Ben Carson: Liberals Don’t Like Me Because They’re ‘Racist’ (AUDIO)

Top Cat said:

Ben Carson: Liberals Don't Like Me Because They're 'Racist' (AUDIO) | TPM LiveWire

Honestly, how can anyone take this man seriously? Sure there are racists on the left. Certainly more than their fair share on the right as well.

Click to expand...

This is part of the problem, right here. "Some" on the left, yet "certainly more than their fair share" on the right. The Democrats branded themselves the party for minorities, every bit as much as Dodge brands it's truck for the tough blue collar man. And by the transitive property, that must necessarily mean that Republicans represent the part of "everyone else," i.e. whites. They must be racist, on the whole, or at least moreso, right?

When you make inane comments like this man has, and you put yourself out there as he has, expecting not to be criticized on one's position is rather short sighted. Playing the race card just looks shallow.

The guy may well be educated. But he certainly looks stupid.

Click to expand...

President Obama and his campaign played the race card to its FULLEST in 2008, even while making a completely sexist campaign against Hilary (and then discounting and making light of that campaign's complaints of discrimination).

Let it be remembered that Candidate Obama said it was his goal to visit all 57 states. Was there massive outcry about his inability to run the country for not knowing such a simple fact as the number of states in the Union he would be presiding over? No, there wasn't. Liberal apologetics glazed that one over as a simple flub or campaign exhaustion or whatever, even while still blaming Bush for making flubs. You see, when a Republican is in office, they must be held to the absolute highest standard, because they are representing America to the entire world.... but they world understands when a Democrat makes a gaff, because Democrats are usually tired and stressed out from providing for women, minorities, and the poor, and all while combating the evil Republicans who are trying to subjugate the world for diabolical purposes.

There was a time not too long ago when nobody, black, white, hispanic, asian, whatever, could say a single negative thing about Candidate and President Obama without being immediately and vehemently accused of being a racist and nitpicking simply because of the color of his skin. Now that the shoe is on the other foot, people can find all kinds of negative things to say about this Republican "token" "Uncle Tom" phony followup media stunt. But that's not racist at all, now is it?

apdst said:

What?...LOL!!! Woodrow Wilson was a Leftist and he was racist as hell. So was Theodore Roosevelt. Wilson's father was a slave owner, in fact.

So, let's don't try that makeSocialism into some sorta pure as the driven snow bull****. Socialists have the highest body count of any other political group/government in human history.

Click to expand...

And dont forget LBJs comments...the real reason he signed that civil rights legislation...he got them folks voting democrat for the next 200 years by golly.

VanceMack said:

And dont forget LBJs comments...the real reason he signed that civil rights legislation...he got them folks voting democrat for the next 200 years by golly.

Click to expand...

That's right!

Libbos forget--more than likely, they never knews--that it was the Republicans in the late 50's that wrote the very first civil rights legislation and it was Liberals like Al Gore, Sr. and LBJ that killed it.

rocket88 said:

So when liberals freak out when Sarah Palin starts talking it's because they're sexist too?

How about when conservatives freak out when Obama starts talking? Is it because they're racist?

People who talk about the liberal "plantation" are racists. They're using a word that's deliberately racially charged because it'll get a rise out of people who think like that.

That said, I don't see anybody freaking out about the obvious bias in the question.

Click to expand...

Well perhaps if your screen had a mirrored finish you would see at least one freaking out.......

apdst said:

What?...LOL!!! Woodrow Wilson was a Leftist and he was racist as hell. So was Theodore Roosevelt. Wilson's father was a slave owner, in fact.

So, let's don't try that makeSocialism into some sorta pure as the driven snow bull****. Socialists have the highest body count of any other political group/government in human history.

Click to expand...

I highly doubt that there's any accuracy whatsoever in that least sentence of yours. What do Roosevelt/Wilson have anything to do with socialism not being synonymous with marxism?

shlunka said:

I highly doubt that there's any accuracy whatsoever in that least sentence of yours. What do Roosevelt/Wilson have anything to do with socialism not being synonymous with marxism?

Click to expand...

Marxism is just a version of Socialism. They're about as different as National Socialists in Germany and the National Facist Party in Italy.

Top Cat said:

Ben Carson: Liberals Don't Like Me Because They're 'Racist' (AUDIO) | TPM LiveWire

Honestly, how can anyone take this man seriously? Sure there are racists on the left. Certainly more than their fair share on the right as well.

When you make inane comments like this man has, and you put yourself out there as he has, expecting not to be criticized on one's position is rather short sighted. Playing the race card just looks shallow.

The guy may well be educated. But he certainly looks stupid.

Click to expand...

Actually, he apologized for the misconception due to his choice of wording. It was not his intention to link homosexuality with pedophilia or anything else. And he clearly stated that it was not his intention to link them so.

You seem not to care about that though.

apdst said:

Marxism is just a version of Socialism. They're about as different as National Socialists in Germany and the National Facist Party in Italy.

Click to expand...

Then therefore, they are not synonymous. Thank you for justifying my original point, and you are now awesome in my eyes.

mac said:

Actually, he apologized for the misconception due to his choice of wording. It was not his intention to link homosexuality with pedophilia or anything else. And he clearly stated that it was not his intention to link them so.

You seem not to care about that though.

Click to expand...

Yeah nobody believes that. Comparing homosexuality to beastiality and pedophilia is a common meme for the religious right.

VanceMack said:

And dont forget LBJs comments...the real reason he signed that civil rights legislation...he got them folks voting democrat for the next 200 years by golly.

Click to expand...

Actually you really have to lack historical knowledge to make that claim. Blacks overwhelming voted Republican following the Civil War but started voting for Democratic presidents by a large margin with the election of FDR. There was definately a bump...from 70ish percent to 90ish percent following Civil Rights but the only large shift following Civil Rights was the loss of the deep south white vote. Which still votes consistently Republican.

Edit: Truman actually recieved above 80% of the black vote...of course well before the Civil Rights Act was passed in 64.

mac said:

Actually, he apologized for the misconception due to his choice of wording. It was not his intention to link homosexuality with pedophilia or anything else. And he clearly stated that it was not his intention to link them so.

You seem not to care about that though.

Click to expand...

Politics is like managing a business; sometimes you have to apologize to those who complain, even if you know their complaint is utter BS.

Gifted Hands was a pretty good movie but this is pretty lame.

shlunka said:

Then therefore, they are not synonymous. Thank you for justifying my original point, and you are now awesome in my eyes.

Click to expand...

Synonymous? No. Are they all Socialists? You betch! Just like Wilson and Roosevelt were socialists.

VanceMack said:

And dont forget LBJs comments...the real reason he signed that civil rights legislation...he got them folks voting democrat for the next 200 years by golly.

Click to expand...

So he should have vetoed it?

Whatever his motivations, he signed it, and it's a good thing.

apdst said:

And when someone dares criticize The Messiah, the Libbos pull the race card out of every orafice.

Click to expand...

Why would I pull the race card when someone criticizes Jesus?

So does this prove Conservatives play the race card too, or do you have another excuse?

Mathematician said:

Politics is like managing a business; sometimes you have to apologize to those who complain, even if you know their complaint is utter BS.

Click to expand...

Be that as it may... I fully believe he never intend to portray what is being said he portrayed.

apdst said:

Synonymous? No. Are they all Socialists? You betch! Just like Wilson and Roosevelt were socialists.

Click to expand...

My point was that they weren't synonymous. Sorry that there was some misconstruing, I imagine it almost certainly was on my part. By the way, does your name have any meaning or was it just arbitrary pressing of keys?

iliveonramen said:

Yeah nobody believes that. Comparing homosexuality to beastiality and pedophilia is a common meme for the religious right.

Click to expand...

So? That doesn't mean he did.

rocket88 said:

So he should have vetoed it?

Whatever his motivations, he signed it, and it's a good thing.

Click to expand...

That all depends on how you look at it, or if you even know what it says. While it doesn't create ghettos, it creates a political motivations to keep ghettos in place. If black folks left their neighborhoods, because they created for themselves more financial independence, it could mean an end to the majority minority voting districts. So, there's no motivation for the politicians who benefit from these majority minority voting districts to improve the quality of life of the people living in those districts.

It also legalizes racial gerrymandering, which is illegal under any other circumstance--as it should be.

apdst said:

And when someone dares criticize The Messiah, the Libbos pull the race card out of every orafice.

Click to expand...

I have personally never pulled a race card out of my anus, though, I would be lying if I said that I haven't pulled one out of my genital region. You're quite knowledgeable on the orifices of libertarians, and for that, I commend you. In my experience, many conservatives don't know that we libertarians also share similar bodily organs as themselves.

apdst said:

That all depends on how you look at it, or if you even know what it says. While it doesn't create ghettos, it creates a political motivations to keep ghettos in place. If black folks left their neighborhoods, because they created for themselves more financial independence, it could mean an end to the majority minority voting districts. So, there's no motivation for the politicians who benefit from these majority minority voting districts to improve the quality of life of the people living in those districts.

It also legalizes racial gerrymandering, which is illegal under any other circumstance--as it should be.

Click to expand...

Gerrymandering would exist anyway. Ever notice that when they draw an overwhelmingly conservative district, they avoid the inner cities completely? I wonder why...:lamo

shlunka said:

My point was that they weren't synonymous. Sorry that there was some misconstruing, I imagine it almost certainly was on my part. By the way, does your name have any meaning or was it just arbitrary pressing of keys?

Click to expand...

You claimed that Socialism had no racist history and that's simply not true. Margaret Sanger was a Leftist and she was racist as hell. The white founders of the NAACP were socialists and racist; hence the reason they created the NAACP, because they viewed blacks as an inferior race, that need the help of white people to succeed in life...purdy much the way Leftists think, today.

rocket88 said:

Gerrymandering would exist anyway. Ever notice that when they draw an overwhelmingly conservative district, they avoid the inner cities completely? I wonder why...:lamo

Click to expand...

It's called, "Section 5 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964".

So, no, I don't wonder why.

shlunka said:

I have personally never pulled a race card out of my anus, though, I would be lying if I said that I haven't pulled one out of my genital region. You're quite knowledgeable on the orifices of libertarians, and for that, I commend you. In my experience, many conservatives don't know that we libertarians also share similar bodily organs as themselves.

Click to expand...

Your political lean says you're a socialist. You claim to be a Libertarian. Which is it?

shlunka said:

Marxism implies the prejudices against other races, socialism does not. Following the personal beliefs of Marx and Engels, socialism pre-dates those two individuals, and therefore is not synonymous.

Click to expand...

The ultimate goal of Socialism is Communism