that there are white racists out there who hate Obama I'd be glad to refer you to some handy websites.

To debate dishonestly, ignoring the facts that don't support your position,

>>>Isn't the pot calling the kettle black?

attacking your opponents integrity

>>>see below where you call me a "liar"

instead of responding to his points, making false accusations in order to focus attention away from your own glaring faults, is.... Anyone? Ralph?

>>>Make a fact-based point and I'll respond.

The left have no intent or desire for honest debate. Honesty and integrity are losing tactics for their goals and intentions. They can't debate on the issues, they've got nothing to back their arguments.

>>>Perfect description of the flying monkey wingnuts.

I've got no use for liars.

>>>Damn! Me neither!

[Mark@Sea]

Funny new wingnut strategy--accuse all liberals off assuming all whites are racist. Who have you heard accuse all whites who criticise Obama of being racist?

One of these things is not like the other. Can you spot the difference?

Ralph, a little exercise for you. Go look at this. Come back and answer the question.

Actually, nevermind. You're going back on my ignore list permanently.

For obvious reasons, it isn't possible to attack your integrity. If you don't care for it, you might try refraining from saying something and then denying it a dozen posts later. And as you apparently missed the memo, "I know you are but what am I" went out of style for most of us at about third grade.

And getting back to topic, I could easily quote 3 or 4 posts you've made wherein you say that as we have no other reason to dislike Obamas' policies, it must be because we're racist. That seems to be your refuge of choice in every thread where you've had to face opposing viewpoints.

[Guest Hyaloid]

Ok, no one on here is racist because they disagree with Obama. Let's accept that as a fact as far as this forum is concerned, and move on with the discussion.

Any more insinuations, no matter how thinly veiled, and the thread will be locked and infractions issued.

Remember to maintain good fellowship with one another. If you cannot attack the issues without attacking one another, we'll stop the topic all together.

Thanks everyone...

[Guest PapaB]

Hyaloid said:

If you cannot attack the issues without attacking one another, we'll stop the topic all together.

In that light, let me compliment our current White House and the Congress. They do provide us with an almost endless supply of issues to attack.

[leroy]

In that light, let me compliment our current White House and the Congress. They do provide us with an almost endless supply of issues to attack.

Amen brother!! I heartily agree!! A veritable cornucopia of lunacy and overbearing, arrogant childishness!! Remember Plato's words: "The penalty that good men pay for not being interested in politics is to be governed by men worse than themselves."

Keep up the good work!!

Kind regards,

LEROY

[Guest H0TSH0T]

so this guy is a racist?

this guy is my hero!

Edited September 19, 2009 by H0TSH0T

[Guest tnmale46]

edit

Edited September 19, 2009 by tnmale46

[Guest Ralph G. Briscoe]

One of these things is not like the other. Can you spot the difference?

>>>the difference (who hate Obama) was an effort to cut you some slack. Are you contending there are white racists who like Obama?

Ralph, a little exercise for you. Go look at this. Come back and answer the question.

Actually, nevermind.

>>>didn't see anything relevent to this discussion....what specifically was I supposed to see?

You're going back on my ignore list permanently.

>>>You keep threatening. Tell the truth--it's boring as hell "debating" with people who agree with you. Dems generally bore the hell out of me....preaching to the choir. You're a good sport--don't bail.

For obvious reasons, it isn't possible to attack your integrity. If you don't care for it, you might try refraining from saying something and then denying it a dozen posts later.

>>>Still burned because I indirectly called you a racist...anything else?

And as you apparently missed the memo, "I know you are but what am I" went out of style for most of us at about third grade.

>>>True, but Republican leaders, and some followers, tend to be abumdantly guilty of things they accuse others of--immorality for example (Larry Craig, Vitter, SC's Governor, Newt Gingrich). Hard to call them on it without resorting to something like that....valid if it's true.

And getting back to topic, I could easily quote 3 or 4 posts you've made wherein you say that as we have no other reason to dislike Obamas' policies, it must be because we're racist. That seems to be your refuge of choice in every thread where you've had to face opposing viewpoints.

>>>Maybe it's because I've never seen such a degree of vitriol and outright lies directed at any President. What could be different? None of his policies are that revolutionary. I will say this--if someone believes all the lies (he's Hitler, he's a Muslim, he's not a citizen, he's a communist (or the diametric opposite--a fascist), etc.--that person need not be a racist to hate Obama...merely a misinformed, paranoid, victim of corporate propaganda.

[Guest thorn]

>>>Maybe it's because I've never seen such a degree of vitriol and outright lies directed at any President. What could be different? None of his policies are that revolutionary. I will say this--if someone believes all the lies (he's Hitler, he's a Muslim, he's not a citizen, he's a communist (or the diametric opposite--a fascist), etc.--that person need not be a racist to hate Obama...merely a misinformed, paranoid, victim of corporate propaganda.

Just don't want anyone to be misinformed so I thought I'd add some definitions - From Merriam-Webster...

Fascism: a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition

Communism: a theory advocating elimination of private property b : a system in which goods are owned in common and are available to all as needed

2 capitalized a : a doctrine based on revolutionary Marxian socialism and Marxism-Leninism that was the official ideology of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics b : a totalitarian system of government in which a single authoritarian party controls state-owned means of production c : a final stage of society in Marxist theory in which the state has withered away and economic goods are distributed equitably d : communist systems collectively

[Guest Hyaloid]

>>>Maybe it's because I've never seen such a degree of vitriol and outright lies directed at any President. What could be different? None of his policies are that revolutionary. I will say this--if someone believes all the lies (he's Hitler, he's a Muslim, he's not a citizen, he's a communist (or the diametric opposite--a fascist), etc.--that person need not be a racist to hate Obama...merely a misinformed, paranoid, victim of corporate propaganda.

Ummm... I don't know where you've been over the last 8 years, but the crap Bush had to put up with during his two terms from the extreme left was worse.

When it's the left doing it, "dissent is the highest form of patriotism", when it's the right it's "ugly, disgraceful (and probably racist)" to disagree with ANY policies.

There's no doubt that BOTH sides are full of hypocrites, so unless you were showing the same indignation when people were holding, "Bush lied, people died" signs and protesting his policies with an even greater amount of vitriol and hate, then you have no legitimate way to cry foul and shield yourself in a cloak of righteousness.

I am disappointed that I am put in a position to defend the right, but the hypocrisy of the left forces one to.

Me? I think they're pretty much all crooked, power hungry people who are only moderately on the ball now because the heretofore 'silent majority' ain't so silent anymore.

[Worriedman]

Me? I think they're pretty much all crooked, power hungry people who are only moderately on the ball now because the heretofore 'silent majority' ain't so silent anymore.

+1

Now that the questions are being directed at the Statist point of view, from the "little people", (those still working and contributing to fund the beast) which seems to not like the force feeding of Central Control, any questioning is racist, because it is all they have left. The veil which covered the radical agenda has been torn for those that have eyes to see, Van Jones and Cass Sunstein are laid bare. ACORN, the President's favorite sink hole for community organizing and receipt of our tax dollars has been outed as the corrupt and illegitimate organization that is has always been, their supporters running for cover, acting as if this is all news instead of common knowledge.

Attributed to Admiral Yamamoto after Pearl Harbor:

"I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve."

There is no actual cite for this statement having been made, rather it is found in his diary. What he is quoted as saying in The Reluctant Admiral:

"A military man can scarcely pride himself on having 'smitten a sleeping enemy'; it is more a matter of shame, simply, for the one smitten. I would rather you made your appraisal after seeing what the enemy does, since it is certain that, angered and outraged, he will soon launch a determined counterattack."

To the Cabinet of War he made this statement:

"I can run wild for six months … after that, I have no expectation of success"

Seems the Administration has studied some history, hence the rush to pass legislation and change the scope of our Government quickly "We must do it NOW". Maybe they should have done a little more research, and they would have found Yamamoto's most prophetic quote:

"Gentlemen, we have just kicked a rabid dog."

Perhaps the same dog that scrambled out from under the porch in the 40's will awake and keep us from domination again? We shall see.

[Guest GhostHunter]

All due respect... The rebel flag on your profile pic does that just as well.

Rebel and Proud of it!!.......Can I say that without being labeled a racist??

[Guest Ralph G. Briscoe]

Ummm... I don't know where you've been over the last 8 years, but the crap Bush had to put up with during his two terms from the extreme left was worse.

>>>Note that I said "outright lies" directed at Obama. Bush did lie and people are still dying because of his lies and desperation to get us into war with people who didn't attack us on 911. Bush didn't have a well-financed propaganda machine attacking him 24-7 on virtually all of talk radio as well as Fox news. Bush deserved to be attacked--he was a constitution-shredding, incompetent fool. There was a factual basis for attacking him. On the other hand, most of the attacks on Obama are the result of paranoia and disinformation generated by GOP think tanks and rightwing media. HUGE difference.

When it's the left doing it, "dissent is the highest form of patriotism", when it's the right it's "ugly, disgraceful (and probably racist)" to disagree with ANY policies.

>>>Once again, when dissent is based on lies and untruths it's the highest form of folly.

There's no doubt that BOTH sides are full of hypocrites, so unless you were showing the same indignation when people were holding, "Bush lied, people died" signs and protesting his policies with an even greater amount of vitriol and hate, then you have no legitimate way to cry foul and shield yourself in a cloak of righteousness.

>>>See above. I would contest your assertion that there was a similar degree of hatred directed at Bush. Also, it's interesting to note that the MSM, and certainly Fox, largely ignored the 1 to 2 million who showed up in DC to protest the war. Contrast this with the wall to wall coverage of the 70,000 teabaggers last week.

I am disappointed that I am put in a position to defend the right, but the hypocrisy of the left forces one to.

Me? I think they're pretty much all crooked, power hungry people who are only moderately on the ball now because the heretofore 'silent majority' ain't so silent anymore.

>>>It's simplistic to condemn them all. There are some good people there, and 3 or 4 of them are Republicans. They are all trapped in a system that requires them to raise millions to run. Most end up beholden to entities that don't have the public good at heart--only their corporate profits. That's what we're seeing bigtime in the healthcare debate from members on both sides.

[extremescene]

Rebel and Proud of it!!.......Can I say that without being labeled a racist??

Not by definition, no.

Even if you would be mislabeled, and you truly are not racist, which you probably are not... that is a symbol of racism. It symbolizes the enslavement of our fellow human beings and it symbolizes the southern withdraw from the United States of America. I also understand it represents the life and death of many family members who bravely fought in TN...but why would you want to give people the wrong idea, if that isn't your true belief? Like it or not, that is how that particular symbol is viewed and nothing can change the cause that it stood for, enslavement of African-Americans and secession from the US. It's definitely a part of TN history, just not for a very humane reason. It's simply a different time now. That was a way of life then but not anymore. We get to choose how people label us and wearing very specific symbols, if that isn't your belief, simply seems like the wrong choice. You are begging people to mislabel you. There are other ways to honor ancestors and southern heritage.

I believe in your right to wear and display that flag. I believe in your right to be racist if you so choose. I also believe in your right to be open and honest about it.

Edited September 20, 2009 by extremescene

[Guest Hyaloid]

>>>It's simplistic to condemn them all. There are some good people there, and 3 or 4 of them are Republicans. They are all trapped in a system that requires them to raise millions to run. Most end up beholden to entities that don't have the public good at heart--only their corporate profits. That's what we're seeing bigtime in the healthcare debate from members on both sides.

It may be simplistic, but overall it is a much more accurate generalization than those who trumpet the party line from each side.

[Guest Ralph G. Briscoe]

It may be simplistic, but overall it is a much more accurate generalization than those who trumpet the party line from each side.

Granted.

[Guest Ralph G. Briscoe]

Not by definition, no.

Even if you would be mislabeled, and you truly are not racist, which you probably are not... that is a symbol of racism. It symbolizes the enslavement of our fellow human beings and it symbolizes the southern withdraw from the United States of America. I also understand it represents the life and death of many family members who bravely fought in TN...but why would you want to give people the wrong idea, if that isn't your true belief? Like it or not, that is how that particular symbol is viewed and nothing can change the cause that it stood for, enslavement of African-Americans and secession from the US. It's definitely a part of TN history, just not for a very humane reason. It's simply a different time now. That was a way of life then but not anymore. We get to choose how people label us and wearing very specific symbols, if that isn't your belief, simply seems like the wrong choice. You are begging people to mislabel you. There are other ways to honor ancestors and southern heritage.

I believe in your right to wear and display that flag. I believe in your right to be racist if you so choose. I also believe in your right to be open and honest about it.

Good post. Dittos especially on the last sentence.

I have ancestors who were slaveowners and fought under that flag.

I don't condemn them. They lived in a different world and I don't feel qualified to judge them from 150 years distance. I am proud that they had the courage to fight for something they believed in. Their fight was as much about being invaded....defending home and hearth....as it was about the issue of slavery. However, as your post indicates, that flag is an affront to many people. It is hurtful. That's why I don't display it despite the fact that I have every right to do so. There's no contest about that.

[BrasilNuts]

We get to choose how people label us

No we don't

[railfancwb]

...[Confederate flag] that is a symbol of racism.

Remember that for the first 80 or so years and through the War of Northern Aggression the Stars and Stripes flew over slave states... The famous "Emancipation Proclamation" did not even attempt to free any of the slaves who lived under the Stars and Stripes.

[Guest SUNTZU]

Remember that for the first 80 or so years and through the War of Northern Aggression the Stars and Stripes flew over slave states... The famous "Emancipation Proclamation" did not even attempt to free any of the slaves who lived under the Stars and Stripes.

So many people don't realize that.

[E4 No More]

People who revisit history tend to interpret it to conform to their beliefs, so why would it surprise anyone that some ignore true meanings of something as simple as a flag?

[raydog1]

People who revisit history tend to interpret it to conform to their beliefs, so why would it surprise anyone that some ignore true meanings of something as simple as a flag?

Changing feelings is never simple and meanings change with time. If only empathy didn't mean weakness as it appears to be these days, we might be able to get past the little things (like old flags) and solve many of the larger issues. It would be easy to blame politicians or the media for this, but I think they're just selling what we want to buy.

[Guest CrazyLincoln]

Remember that for the first 80 or so years and through the War of Northern Aggression the Stars and Stripes flew over slave states... The famous "Emancipation Proclamation" did not even attempt to free any of the slaves who lived under the Stars and Stripes.

Yes, many people think that the civil war was as simple as the gov't threatened to outlaw slavery and the south broke away. However, in actuality, it was since Lincoln stood on a platform of not expanding slavery with federal legislation, and some southern states felt as if his election meant their states rights had been or would be violated. Since slavery was a major part of the southern economy, some southern states felt the only route to economic survival was to secede. The civil war was not fought over slavery, but rather states rights. Slavery was just the catalyst. If Abraham Lincoln had taken a position of outlawing cotton instead, we very well may have had a similar situation. I'm not denying the fact that the southern states supported slavery or slavery was the defining issue, but lets get the facts straight.

No offense to anyone on this board, but I equate waiving the rebel flag to the same thing as wearing a Che Guevara shirt. It means many things to many people. Does a Che Guevara shirt necessarily mean someone is a socialist? Or do they just like the idea of revolution? Or did they find it at GoodWill and think it looks cool? Same with the rebel flag. They could be a racist or not. They might just see it as a symbol of the south or they could be the worst bigot ever, but you can't make accurate judgments based on the symbol alone.

Either way, I don't advertise either the rebel flag or Che Guevara since I like my motives to be clear, but to each his own.

Edit: Does anyone else find it ironic that I am making an argument that involves Abraham Lincoln?

Edited September 22, 2009 by CrazyLincoln

[Guest Hyaloid]

With the flag issue, I am always reminded that after a conflict, typically the victors get to write the history of the events.