Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 57

Thread: Study: Obama foes aren't race-driven

  1. #21
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Last Seen
    01-03-16 @ 02:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,761

    Re: Study: Obama foes aren't race-driven

    Quote Originally Posted by SE102 View Post
    Birthers
    Oddly enough, I'm pretty sure Mccain would have gone through the same grief... what with him being born in Panama on a millitary base that suppsedly does not exist.

    So, it's NOT an issue of race, no matter how much the liberals seem intent on making it seem, as much as it's a constitutional issue of being CERTAIN that he is a natural born citizen.

    Osamacare?
    Health-care is NOT a racial issue in spite of you exchanging the 'b' for an 's'... MANY people oppose Obama's health care plan because of WHAT IS CONTAINED WITHIN the plan, AND NOT because Obama has brown skin.


    Maybe there are actual racists out there just ruining your name and since you tend to be homogenized they just confuse you all?
    Yes, there are definately racists out there... I don't live in some fantasy land. HOWEVER, the real racists are in the SMALL minority, and the continual insistance by liberals that EVERY BIT of opposition to Obama is racially motivated IS ONLY a means to stifle debate.

    There is no confusion... the liberals position DEPENDS on stifling debate, because if there was a legitimate debate ON THE ISSUES (rather then the race card) the MAJORITY of people would stand in opposition.

  2. #22
    Clown Prince of Politics
    Psychoclown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Hiding from the voices in my head.
    Last Seen
    12-14-17 @ 09:31 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    1,738

    Re: Study: Obama foes aren't race-driven

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    This liberal study done in part by James Carville is just another example of the liberal bias so prevalent today. We should discount it immediately just as all liberal media claims are automatically wrong.
    No, but its very reasonable to consider the source when looking at anything. A source with a known bias or agenda isn't automatically wrong or false, but they deserve more scrutiny, particularly when making claims that support their established bias.

    To use an extreme example, you wouldn't consider a neo-nazi web site likely to be a accurate source on the history of the holocaust, would you? The fact is there are a lot of sources out there, on both sides, that are more interested in producing propaganda than in accurate studies and providing factual content. Not all of them, but a lot. A healthy dose of skepticism is needed, now more than ever, given that the internet has made it incredibly easy to spread both information and disinformation.
    Slipping into madness is good for the sake of comparison - Unknown.

  3. #23
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:38 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,344
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Study: Obama foes aren't race-driven

    Quote Originally Posted by Psychoclown View Post
    No, but its very reasonable to consider the source when looking at anything. A source with a known bias or agenda isn't automatically wrong or false, but they deserve more scrutiny, particularly when making claims that support their established bias.

    To use an extreme example, you wouldn't consider a neo-nazi web site likely to be a accurate source on the history of the holocaust, would you? The fact is there are a lot of sources out there, on both sides, that are more interested in producing propaganda than in accurate studies and providing factual content. Not all of them, but a lot. A healthy dose of skepticism is needed, now more than ever, given that the internet has made it incredibly easy to spread both information and disinformation.
    The only source I throw out immediately just because of the source is WorldNutDaily. Everything else, you should at least check what they are saying. Usually, any time I link to say, Factcheck or Politifact, or CNN, some one just says they are liberally biased without ever arguing against the information presented. That is what I was making fun of in my post.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  4. #24
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Last Seen
    01-03-16 @ 02:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,761

    Re: Study: Obama foes aren't race-driven

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    The only source I throw out immediately just because of the source is WorldNutDaily. Everything else, you should at least check what they are saying. Usually, any time I link to say, Factcheck or Politifact, or CNN, some one just says they are liberally biased without ever arguing against the information presented. That is what I was making fun of in my post.
    If your source can be affilliated with any of the 'big 6' media companies (controlling 98% of all print, internet, radio, television, and movies), then it's actually a safe bet that there is some form of bias or spin to the information presented.

    Sometimes it's hard to sort out the fact from the fiction, that much is true... but it's an equal opportunity thing.

  5. #25
    Sage
    teamosil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    San Francisco
    Last Seen
    05-22-14 @ 12:47 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6,623

    Re: Study: Obama foes aren't race-driven

    I haven't actually seen many, if any, liberals saying that the bulk of opposition to Obama's policies is driven by racism. That's sort of a straw man the right created and attributed to liberals. What we've been saying, and what I absolutely still believe to be true, is that a portion of the folks opposing Obama, especially amongst the most foaming at the mouth opposition, are motivated by racism. A Republican on another board estimated that it is "no more than 10% of Republicans" who are racist. I think that's probably about right, and I think most folks in both parties would probably put out a number somewhere in that ballpark.

    Where I think the parties differ is around how big of a deal 10% is and what should be done about it. From where I'm sitting, 10% is a huge number. That means almost half of the juries have a racist sitting on them. Think what that means for equality before the law. When somebody gets a job usually there are somewhere around 5 people involved in the decision of who to hire. If 10% of one of the major party are racist, that means 1/4 of the times a black guy applies for a job, he's getting denied because of his race. That goes a long ways towards explaining why a white applicant is 2 and a half times as likely to get called in for an interview with the same resume as a black candidate. That's a huge problem.

    What's more alarming is that it wasn't 10% a year ago. The number is growing. Membership in militant white supremacist groups has reportedly trippled since Obama won the election. That's a serious problem. In 2007 3,500 black people were the victims of hate crimes. I'm not looking forward to seeing how many there are in 2008 or 2009, but it's a safe bet that as membership in white supremacist organizations rises, so will those numbers. The FBI has foiled a shocking 75 domestic terrorist plots by white supremacist organizations since the Oklaholma City bombing. These groups are no joke. They're violent, they're active, they're dangerous, and they're growing.

    At the same time, racism is appearing more and more often in relatively mainstream media pundits. The racism is being legitimized by it's association with the Republican party. A kid that goes to a teabagging event with his republican parents is being exposed to the full fledged white supremacists and is learning that it is ok to march with folks like that- that they're on the same side. To go from there to becoming a white supremacist himself is not a huge leap.

    What really has me puzzled is that the solution is simple and pain free. All we need is for a number of very high profile white Republicans to speak out against white supremacy. The ideals of white supremacy and the ideals of conservatism are completely opposed. So why aren't we hearing that message being shouted from the top of the party? Why aren't any of the speakers at teabagging events expressing their disagreement with the folks in the crowd with racist signs? Sure, they'd risk losing some of the votes from white supremacists, but they'd gain at least that many moderate and minority votes wouldn't they? I don't think most Republicans are racists. Not at all. But I do see an alarming tendency emerging for Republicans tolerating racism, denying that it exists, even defending it. Doing that creates a safe haven for white supremacy to grow under the protection of a major political party. We Democrats made that mistake once and millions of lives were ruined for generations. Republicans, we need you to show us up and cast out the white supremacists in months instead of the decades it took us to denounce the dixiecrats.

  6. #26
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Last Seen
    07-23-12 @ 03:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    6,763
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Study: Obama foes aren't race-driven

    Quote Originally Posted by teamosil View Post
    We Democrats made that mistake once and millions of lives were ruined for generations. Republicans, we need you to show us up and cast out the white supremacists in months instead of the decades it took us to denounce the dixiecrats.
    Why are you saying that racism is isolated solely on the Republican side of the house? The Republican party was the party that freed the slaves and intituted the Civil Rights Act. There is an inherent soft racism in welfare policy, a darling of the Democratic party.

  7. #27
    Student
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Seen
    01-29-11 @ 01:30 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    151

    Re: Study: Obama foes aren't race-driven

    Quote Originally Posted by teamosil View Post
    What's more alarming is that it wasn't 10% a year ago. The number is growing. Membership in militant white supremacist groups has reportedly trippled since Obama won the election. That's a serious problem.
    I don't think this is indicative of a rise in actual racism. People who aren't racist to begin with don't look up, see a black President, and decide to start posting on Stormfront and find their local Aryan brotherhood.

    What I do think Obama has done by the simple fact of his existence is force people to deal with their own feelings of racism. A lot of white people have negative views of black people, even though it isn't intentional or deliberate. However, recognizing that it isn't intentional or deliberate doesn't mean that such subconscious presuppositions are not powerful. They are. Think about it this way. Ask yourself the following: if you were walking in a dark alley and heard footsteps behind you, would you be more frightened if you saw a black man or a white man? Most white people would probably be cautious of both... but moreso the black person. That's just societal programming. It's just there. Read Blink by Gladwell for a round-about rationale for why this exists. It's interesting.

    Now, apply that same tendency towards hiring practices and you understand why a white person in power to hire another person might prefer to stick with someone that looks and acts like them, culturally speaking.

    So no, I don't think racism is growing in this country. I think people who had racist worldviews are being forced to confront their own racist views and this struggle is causing a lot of growing pains. Think of it this way: many medical problems often become worse upon immediate treatment and don't actually subside or decrease until after extended attention.


    Quote Originally Posted by teamosil View Post
    At the same time, racism is appearing more and more often in relatively mainstream media pundits. The racism is being legitimized by it's association with the Republican party. A kid that goes to a teabagging event with his republican parents is being exposed to the full fledged white supremacists and is learning that it is ok to march with folks like that- that they're on the same side. To go from there to becoming a white supremacist himself is not a huge leap.
    It's frustrating to read an intelligent piece like this which so casually uses the term 'teabagging.' It really brings down the quality and credibility of the post to see broad group of people, mostly concerned with taxation, labeled with a crude sexual term.

    Anyway, I do think that the Tea Party protesters should do a better part of distancing themselves from the white supremacists but I would also interject three points in their defense. First, they don't have a solid leadership structure so getting a message as specific as "those guys in white capes are whacko" is harder to do than in a political party setting. Second, the supremacists are opportunists: they see an opportunity to integrate with people who are frustrated at this administration and the supremacists are taking advantage. They have set leadership groups which can coordinate and plan on how to effectively spread their message. That gives them an advantage over the more nebulous and fractured leadership of the Tea Party people. Third, media portrayals are still there for ratings... which means that if 100 people are protesting and 99 are civil and intelligent, the drunk idiot in the white cape with the misspelled sign will be the one who ends up on YouTube or MSNBC. That's just ratings. So be careful in assuming that "the teabaggers" support these clowns at all. I personally suspect most of the Tea Party goers find them repulsive.

    Quote Originally Posted by teamosil View Post
    What really has me puzzled is that the solution is simple and pain free. All we need is for a number of very high profile white Republicans to speak out against white supremacy. The ideals of white supremacy and the ideals of conservatism are completely opposed. So why aren't we hearing that message being shouted from the top of the party? Why aren't any of the speakers at teabagging events expressing their disagreement with the folks in the crowd with racist signs? Sure, they'd risk losing some of the votes from white supremacists, but they'd gain at least that many moderate and minority votes wouldn't they? I don't think most Republicans are racists. Not at all. But I do see an alarming tendency emerging for Republicans tolerating racism, denying that it exists, even defending it. Doing that creates a safe haven for white supremacy to grow under the protection of a major political party. We Democrats made that mistake once and millions of lives were ruined for generations. Republicans, we need you to show us up and cast out the white supremacists in months instead of the decades it took us to denounce the dixiecrats.
    Part of the problem is that any attempt to address or criticize this aspect of the Tea Party movement will be met by the Democrats and media with glee. Such addresses will be taken as a sign that the Republicans are aware that their members are rife with racists and 'are only now doing something about it.' In addressing such idiots, the Republicans could end up giving the supremacists the appearance of more influence than they actually wield. Rep leadership could try to fight a problem, only to find that focusing on the problem will make it larger than it was when they ignored it.

    In my opinion, the Reps should address the issue... but I also see where they could be afraid to do so out of fear of how the left and the media will spin such a response.

  8. #28
    Sage
    teamosil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    San Francisco
    Last Seen
    05-22-14 @ 12:47 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6,623

    Re: Study: Obama foes aren't race-driven

    Quote Originally Posted by reefedjib View Post
    Why are you saying that racism is isolated solely on the Republican side of the house? The Republican party was the party that freed the slaves and intituted the Civil Rights Act.
    No, that's not what I'm saying. Or at least I'm not saying it is inherent in the Republican party. I'm saying they used to be in the Democratic party. We booted them out. Now they're hanging on to the Republican party. With the Democrats running a black candidate for president we pretty much shoved the remaining racists in our party out the door and they're rallying around your party. Again though, by all means, I don't think they're really Republicans as such. More like they're parasites that clings on to whatever party will tolerate them. We just need the GOP to refuse to have them.

    Quote Originally Posted by reefedjib View Post
    There is an inherent soft racism in welfare policy, a darling of the Democratic party.
    You hear that a lot from folks on the right... But it makes no sense to me whatsoever... Explain if you feel so inclined... Although I probably won't buy it

  9. #29
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Last Seen
    01-03-16 @ 02:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,761

    Re: Study: Obama foes aren't race-driven

    Quote Originally Posted by teamosil View Post
    I haven't actually seen many, if any, liberals saying that the bulk of opposition to Obama's policies is driven by racism.
    Ok, well, rather then leftist I will say 'obama supporters' have called various opposition to various issues a result of racism... mostly on the news since the average person shouldn't be so gullible to think that it's a racial issue.

    That's sort of a straw man the right created and attributed to liberals. What we've been saying, and what I absolutely still believe to be true, is that a portion of the folks opposing Obama, especially amongst the most foaming at the mouth opposition, are motivated by racism. A Republican on another board estimated that it is "no more than 10% of Republicans" who are racist. I think that's probably about right, and I think most folks in both parties would probably put out a number somewhere in that ballpark.
    So you reduce your argument that only a small minority of the people are actually racist, yet they are the voice of the opposition to Obama?? Politicians are equally racist on both sides of the fence they sit on... it's probably the same rate you might find in various areas of the country as well... but what is going on is that the FOCUS is on what that small minority of already hateful people are being used to demonize the majority of REAL decent hardworking people that have legitimate gripe with the POLICIES... AKA it is being used, even by YOU right now... to stifle debate, want proof, we'll continue...

    Where I think the parties differ is around how big of a deal 10% is and what should be done about it. From where I'm sitting, 10% is a huge number. That means almost half of the juries have a racist sitting on them. Think what that means for equality before the law. When somebody gets a job usually there are somewhere around 5 people involved in the decision of who to hire. If 10% of one of the major party are racist, that means 1/4 of the times a black guy applies for a job, he's getting denied because of his race.
    Wow, where do I start... There is alot of discrimination that goes on everywhere... I know it's not fair, but even attractive people have it easier then unattractive people.

    The appropriate thing to do is the shunning of this behavior, boycotts, etc... not legislation. You can't create a law to incriminate 'hurt feelings'... there's no way that you can work it without creating some sort of tyranny where anyone can be found guilty for anything.

    I know that's terrible... but that does NOT mean that the opposition to Obama's policies are racially biased.

    What's more alarming is that it wasn't 10% a year ago. The number is growing.
    More likely they are being increasingly reported...

    Membership in militant white supremacist groups has reportedly trippled since Obama won the election. That's a serious problem. In 2007 3,500 black people were the victims of hate crimes.
    If you look to the MIAC and DHS reports, Ron Paul is a millitant white supremacist millitia member... ANY millitia group that isn't government sanctioned is counted in the 'white supremacist' category. Militia activities have been increasing, but that's not a reflection on race, though it's being portrayed that way.

    I'm not looking forward to seeing how many there are in 2008 or 2009, but it's a safe bet that as membership in white supremacist organizations rises, so will those numbers. The FBI has foiled a shocking 75 domestic terrorist plots by white supremacist organizations since the Oklaholma City bombing. These groups are no joke. They're violent, they're active, they're dangerous, and they're growing.
    Once again, race was added regardless of the members opinions... I won't even get into these '75 foiled attempts' cause I don't want to spend an hour sourcing...

    At the same time, racism is appearing more and more often in relatively mainstream media pundits.
    Ex : A man brought a gun to an Obama rally, Newscaster says, "that's just racist"

    The racism is being legitimized by it's association with the Republican party.
    As a means of demonizing opposition to Obama.

    A kid that goes to a teabagging event with his republican parents is being exposed to the full fledged white supremacists and is learning that it is ok to march with folks like that- that they're on the same side. To go from there to becoming a white supremacist himself is not a huge leap.
    *smacks forehead* Not only are the teaparties against excessive taxation among other pertinant issues, you come in and call this group a 'multi-cultural' whit supremacist meeting...

    What really has me puzzled is that the solution is simple and pain free. All we need is for a number of very high profile white Republicans to speak out against white supremacy. The ideals of white supremacy and the ideals of conservatism are completely opposed.
    They don't speak out because it's essentially a non-issue... and anyone that comes out would have their testimony scrutinized and if they ever so much as cut off a black person on his day off that would be brought up and thrown in his face...

    So why aren't we hearing that message being shouted from the top of the party?
    cause they know how retarted it is to inject race into non-racial issues...


    Why aren't any of the speakers at teabagging events expressing their disagreement with the folks in the crowd with racist signs?
    You mean that sign : "It doesn't matter what this sign says, you'll call it racist anyway"??

    Sure, they'd risk losing some of the votes from white supremacists, but they'd gain at least that many moderate and minority votes wouldn't they? I don't think most Republicans are racists. Not at all. But I do see an alarming tendency emerging for Republicans tolerating racism, denying that it exists, even defending it.
    When everything is called 'racist' if it even slightly opposes Obama's agenda, it becomes very VERY easy to be 'tolerating, denying or defending' racism... you might not even know you're racist...

    Doing that creates a safe haven for white supremacy to grow under the protection of a major political party. We Democrats made that mistake once and millions of lives were ruined for generations. Republicans, we need you to show us up and cast out the white supremacists in months instead of the decades it took us to denounce the dixiecrats.
    Denouncing those a*****es that continuously inject race into non-racial issues is the safest bet, then people might realize that almost noone is really racist, just pissed off about the issues, cause most of these policies are a kick in the arse for the vast majority of the people and would realize this quickly if we didn't have to defend ourselves as being racially motivated.

  10. #30
    Sage
    teamosil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    San Francisco
    Last Seen
    05-22-14 @ 12:47 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6,623

    Re: Study: Obama foes aren't race-driven

    Quote Originally Posted by Caedon View Post
    So no, I don't think racism is growing in this country. I think people who had racist worldviews are being forced to confront their own racist views and this struggle is causing a lot of growing pains. Think of it this way: many medical problems often become worse upon immediate treatment and don't actually subside or decrease until after extended attention.
    I definitely think that's true. It's brought a lot of feelings that have been lurking in the dark out into the open.

    But, I also think that feelings like that diminish when shunned and thrive when tolerated in the open. If this whole experience results in those feelings being brought out into the open, and then dealt with, by all means, it will be, like you say, the pain of healing. That would be great. But, that isn't going to happen unless the Republican party joins up in denouncing it. If they stay silent, then I think we'll see feelings people used to be ashamed of suddenly become somewhat acceptable socially.

    Quote Originally Posted by Caedon View Post
    It's frustrating to read an intelligent piece like this which so casually uses the term 'teabagging.' It really brings down the quality and credibility of the post to see broad group of people, mostly concerned with taxation, labeled with a crude sexual term.
    But... But... Eh, I can't help it... They just walked so cleanly into that one. They practically named themselves. I mean, they wear actual teabags on their hats dangling around next to their faces... It's just too tempting.

    Quote Originally Posted by Caedon View Post
    Anyway, I do think that the Tea Party protesters should do a better part of distancing themselves from the white supremacists but I would also interject three points in their defense.
    I agree somewhat. Probably the extent of actual racism in the tea parties is exagerated by a drama-driven media. But, to some extent that isn't the main issue. Now it has been built up. The average up and coming Republican kid sitting at home has been made aware that there are white supremacists amongst the teabaggers and he's waiting to see what the Republicans do or don't do about it. The party leadership needs to act as a role model to their members and make it clear what the appropriate way to respond to racism is. If they do nothing, they're sending a message that tolerating racism is ok.

    Quote Originally Posted by Caedon View Post
    In my opinion, the Reps should address the issue... but I also see where they could be afraid to do so out of fear of how the left and the media will spin such a response.
    Yeah I think that's dead on. It is a problem. But, I think that fear is unfounded. I know personally that if I heard some big time Republicans speaking out against white supremacy "ah ha! I knew the racists were really there!" would be the last thing from my mind. Personally I am certain I would be impressed with whoever took the stand and more inclined to support them.

    For example, during the campaign McCain took very clear and vocal stands against racism, claims that Obama was a muslim or a terrorist, etc. Every time he did, liberals were thrilled with him and he gained in the polls. For instance, you may remember that McCain rally where a woman from the audience said something about Obama being a muslim terrorist. McCain jumped over to her, snatched the mic out of her hand, and admonished her sternly. He said, "That is absolutely not true. Senator Obama is a good man, a family man, and a Chistian man. He just happens to also be someone with whom I disagree." None of the liberals I know gloated over that one bit. Frankly a lot of them were talking about how great he was (for a Republican).

    But after the campaign ended we stopped hearing those kinds of messages from the GOP. I honestly believe that if a prominent Republican came out and made a great speech about how white supremacy conflicts with the deepest principals of the Republican party, that nobody should make the mistake of thinking that the Republican party tolerates racism, and that those who think that a black man shouldn't be president can take a hike, he'd instantly be the most popular Republican out there. I even think a lot of Republicans are getting a bit bugged out by the racism, even if it's only a perception of racism. They want their leaders to stand up for what they believe in and to distinguish it from what the white supremacists stand for.

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •