Racism ??? Naww ... whatever gave you THAT idea ?
POSTED BY: rue
UPDATED: Friday, February 6, 2026 18:38
VIEWED: 6038
PAGE 5 of 14
Quote:
Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
In this Nixon-bunker mentality White House EVERYONE who disagrees with Obama's disasterous policies is now called a racist. These vile Chicago thugs surrounding Obama called Bill Clinton a racist during the campaign. They called Geraldine Ferraro a racist during the campaign. They will call ANYBODY a racist when they have to. And don't ever forgot what the Dems & Liberals had to say originally about Colin Powell & Condi Rice. As the FIRST African-Americans to hold those high offices, they were simply dismissed & demeaned as Uncle Toms by Liberals. Its' reached a point where it means NOTHING anymore, perhaps even a badge of honor to be called a racist by those who promised to heal the nation, those who promised to unite everyone. They also promised openness in Govt! I guess the first step would be to actually have the Legislators read the bills they pass, or even open up these closed door sessions, or put the shit on the web. Nope...none of that with this Prez. No, instead these bullies have enemies, and they have a LIST! They strongarmed Chrysler, they strongarmed BOA, they are using Legislative retalitation against insurance companies for having THE NERVE to have an opposing view on Healthcare. It's typical of Chicago-style strong-arm politics. They've launched an investigation aimed at Humana. They are attacking Fox News. They are attacking the U.S. Chamber of Commerce because they, as a business-development organization, see the Dem's Cap & Tax and HC as catastrophic to our economy. They say even more jobs will be lost, and even more debt will be piled on top of the $ 1.4 trillion that Obama has racked up so far in his campaign to bankrupt America & destroy the value of the U.S.Dollar. They are encouraging and warning the Obama-thrill-down-their-leg media drones not to pick up on Fox stories. Never has an administration been so pathetically petty, so thin-skinned, and so utterly mis-guided as these clowns. Fox News is making fools of them every day....taunting them, calling them out for all their radicals running around the White House these days. It's only a matter of time before even the Obama-crazed media turns on him too, as even the NY Times is starting to jab a bit at Obama's waffling on Afghanistan. And that piece of shit idiot-propagandist Gibbs had his hands full with a WH reporter the other day from ABC who persisted in getting an answer as to their Fox attacks. He never got one.
On the Acorn thing...The House voted to cut off Acorn funding. ( Democrats, by the way)
The Senate voted to cut off Acorn funding.(Democrats, by the way)
The U.S. Census Bureau has cut off all ties with Acorn.
The Attorney General of Louisiana has a major criminal investigation into Acorn.
11 states have election fraud investigations against Acorn in progress.
Acorn has had millions of US tax dollars stolen from it over the years by top Acorn officials.
The Acorn offices videotaped by the 2 corruption-busters dealt not only with setting up illegal and fraudulent housing for a prostitution house, but also with smuggling in under-age girls, as young as 13 from Latin America.
Acorn is over, done, kaput. For you to try to defend them in any way is just another example of your willingness to defend anything that a Liberal group does, no matter how vile and heinous. You should be a bit concerned too that as these investigations move forward, Obama himself may be drawn into them. He was their attorney and served as their trainer and advisor. Also the NY Times knew all this before the election, as an inside whistle-blower gave them the whole sordid story last year. They made a decision to kill the story because it would hurt Obama in the the election. Some "paper of record". All the news that THEY SEE FIT to print is more like it.
And Niki2, or Rue/Signy, or whoever you are...why don't you take your head out of your ass and see what's going on with this Administration? Then you might not be so damn smug and condescending to FFF posters here. I think you DO knoNOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Riverlove:
You've apparently done your Hannity/Beck homework assigment quite well. I had to pop an Extra-Strength Tylenol after reading thru it. Truth is you really don't know most of that to be true, but I'm sure it made you feel better to write it, right? All I can say is dude, chill! America isn't going to die, and Obama isn't going to eat your children. Relax, and enjoy all the heavenly glory.
For the record I watch many news and commentary shows on many different networks, and I have never watched Glenn Beck's show because I'm not home from work yet. But you do make an interesting argument, and one, due to your relative politeness to me, that I will take under advisement. I will go out and smell the flowers and walk and ponder as soon as I can.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Wulf -
The woman who recanted her story - are you saying that b/c she recanted her story (and BTW, as the article points out, the convictions were not based on her testimony, since she never did testify) - that hate crimes NEVER happen ? That racism is gone completely and forever ? That ONE instance means ALL are exactly the same ? Is THAT the point you think you're making ?
As for your second link, you CLAIM that the man was ONLY complaining about the president - but then, they kept the nature of his comments out of the news. So, HOW do you know he wasn't making actual threats ? Can you please point out the FACT which lets you say that ? Just for the rcord, so you can show us you're not making shit up.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/10/22/lia.shenandoah.killing/index.html
"Hate is part of our culture," said Jack Levin of the Brudnick Center on Violence at Northeastern University.
"It transcends generations, it's widely shared, and it's learned from an early age," Levin said. "Even otherwise decent, honorable people can be pulled into it."
Jack McDevitt of Northeastern University's Institute on Race and Justice said, "We all carry around biases with us, and it's not the extraordinary monster that decides to act on it. Generally speaking, it's someone more like us and our children than a member of the [Ku Klux] Klan."
***************************************************************
Silence is consent.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"The woman who recanted her story - are you saying that b/c she recanted her story (and BTW, as the article points out, the convictions were not based on her testimony, since she never did testify) - that hate crimes NEVER happen ? That racism is gone completely and forever ? That ONE instance means ALL are exactly the same ? Is THAT the point you think you're making ?"
Absolutely not. However, I do believe the media sensationalizes stories, in order to push home THEIR belief that racism is EVERYWHERE. All the time, 24/7. Racism sells. Ask Al Sharpton.
Racists are to liberals, what terrorists are to conservatives, and what anti-semites are to Jewish people.
Do these people exist? I have no doubt. Are they as prevalent as the news would have you believe? That I doubt.
"As for your second link, you CLAIM that the man was ONLY complaining about the president - but then, they kept the nature of his comments out of the news. So, HOW do you know he wasn't making actual threats ? Can you please point out the FACT which lets you say that ? Just for the rcord, so you can show us you're not making shit up."
My point, and I think I was very clear on this was... I believe this man was arrested because he was a Republican, who was proud of his gun collection, and said something disparaging about Obama.
Now, if they would publish what he supposedly said, I could make a better assessment.
But again, its sensationalism/manipulation. Hot on the heels of the 400% stuff, you get THIS story. Doesn't it seem kind of staged?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Re: Oathkeepers
Hello,
I am copying my comments about the Oathkeepers here. This is the comment I made in response to the questionable article:
The Oathkeepers precede the Obama administration, and have nothing to do with Obama. It is simply a reaffirmation of those in the service to decline illegal orders. This became an especially poignant reaffirmation in the wake of illegal torture activities, and one can imagine other missteps that the government might incline its soldiers to take. Not the Oathkeepers. It's not political. It's humanism at work. I believe President Obama would approve.
--Anthony
"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:No.
But again, its sensationalism/ manipulation. Hot on the heels of the 400% stuff, you get THIS story. Doesn't it seem kind of staged?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"Do these people exist? I have no doubt. Are they as prevalent as the news would have you believe? That I doubt."
And you think that because ... ??? Because of ONE story ? Because you WANT to ? WHY exactly do you think that ?
OTOH I CAN point to VERY credible studies that have been reproduced many, many times that show that 80% of white people are biased against blacks (as well as 50% of black people). Though I suspect that, as usual, you will blow past FACTS. After all, 80% --- that's nothing. Right ?
"I believe this man was arrested because he was a Republican, who was proud of his gun collection, and said something disparaging about Obama."
Yes, you believe, with absolutely NOTHING to base your belief on --- except your own wishful thinking. So, why should we accept your post? Care to offer a reason ?
***************************************************************
Silence is consent.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:Quote:
Originally posted by pizmobeach:
[B]@Anthony - and how much is fed by hate speech? How many of these people only find the courage to voice their anger when someone tells them it's ok to hate?
Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com]
Hello,
It doesn't matter. I don't care how many bajillions of people hear someone tell them it's okay to do something stupid, and then follow. The cost of banning free speech is too high.
And the much easier means of countering hate speech seems to be completely lost on those who despise it. It seems so lazy to me that every time there is a problem, the first reaction is, "There oughta be a law."
No, there usually oughtn't to be.
You want to counter hate speech? Then make some love speech. You want to counter noise? Make some music.
Those are beautiful sentiments Anthony, certainly nothing anybody would find fault with. I agree - there needn't be a law every time there is a problem. Is it effective? Music and love speech have a way of stirring the beast in negative ways - when some people sense weakness they only act even more aggressively, try and take further advantage. You can see it even on this board.
Ironically, it seems lazy to me to have such an absolutist approach to free speech - that ALL speech should be protected - as if we're incapable of distinguishing what's borderline and what clearly should not be tolerated in a so-called civil society.
Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"The cost of banning free speech is too high."
Well, free speech gave the world the Nazis, the Serbs, Rwanda. So, on the other side of the equation, what is the cost of totally free speech ?
AND EVEN IN THE US, WHICH CLAIMS TO BE THE LAND OF FREE SPEECH, FREE SPEECH IS NOT TOTALLY FREE.
There are limits, after all. Don't believe it ? Try yelling FIRE ! in a crowded theatre. Try claiming something defamatory (and untrue) about someone, or a product. Try telling your neighbor you are going to kill him, in front of witnesses.
Given that there are limits and always will be, the question is, where do you set them ?
***************************************************************
Silence is consent.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:So, speaking of smug and condescending... not sure you have a right to complain about that, Jongsie.
And Niki2, or Rue/Signy, or whoever you are...why don't you take your head out of your ass and see what's going on with this Administration? Then you might not be so damn smug and condescending to FFF posters here.
You assume that we don't see what's going on with the Obama administration. Are you committing the common conservative error, believing that Obama is our messiah or something? Because FWIW, "libruls" tend not to be idol-worshippers.
And clearly, either you haven't been reading our posts or your have conveniently forgotten what we've said. So refresh your memory and go the the Obama Pro and Con thread. I think you'll see that many of the "libruls" here have a fair list of "cons" attached to Obama. And some of those "cons" attach to civil liberties... for example, not pushing to repeal the so-called Patriot Act, or proposing indefinite preventive detention. It would be nice if you would direct your disagreement to a point that was actually reflective of what we are saying, instead of to some point off in space that has nothing to do with Dems, libruls, progressives or whatever.
AFA whether or not the anti-Obama feeling is caused by racism, clearly racism is a part of it- as Kwicko's pix show. The only points we should be discussing are "How much?" and "So what?". I think some of the anti-Obama rhetoric is also being precipiated by Republican right-wing. That part of the party is SO anti-Dem and so flagrantly delusional that it wouldn't matter WHO was in office or WHAT they were doing... the right-wingers would be screeching their heads off about anything and everything, whether it makes sense or not (like Obama's birth certificate and religion) or whether Bush had done it ten times worse. If Hillary had been elected, I'm certain we would be seeing a number of anti-women T-shirts, and we would be discussing the role of sexism. In reality, it's due to a group of people who will stop at nothing to tear down a Democratic President.
In total, the reason why there were so few threats against GWB is simply because the left wing is reasonable and respects the Presidency more than the right wing, who are delusional and hate-filled and prone to violence.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME