• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is this Racist?[W:300]

Is this story from Nebraska Racist?

  • Yes

    Votes: 7 16.3%
  • No

    Votes: 36 83.7%

  • Total voters
    43
Re: Is this Racist?

What he said was correct though.

Is that right? Well, I guess you can think that. I think Romney was right on point when he used the term "47%" to identify the lost cause voters who are only interested in getting more free stuff.

The fact is, they exist in even greater numbers today, and with the addition of the invaders from foreign countries the President is anxious to add to the public dole, the 47% is bound to grow significantly higher.
 
Re: Is this Racist?

Do you only care about the house or do you care that Reid won't let bills from the house get voted upon? Is that OK with you? Isnt that Democratic obstructionism?

The difference, sir, is that the bills that the Senate passed - like the immigration bill - were mostly bipartisan, whereas the (relatively few) bills that the House passed were never brought up for a vote unless Boehner knew that it had enough support from the Republicans for it to pass without Democratic support (see "the Hastert Rule")...which means that the bills passed by the House were not bipartisan.
 
Re: Is this Racist?

Ah. So...when someone commits an obviously racist act or if someone says something that is obviously racist, should we then refrain from pointing it out? "Ignore it and it'll go away"?

TB, do yourself a favor - look at both sides of the story, and see which side is committing more racist acts, which side actually does use racist dog-whistles on a weekly basis. Better yet, keep a record of racist acts and statements by both sides, and see which side's list gets much, much longer. And be sure to include the dog-whistle statements, because almost everyone knows them for what they are.

See which side's list gets much, much longer...

...and bear in mind that a degree of racism by one side does not negate that side's right and responsibility to point out the much, much greater degree of racism by the other side.

I'm eager to see how your list turns out.

Face facts, both sides will do and say whatever it takes to win elections. It is really THAT simple.
 
Re: Is this Racist?

Let other adults call your child names because of his race and see how quickly you DO pay attention.

LOL,,, not at all. Been called names too many times to get upset about it anymore, and that's what I'd teach my kids. Sticks and stones now are a different story.
 
Re: Is this Racist?

None of them....?

You're smarter than this. You really think Obama is the first POTUS to face opposition?

Hey, remember when Bush wanted to privatize Social Security?

Hey, remember when Clinton (via his wife) wanted to implement a healthcare reform plan?

Hey, remember when the Democrats opposed Bush's tax cuts (which of course they "reconsidered" in 2012)?

We could go on all day.
All presidents have experienced opposition ...that is how the system works. But Obama has experienced a level of obstructionism that is historically unprecedented.
Of course you know this but you insist on playing your little game of selective memory.
That's OK it just makes you look childish.
 
Re: Is this Racist?

The difference, sir, is that the bills that the Senate passed - like the immigration bill - were mostly bipartisan, whereas the (relatively few) bills that the House passed were never brought up for a vote unless Boehner knew that it had enough support from the Republicans for it to pass without Democratic support (see "the Hastert Rule")...which means that the bills passed by the House were not bipartisan.

The subject was not about bills passed, but about the head of the chamber not allowing votes, which is highly prevalent in the Senate. Reid won't let bills be voted on and you are Ok with that. No difference between the two.
 
Re: Is this Racist?

All presidents have experienced opposition ...that is how the system works. But Obama has experienced a level of obstructionism that is historically unprecedented.
Of course you know this but you insist on playing your little game of selective memory.
That's OK it just makes you look childish.

That word "unprecedented" is very hard to prove.

If the other presidents had told their Congresses they had to vote with him or jump off a bridge, like Obama has done, would those Congresses have voted or would they have obstructed?
 
Re: Is this Racist?

All presidents have experienced opposition ...that is how the system works. But Obama has experienced a level of obstructionism that is historically unprecedented.
Of course you know this but you insist on playing your little game of selective memory.
That's OK it just makes you look childish.

So the Democrats all supported Bush 43. And the Republicans all supported Clinton. And the Democrats all supported Bush 41. And the Democrats all supported Reagan.

Um, yeah.

Kindly stop with the personal insults. "Games", "childish", etc. How about sticking to the topic/content of my posts and leaving the little digs aside?
 
Re: Is this Racist?

Is that right? Well, I guess you can think that. I think Romney was right on point when he used the term "47%" to identify the lost cause voters who are only interested in getting more free stuff.

The fact is, they exist in even greater numbers today, and with the addition of the invaders from foreign countries the President is anxious to add to the public dole, the 47% is bound to grow significantly higher.

If that's what you want to tell yourself, go right ahead.
 
Re: Is this Racist?

Face facts, both sides will do and say whatever it takes to win elections. It is really THAT simple.

No, this is the very first time in history that one party didn't want the other party's candidate to win the Presidential election, Chris. Pay attention.
 
Re: Is this Racist?

If that's what you want to tell yourself, go right ahead.

I don't need to tell myself anything. I look at the demographics and voting record. It's part of the public record.

What do you look at to prove people cling to guns and bibles?
 
Re: Is this Racist?

I don't need to tell myself anything. I look at the demographics and voting record. It's part of the public record.

What do you look at to prove people cling to guns and bibles?

Demographics and voting record, eh?

As for the latter, I lived by it. They do cling to their bibles, they love guns, and many are racist to the core.

I saw it for myself. Whether you believe me or not, makes no difference.
 
Re: Is this Racist?

So you didn't have any problem Romney insulting 47%. Oh right, as long as it is the half that you don't care for :roll:

By the way, please provide a link where Obama is calling half the people in this country his "enemies"

It was in a speech made to Latinos in a "get-out-the-vote- rally on immigration overhaul on October 25, 2010 that was aired on Univision. See the YouTube video. BTW, he later backtracked by saying, "I shouldn't have used the word "enemies." I should have said "opponents."

And since you don't know me, or how I spend my time, how can you know what or who I care about? I assure you I care a lot more than you could possibly imagine, and my caring is shown by what I do to help the 47 percent you refer to, and they tell me they're very glad I do. So I'll put my actions and my time up against your posted words any day! All Republicans are not bad guys, you know, any more than All Democrats are. Try to judge people more fairly as individuals.

Greetings, rcart76. :2wave:
 
Re: Is this Racist?

That IS nice when you need to refute their silly echoed platitudes ...
We can dis the whole lot with a single comment and it applies across the board.:lamo

Go right ahead and dis whomever you want. I don't concern myself with who listens to what radio shows.

It is amusing to see the parrots on both sides repeating what they hear. And it happens on here all the time - from both sides. Including the side I suspect you would consider yourself aligned with.
 
Re: Is this Racist?

No, this is the very first time in history that one party didn't want the other party's candidate to win the Presidential election, Chris. Pay attention.

Jeez, what was I thinking. I must need my afternoon cup of coffee. :lol:
 
Re: Is this Racist?

No, this is the very first time in history that one party didn't want the other party's candidate to win the Presidential election, Chris. Pay attention.
First time a senate leader vowed it as the single most important objective in the first year.
But of course you know that. That coy, sarcastic, selective memory is making you look silly again.
 
Re: Is this Racist?

That word "unprecedented" is very hard to prove.
No it's not;
Cloture-Invoked3Final.jpg
 
Re: Is this Racist?

Please see my post #269.

Greetings, Buck Ewer. :2wave:
Greetings to you as well...
So you take issue with a single slipped word that was apologized for?
How tolerant of you.
 
Back
Top Bottom