PDA

View Full Version : CNN: Only Racism Explains Obama's Slide In Polls



BAMAPHIN 22
09-17-2008, 09:21 PM
"The differences between Barack Obama and John McCain couldn't be more well-defined. Obama wants to change Washington. McCain is a part of Washington and a part of the Bush legacy. Yet the polls remain close. Doesn't make sense…unless it's race."


http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/09/16/cafferty-obama-race-a-factor/

ih8brady
09-17-2008, 09:23 PM
Very well-put. McCain is interested in change the way the Jonas Brothers are interested in Rock music or females.

milldog
09-17-2008, 09:27 PM
I'm not gonna push any buttons on this topic but we'de all be naive to think his color doesn't matter to some people. We see it everyday. It means nothing to me though. I could care less if you were purple. I would hope if elected, it would ease some of the racial hatred in this country!

FINSFAN2781
09-17-2008, 09:28 PM
I agree. Like I said before, whether people want to believe it or not, thats exactly what is holding him back from running away. I was watching CNN the other day and someone who I cant remember said, that the reason the polls are as close as they are is because Obama is black. If he were white, this race would have been over a long time ago.

WSE
09-17-2008, 09:29 PM
I think its the newness of Palin

it will wear off imo, and Obama should have a 3-5 pt lead heading to the debates

milldog
09-17-2008, 09:33 PM
I think its the newness of Palin

it will wear off imo, and Obama should have a 3-5 pt lead heading to the debates

I hope your right! Fact is, whoever wins the election, the fact remains we are divided. Hopefully we will come together as one and put an end to partisianship! Wishful thinking!

phinfan3411
09-17-2008, 09:33 PM
So, there was not racism earlier, when he had the lead, in fact, a comfortable lead, but now, with fall coming, racism is "in the air", makes sense.

milldog
09-17-2008, 09:41 PM
So, there was not racism earlier, when he had the lead, in fact, a comfortable lead, but now, with fall coming, racism is "in the air", makes sense.

So your saying rascism isn't a factor at all. I'm not talking about his slide in the polls, just in general. Hope you can at least agree to that!

milldog
09-17-2008, 09:42 PM
I know you were responding to the thread, I'm just asking.

FinFatale
09-17-2008, 09:46 PM
So, there was not racism earlier, when he had the lead, in fact, a comfortable lead, but now, with fall coming, racism is "in the air", makes sense.

hmmm, great point.....where was it when he was the raising star?????
I think that many who PLAY the race card are trying their best to illict " white guilt" votes. Anywhooooooooo lol, won't the debates be fun?
I have done a lot of reading today on both senators, comparing their positions etc...........I wish more people would register third party........get a trend going and get this two party crap brought to an end honestly.........it won't happen over night but it would happen.......

phinfan3411
09-17-2008, 09:57 PM
So your saying rascism isn't a factor at all. I'm not talking about his slide in the polls, just in general. Hope you can at least agree to that!

No, if you read any of my threads, you will see I admit there is racism, I actually believe everybody is racist to a certain extent, but I think it is a two way street.

You have to understand I usually support republicans, although it is not completely out of the of the ordinary for me to like a democrat, my states gov for instance (and he's black!). I have almost always voted republican for president, except Ross Perot, and I supported Ron Paul this year. So this year I do not support the Black democratic candidate, and all of a sudden i'm a racist, it got old about 6 months ago.

ih8brady
09-17-2008, 09:57 PM
So, there was not racism earlier, when he had the lead, in fact, a comfortable lead, but now, with fall coming, racism is "in the air", makes sense.


Racism was a factor earlier in the Democratic contest. Hillary won many votes due to racist undertones. In Indiana, 13% of whites did not vote for Obama because he is black. In North Carolina, the number was 14%. And this was the amount of people who admitted to it. How many more voters were too ashamed to admit the truth? And this was among Democrats! What about Republicans or Independents, especially in areas where hostility against blacks is high?

ih8brady
09-17-2008, 09:59 PM
No, if you read any of my threads, you will see I admit there is racism, I actually believe everybody is racist to a certain extent, but I think it is a two way street.

You have to understand I usually support republicans, although it is not completely out of the of the ordinary for me to like a democrat, my states gov for instance (and he's black!). I have almost always voted republican for president, except Ross Perot, and I supported Ron Paul this year. So this year I do not support the Black democratic candidate, and all of a sudden i'm a racist, it got old about 6 months ago.


This isn't about you. It's about the general public and attitudes in places across America where voters don't decide based off issues or stances but BS like skin color.

milldog
09-17-2008, 10:02 PM
No, if you read any of my threads, you will see I admit there is racism, I actually believe everybody is racist to a certain extent, but I think it is a two way street.

You have to understand I usually support republicans, although it is not completely out of the of the ordinary for me to like a democrat, my states gov for instance (and he's black!). I have almost always voted republican for president, except Ross Perot, and I supported Ron Paul this year. So this year I do not support the Black democratic candidate, and all of a sudden i'm a racist, it got old about 6 months ago.

You're right, I didn't see your earlier post before I asked, my bad! :up:

milldog
09-17-2008, 10:04 PM
You're right, I didn't see your earlier post before I asked, my bad! :up:

And I wasn't implying you were, I was just curious.

finintheburgh
09-17-2008, 10:05 PM
Racism was a factor earlier in the Democratic contest. Hillary won many votes due to racist undertones. In Indiana, 13% of whites did not vote for Obama because he is black. In North Carolina, the number was 14%. And this was the amount of people who admitted to it. How many more voters were too ashamed to admit the truth? And this was among Democrats! What about Republicans or Independents, especially in areas where hostility against blacks is high?


well is it racist that he recieved well over 90% of the black vote.

thats a large portion of the vote considering he wasnt the only person in the race, i guess the black vote didnt realize there were other people running.

how come were only complaining about the fact that he may lose a few votes because of his color, but we ignore the fact that he gained votes just because of his color

Dolphins9954
09-17-2008, 10:22 PM
I don't think race has anything to do with it. That's an excuse. It's his policies and votes that's doing him in. The fact remains that Obama is not offering "change". It's nothing more than smoke and mirrors. A total illusion that has many people fooled. The Tax Policy Center which is a total independent group of accountants and guys good with numbers. Has done their report on both Obama and Mccain. Or McBama is how I like to call them. And they concluded that both Obama and Mccain will add anywhere from 4 to 5 trillion to the debt. And that we would have 10 years of deficits. Not exactly the change we're looking for. And you have both parties and candidates support of the Federal Reserve. An unconstitutional private entity that has no oversight. Controlling our money, economy and inflation. Not exactly change.

Then you have Obama's vote for the Patriot Act and FISA. Two of the biggest attacks on our liberties and Constitution of this generation. Obama voted for. Not only does Obama have no problem with taking away your liberties and spying on the American people. He also voted to give immunity to Tele-com corporations that were illegally spying on you for the government. Not exactly the change we're looking for.

Then you have these "free speech zones" at Obama convention. That was enforced by Paramilitary forces. All those that expressed their right and freedom to protest. Were subjected to Big Brother and Government suppression of dissent. The same exact thing can be said about the GOP convention as well. All different opinions and views were suppressed. Simple as that. "Change". Not exactly.

Then comes Iraq and our current Foreign Policy. I run into Obama supporters all the time who think Obama is Anti-War. That he will end the war in Iraq and bring our troops home. Nothing could be further from the truth. The only difference between Obama and Mccain when it comes to Iraq is troop levels. Obama will not. And I repeat. Will not end the war in Iraq and bring our troops home. His plan calls for a Phased two year withdrawl. That will leave 50,000 tropps in Iraq for years to come. Something that both Bush and Mccain agree on. The only difference is troop levels. You also have Obama saying that he would attack Pakistan without permission. And saying that war with Iran is on the table. The fact remains that Obama is not Anti-War. And not much difference at all when it comes to war and Foreign policy. Not the "change" we need.

In the end. Race has nothing to do with it. The reason Obama is in this position is because of his policies and votes. He only has to blame himself for that. Not Racism. That's a poor excuse and deflection from reality. If Obama really did offer true change and not More Big Government, Debt and loss of liberty. Then I guarantee he would be far ahead in the polls.

ohall
09-17-2008, 11:20 PM
I agree. Obama plays the race card a lot. What else does he think is going to happen?

Any way the polls are shifting back to him so white guild must be kicking in again.

MDFINFAN
09-17-2008, 11:33 PM
Well that's one subject you'll never get ppl to answer honestly... race are you kidding me..a touchy subject..

Dolphins9954
09-18-2008, 09:46 AM
Well that's one subject you'll never get ppl to answer honestly... race are you kidding me..a touchy subject..


At the same time it's not honest to use racism as an excuse. Obama is in this position because of his policies and votes. If Obama really did offer us true change. And not this charade of illusions. He would be in a better position right now. Obama is to blame. Not Racism.

poornate
09-18-2008, 10:02 AM
well is it racist that he recieved well over 90% of the black vote.

thats a large portion of the vote considering he wasnt the only person in the race, i guess the black vote didnt realize there were other people running.

how come were only complaining about the fact that he may lose a few votes because of his color, but we ignore the fact that he gained votes just because of his color

Well... that is a stunning reversal... since Kerry and Gore only got 88 and 89% respectively of the African-American vote... Did you forget that Republicans still don't represent issues that African-American voters support favorably? Did you expect this year to be different?

phinfan3411
09-18-2008, 12:17 PM
Well... that is a stunning reversal... since Kerry and Gore only got 88 and 89% respectively of the African-American vote... Did you forget that Republicans still don't represent issues that African-American voters support favorably? Did you expect this year to be different?

Nice try, I believe he is talking about between Obama, and Hillary, I heard Obama in some states getting 91 or 92% of the black vote. The only thing that made them jump, you can spin this all you want, was as soon as they knew he had a chance, the black vote left Hillary, like George Costanza left that building when the fire alarm sounded.

Don't get me wrong, i'm not saying that is wrong, i'm saying, again, it goes both ways, don't expect it from one group, when you do not practice it yourself.

MDFINFAN
09-18-2008, 12:33 PM
I agree. Obama plays the race card a lot. What else does he think is going to happen?

Any way the polls are shifting back to him so white guild must be kicking in again.


It's very hard to talk race for all of us. Actually this election has made us all confront all our hypocricies..

We've had gender bais, race bais, age bais, experience bais, and education bias all in one election cycle which carried into the general election as well. This might be the best thing to have ever happened to us...because in the future it should be a mute point on all fronts.:up:

Gonzo
09-18-2008, 12:35 PM
No, if you read any of my threads, you will see I admit there is racism, I actually believe everybody is racist to a certain extent, but I think it is a two way street.

You have to understand I usually support republicans, although it is not completely out of the of the ordinary for me to like a democrat, my states gov for instance (and he's black!). I have almost always voted republican for president, except Ross Perot, and I supported Ron Paul this year. So this year I do not support the Black democratic candidate, and all of a sudden i'm a racist, it got old about 6 months ago.
If that is true, then I guess I know the feeling. I'm not supporting McCain and Palin, so I'm suddenly sexist and ageist.

MDFINFAN
09-18-2008, 12:41 PM
well is it racist that he recieved well over 90% of the black vote.

thats a large portion of the vote considering he wasnt the only person in the race, i guess the black vote didnt realize there were other people running.

how come were only complaining about the fact that he may lose a few votes because of his color, but we ignore the fact that he gained votes just because of his color

That wasn't racism, that was Bill and Hillary saying somethings that turned off the black population..did you forget the famous jj comparison from Bill, or the signing of the civil rights bill took a president from hillary, kind of down playing the role MLKing had in the event.. Up to that point Hillary had about 54% of the black vote, then those statements turned ppl off, I know on this one..trust me, those comments were not taken well in the black communities.
In those instances, blacks thought the clintons were playing the race card.
that's when Obama started picking up the black vote.. and as he had that straigth of 11 straight wins, then like everyone else, you get on the bandwagon of a winner, and at the end of that stretch is when you saw him get 90, 91% of black voters in the south... Just like once McCain started winning most of the repub primaries you saw his vote total increase, except you don't have a large group of minorities in the repub party to track like you do in the dem party..

MDFINFAN
09-18-2008, 12:53 PM
well is it racist that he recieved well over 90% of the black vote.

thats a large portion of the vote considering he wasnt the only person in the race, i guess the black vote didnt realize there were other people running.

how come were only complaining about the fact that he may lose a few votes because of his color, but we ignore the fact that he gained votes just because of his color

Btw, black aren't so racist..I posted this awhile back, here's who blacks consider leaders for them...and you'll note Hillary and Bill are there.:up:

And this was a recent poll during Obama's and Hillary's historic run.

http://www.finheaven.com/images/imported/2008/09/080714BlackLeader1_904ljede-1.gif

FinFatale
09-18-2008, 12:56 PM
I do not have a difficult time discussing issues of race although I do think that is at this time in an election it can take one's mind off real issues.............often to a candiates advantage.....again, red, yellow, black or white... color doesn't indicate a man's or woman's worth as a human being........not to me anyway..I have had my own problems with prejudices, I am not a stranger to it at all........african american are NOT the ONLY people in our society that have had to deal with it......Condie Rice did ok "despite" her race as did Colin Powell for example so I think our government is past that crap.........just my opinion as always................

Dolphan7
09-18-2008, 01:12 PM
I just think it is hilarious that when Obama is down in the polls, there must be some excuse as to why, and instead of looking at the issues, people look at race.

This election is about issues to me, and to many informed voters. This election is about where this country goes in the next 10 years.

I am sorry but I just don't think that a charismatic and skilled speaker with maybe 1 good year as a US Senator is the right person for the JOB.

It isn't race, it is the democratic platform that Americans have rejected in the last 2 elections, and will reject once again.

MDFINFAN
09-18-2008, 01:15 PM
I do not have a difficult time discussing issues of race although I do think that is at this time in an election it can take one's mind off real issues.............often to a candiates advantage.....again, red, yellow, black or white... color doesn't indicate a man's or woman's worth as a human being........not to me anyway..I have had my own problems with prejudices, I am not a stranger to it at all........african american are NOT the ONLY people in our society that have had to deal with it......Condie Rice did ok "despite" her race as did Colin Powell for example so I think our government is past that crap.........just my opinion as always................

Connie and Powell were appointed to their positions in Gov't..so indivduals have passed that crap..:up: And both of them will tell you Affirmative action help them get to where they're at..it was their start, as it was for a lot of ppl their age.. never the less, a good solid post by you as always..:up:

MDFINFAN
09-18-2008, 01:21 PM
I just think it is hilarious that when Obama is down in the polls, there must be some excuse as to why, and instead of looking at the issues, people look at race.

This election is about issues to me, and to many informed voters. This election is about where this country goes in the next 10 years.

I am sorry but I just don't think that a charismatic and skilled speaker with maybe 1 good year as a US Senator is the right person for the JOB.

It isn't race, it is the democratic platform that Americans have rejected in the last 2 elections, and will reject once again.

I think you're correct, some will look at race, and I think it goes to why when an economy is this bad, the last 8 years as bad as they were, and a person who offers a clear and distinct different path, and who by the way is smart, inspiring with a good plan is not futher ahead.. of course that's part of the dialog as to why he isn't futher along in the polls.. in WVa they wouldn't even give him a chance, when 23% of Americans say they won't vote for a black man...yea it'll be question.. Is it right, should it be a big issue, no.. But I think as we go on, race will become less of a issue and the issues become the primary focus point for ppl.. I also think Obama's becoming less scary for ppl as they get to know him. All the radical stuff that they've heard from the underground isn't panding out in all the investigations on him.. I think that's helping along with this economy now.

finintheburgh
09-18-2008, 06:07 PM
Btw, black aren't so racist..I posted this awhile back, here's who blacks consider leaders for them...and you'll note Hillary and Bill are there.:up:

And this was a recent poll during Obama's and Hillary's historic run.

http://www.finheaven.com/images/imported/2008/09/080714BlackLeader1_904ljede-1.gif
sorry md but i have to disagee on this one. there are just as many racist blacks as there are racist whites. probably even a higher percent

ih8brady
09-18-2008, 09:36 PM
sorry md but i have to disagee on this one. there are just as many racist blacks as there are racist whites. probably even a higher percent



Any proof? Or are you pulling this out of thin air? You do realize that the total amount of whites in this country is over 200 million and the total amount of blacks is around 41 million. So that means if a quarter of whites are racist and 100% of blacks are racist, then there are still more racist whites than blacks.

MDFINFAN
09-18-2008, 10:20 PM
sorry md but i have to disagee on this one. there are just as many racist blacks as there are racist whites. probably even a higher percent

I have to humbly disagree, the % are too high in white favor..

There's 261 million white people in the US, and only 38 million black people, I just don't think there's as many black racists as white racists..and I'm not trying to be funny.. it's just that the numbers don't seem to work. Btw, this is a poll of what black ppl said...how do you disagree with who they consider a leader and what does that have to do with racism..?? I was just showing you that blacks include whites as leaders for them.. How do you question that?

MDFINFAN
09-18-2008, 10:24 PM
Any proof? Or are you pulling this out of thin air? You do realize that the total amount of whites in this country is over 200 million and the total amount of blacks is around 41 million. So that means if a quarter of whites are racist and 100% of blacks are racist, then there are still more racist whites than blacks.

I should have read your post before responding..thanks you made my case.. part of the reasons of not knowing is not knowing the facts..that's why I laugh when ppl talk affirmative action, there's just not enough black ppl to take all these jobs and positions that these guys argue about..

And remember guys the 38 million aren't all grown ups, that number includes babies, small kids, teenagers and adults..

ohall
09-18-2008, 10:57 PM
Any proof? Or are you pulling this out of thin air? You do realize that the total amount of whites in this country is over 200 million and the total amount of blacks is around 41 million. So that means if a quarter of whites are racist and 100% of blacks are racist, then there are still more racist whites than blacks.

Rev. Wright, end of story.

ohall
09-18-2008, 10:58 PM
I have to humbly disagree, the % are too high in white favor..

There's 261 million white people in the US, and only 38 million black people, I just don't think there's as many black racists as white racists..and I'm not trying to be funny.. it's just that the numbers don't seem to work. Btw, this is a poll of what black ppl said...how do you disagree with who they consider a leader and what does that have to do with racism..?? I was just showing you that blacks include whites as leaders for them.. How do you question that?

You know what he meant, don't be like this.

finintheburgh
09-19-2008, 07:22 AM
I have to humbly disagree, the % are too high in white favor..

There's 261 million white people in the US, and only 38 million black people, I just don't think there's as many black racists as white racists..and I'm not trying to be funny.. it's just that the numbers don't seem to work. Btw, this is a poll of what black ppl said...how do you disagree with who they consider a leader and what does that have to do with racism..?? I was just showing you that blacks include whites as leaders for them.. How do you question that?


thats why i sais percent. there may be a total higher number of white racist, but if you went by percents then i would clearly give the edge to blacks. the difference is that theres a lot of people who think its impossible for blacks to be racist or they try to justify it, that way it ok.

i dont question that some consider the clintons as leaders for them. its a very small%. but look at the list. you have one white famil and the rest are black. clinton was avery popular president with them. thats why its such a big deal that hillary counldnt get any support from them. not even from the black women. if it was the other way around and hillary recieved 90+ % of the white vote, then the whites are racist

poornate
09-19-2008, 08:33 AM
Rev. Wright, end of story.

You know what... this statement really bothers me a lot... You are saying that because Reverend Wright is black, and you perceive him to be racist, that blacks are obviously more racist? Well I think that Bill O' Reilly is a moron... therefore more whites must be idiots. I think my friend Ana sleeps too much... I guess Venezuelans are the laziest ethnicity.... Do you not see the irony of your post being in this line of conversation?

I lived in Alabama for 3 years... perhaps you should take a field trip down there to see how much racism, and in what form, exists in this nation. But then again, if I understood your statement correctly, perhaps you have a more intimate knowledge of stereotyping and bigotry than any external source could ever provide.

milldog
09-19-2008, 09:41 AM
You know what... this statement really bothers me a lot... You are saying that because Reverend Wright is black, and you perceive him to be racist, that blacks are obviously more racist? Well I think that Bill O' Reilly is a moron... therefore more whites must be idiots. I think my friend Ana sleeps too much... I guess Venezuelans are the laziest ethnicity.... Do you not see the irony of your post being in this line of conversation?

I lived in Alabama for 3 years... perhaps you should take a field trip down there to see how much racism, and in what form, exists in this nation. But then again, if I understood your statement correctly, perhaps you have a more intimate knowledge of stereotyping and bigotry than any external source could ever provide.

What's ever funnier is I could pull up a response to an apology I sent Ohall a while back. I told him that my wife's family is from Live Oak and surrounding areas. Whenever I go there for Thanksgiving and the whole family is around, hold on. They all refer to blacks as the "n" word, are all die hard republicans who have tried over and over to conform me. I only go because my wife loves her grandmother and she won't be around much longer. They are the most rascist bunch I've ever seen. When I told Ohall this, he said to the tune of where he lives, he hasn't seen such behavior. Now I'm starting to wonder....

Gonzo
09-19-2008, 09:51 AM
Here are the 2006 percentages according to the FBI:



Racial bias

Among the single-bias hate crime incidents in 2006, there were 5,020 victims of racially motivated hate crime.

66.4 percent were victims of an offender’s anti-black bias.
21.0 percent were victims of an anti-white bias.
4.8 percent were victims of an anti-Asian/Pacific Islander bias.
1.5 percent were victims of an anti-American Indian/Alaskan Native bias.
6.4 percent were victims of a bias against a group of individuals in which more than one race was represented (anti-multiple races, group).
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/hc2006/victims.html

And those are the numbers with "only 12,600 of the nation’s more than 17,000 local, county, state and federal police agencies participated in the program. Certain states barely participated. Alabama reported only one hate crime in 2006. Mississippi and Hawaii did not report any hate crimes at all. "
http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2007/11/19/fbi-releases-hate-crime-statistics/

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/hc2006/table13index.html

FinFatale
09-19-2008, 10:01 AM
What's ever funnier is I could pull up a response to an apology I sent Ohall a while back. I told him that my wife's family is from Live Oak and surrounding areas. Whenever I go there for Thanksgiving and the whole family is around, hold on. They all refer to blacks as the "n" word, are all die hard republicans who have tried over and over to conform me. I only go because my wife loves her grandmother and she won't be around much longer. They are the most rascist bunch I've ever seen. When I told Ohall this, he said to the tune of where he lives, he hasn't seen such behavior. Now I'm starting to wonder....

I live quite close to Mr. Ohall and I haven't heard people using that word or that kind of hatred either although I have witnessed it the other way around in the St. Pete area. Have you heard of Uhuru Movement?

Gonzo
09-19-2008, 10:10 AM
You know what... this statement really bothers me a lot... You are saying that because Reverend Wright is black, and you perceive him to be racist, that blacks are obviously more racist? Well I think that Bill O' Reilly is a moron... therefore more whites must be idiots. I think my friend Ana sleeps too much... I guess Venezuelans are the laziest ethnicity.... Do you not see the irony of your post being in this line of conversation?

I lived in Alabama for 3 years... perhaps you should take a field trip down there to see how much racism, and in what form, exists in this nation. But then again, if I understood your statement correctly, perhaps you have a more intimate knowledge of stereotyping and bigotry than any external source could ever provide.No, it's easier to pretend it doesn't exist.

I'm surrounded by it here in Texas just outside of Houston. My step-grandfather and his friends are some of the most racist people I have ever met. Any crime that ever happens, the assumption is that it's a black man or a Mexican. When it turns out to be a white man (quite a few times it was my cousin), "aw, he was just out foolin' around, not like those n-s." I've heard that exact phrase numerous times.

I was in Western Louisiana in 1998 when the hate crime in Jasper occured about 50 miles away. A comment from a local Leesvillian: "wonder what he did to those boys."

I wish I could say it was different in other places I've lived, but it wasn't. The targets usually differed. In Arizona, it was Latinos (which were all apparently Mexican and illegal).

poornate
09-19-2008, 10:11 AM
I live quite close to Mr. Ohall and I haven't heard people using that word or that kind of hatred either although I have witnessed it the other way around in the St. Pete area. Have you heard of Uhuru Movement?

That's funny... because Florida is tied for the most active registered hate groups of any state in the United States... Orlando has a National Alliance office and an active branch of the Ku Klux Klan....

Gonzo
09-19-2008, 10:22 AM
I live quite close to Mr. Ohall and I haven't heard people using that word or that kind of hatred either although I have witnessed it the other way around in the St. Pete area. Have you heard of Uhuru Movement?I've heard of it ("What about the black community?"), but never heard they were a hate group. Here's a list of noted Florida hate groups (yes, it includes anti-white groups):
http://www.splcenter.org/intel/map/hate.jsp#s=FL

ADL's version:
http://www.adl.org/learn/ext_us/loc/default.asp?LEARN_Cat=Extremism&LEARN_SubCat=Extremism_by_State#fl

FinFatale
09-19-2008, 10:31 AM
I've heard of it ("What about the black community?"), but never heard they were a hate group. Here's a list of noted Florida hate groups (yes, it includes anti-white groups):
http://www.splcenter.org/intel/map/hate.jsp#s=FL

ADL's version:
http://www.adl.org/learn/ext_us/loc/default.asp?LEARN_Cat=Extremism&LEARN_SubCat=Extremism_by_State#fl

perhaps they haven't " registered" as a hate group........lol...but come on into South St. Pete and you can live it.......honestly it's awful.....but then I think all racism......not just against blacks, whites, asians etc.........its awful but I also know that is it what it is........

FinFatale
09-19-2008, 10:35 AM
That's funny... because Florida is tied for the most active registered hate groups of any state in the United States... Orlando has a National Alliance office and an active branch of the Ku Klux Klan....


well Nate, what can I say? I guess I don't hang with those people.......or attend their events etc.........so I really didn't know that.....but the people I do associate myself with, my frame of reference , aren't like that at all............

milldog
09-19-2008, 10:45 AM
well Nate, what can I say? I guess I don't hang with those people.......or attend their events etc.........so I really didn't know that.....but the people I do associate myself with, my frame of reference , aren't like that at all............

Let's face it, it's everywhere, and it aint going to change. When people can see each other as the same, maybe. But we'de be fooling ourselves to beleive that could ever happen! I don't stand for it and I've kicked people out of my house for using rascist remarks.

FinFatale
09-19-2008, 10:45 AM
http://www.inpdum.org/ I just watched this......they are going after Senator Obama...........it's the TONE, and I have personally seen some of their " rallies" and the results..........anyway I found this video scary to say the least........I guess it's not just whites they dislike but in this video if you listen this leader calls their people africans not americans at all.............gosh...............I might have to concede that it's not just the white race...........they dislike............

Dolphins9954
09-19-2008, 10:51 AM
That's funny... because Florida is tied for the most active registered hate groups of any state in the United States... Orlando has a National Alliance office and an active branch of the Ku Klux Klan....


That's funny. I lived in Orlando for ten years of my life and never once saw one Ku Klux Klan member. Have you ever been or lived in Orlando?
It's not at all like this racist capital that you make it seem to be. They have Disney World there. Come on. Let's be real. Mickey Mouse wouldn't hurt a fly.

poornate
09-19-2008, 10:55 AM
well Nate, what can I say? I guess I don't hang with those people.......or attend their events etc.........so I really didn't know that.....but the people I do associate myself with, my frame of reference , aren't like that at all............

Neither do I... but that doesn't make them disappear... I have lived all over the south... I know that the division exists in the minds of many people... I've seen it in my life... I've seen it in my relatives.... my High school principal shut down the prom to stop inter-racial couples from attending the dance... then when he was ordered to allow the couples "someone" burned the school down... That hatred and venom is still here... that was in the mid-nineties... How much has changed?

poornate
09-19-2008, 10:59 AM
That's funny. I lived in Orlando for ten years of my life and never once saw one Ku Klux Klan member. Have you ever been or lived in Orlando?
It's not at all like this racist capital that you make it seem to be. ....

I'm not making it some racist capital... I am just stating fact... That doesn't make Orlando significantly different than a thousand other places in the United States...

Dolphins9954
09-19-2008, 11:06 AM
I'm not making it some racist capital... I am just stating fact... That doesn't make Orlando significantly different than a thousand other places in the United States...


Bringing up that there is a National Alliance office and an active branch of the Ku Klux Klan in Orlando does make it appear that Orlando is this big time racist city. I've lived there for a long time and never saw or heard anything about these guys. It's more than likely some idiot racist living in a trailer that has his own website. The worst thing about Orlando was the tourists. Not racism.

poornate
09-19-2008, 11:13 AM
This is from a government research institute and only tracks LARGE and ACTIVE hate groups, who are officially organized... I don't care if you have seen them or not... They don't wear buttons to identify themselves... I've never ran into a Klan rally in Maryland... but they have more Klan members than any other state in the nation... So you don't knowingly associate with hate groups? Good... that doesn't make them not there...

Dolphins9954
09-19-2008, 11:23 AM
This is from a government research institute and only tracks LARGE and ACTIVE hate groups, who are officially organized... I don't care if you have seen them or not... They don't wear buttons to identify themselves... I've never ran into a Klan rally in Maryland... but they have more Klan members than any other state in the nation... So you don't knowingly associate with hate groups? Good... that doesn't make them not there...


What's that supposed to mean?

You really have an obsession with Racism don't you? I agree that there are racists everywhere. But what I disagree with is the picture of Orlando being the city of racists. I'm sure there is some. But nothing worth pointing out. Like I said it's probably some idiot living in a trailer somewhere that has his own website. Not exactly this heavily organized hate group.

Gonzo
09-19-2008, 11:28 AM
What's that supposed to mean?

You really have an obsession with Racism don't you? I agree that there are racists everywhere. But what I disagree with is the picture of Orlando being the city of racists. I'm sure there is some. But nothing worth pointing out. Like I said it's probably some idiot living in a trailer somewhere that has his own website. Not exactly this heavily organized hate group.
I think it's pretty clear. Just because you personally don't associate with hate groups doesn't mean they don't exist.

And he never said Orlando was a racist city, he just pointed out that it certainly has a racist presence in a state with more large hate groups than most other states. These organizations track large, organized groups, not some guy in a trailer.

poornate
09-19-2008, 11:32 AM
What's that supposed to mean?

You really have an obsession with Racism don't you? I agree that there are racists everywhere. But what I disagree with is the picture of Orlando being the city of racists. I'm sure there is some. But nothing worth pointing out. Like I said it's probably some idiot living in a trailer somewhere that has his own website. Not exactly this heavily organized hate group.

I think it is clear what I mean... and there is a racist element worth pointing out in Orlando... just like there is a racist element worth pointing out anywhere it is confronted in society... and I do have an obsession with racism... because I find it to be one of the most deplorable types of hatred... because it has no merit... and it is an empty ethos that is a stain on an otherwise wonderful American society.

Dolphins9954
09-19-2008, 11:42 AM
I think it is clear what I mean... and there is a racist element worth pointing out in Orlando... just like there is a racist element worth pointing out anywhere it is confronted in society... and I do have an obsession with racism... because I find it to be one of the most deplorable types of hatred... because it has no merit... and it is an empty ethos that is a stain on an otherwise wonderful American society.


I don't like racists and racism either. But racism is not the reason for Obama's troubles. That's an excuse. Obama is in this position because of his votes and policies. And Orlando is not that bad at all when it comes to racism. Tourists is the worst thing you have to deal with there. Not some heavily organized Racists.

poornate
09-19-2008, 12:14 PM
I don't like racists and racism either. But racism is not the reason for Obama's troubles. That's an excuse. Obama is in this position because of his votes and policies. And Orlando is not that bad at all when it comes to racism. Tourists is the worst thing you have to deal with there. Not some heavily organized Racists.

If you don't think racism has anything to do with this campaign, then you have your head in the sand....

ohall
09-19-2008, 12:30 PM
You know what... this statement really bothers me a lot... You are saying that because Reverend Wright is black, and you perceive him to be racist, that blacks are obviously more racist? Well I think that Bill O' Reilly is a moron... therefore more whites must be idiots. I think my friend Ana sleeps too much... I guess Venezuelans are the laziest ethnicity.... Do you not see the irony of your post being in this line of conversation?

I lived in Alabama for 3 years... perhaps you should take a field trip down there to see how much racism, and in what form, exists in this nation. But then again, if I understood your statement correctly, perhaps you have a more intimate knowledge of stereotyping and bigotry than any external source could ever provide.

He is racist, and the point was simple. Some blacks will follow idiots like him.

ohall
09-19-2008, 12:36 PM
What's ever funnier is I could pull up a response to an apology I sent Ohall a while back. I told him that my wife's family is from Live Oak and surrounding areas. Whenever I go there for Thanksgiving and the whole family is around, hold on. They all refer to blacks as the "n" word, are all die hard republicans who have tried over and over to conform me. I only go because my wife loves her grandmother and she won't be around much longer. They are the most rascist bunch I've ever seen. When I told Ohall this, he said to the tune of where he lives, he hasn't seen such behavior. Now I'm starting to wonder....

I live 2 or 3 miles away from Oakland. I have lived in the Oakland/Montverde/Clermont area for 9 years and I've never heard any one use the word ******. Do I think no one here uses the word? Of course not, that would be an idiotic thing to think. However you obviously don't know a darn thing about the Oakland area. One of the largest black areas in the greater Orlando area is right next to the Oakland city limits.

You can wonder all you want to. As far as I'm concerned you're not exactly the most stable person I've ever met on a MBoard. People like you run around making all kinds of insulting insinuations and then run away with your ball when you get called on it.

I can't wait for the next melt down.

Dolphins9954
09-19-2008, 12:39 PM
If you don't think racism has anything to do with this campaign, then you have your head in the sand....


Racism has nothing to do with Obama slides in the polls. (Which is the topic of this thread by the way) To say that's the reason why is an excuse and deflection from reality. Obama's troubles come from his polices and votes. Not racism. The reason why he is in this position is because he doesn't offer any true "change". His campaign slogan about Mccain is "more of the same". Guess what. So is Obama. More Big Government, More Debt and More loss of liberties. How is that "change"?

MDFINFAN
09-19-2008, 12:42 PM
He is racist, and the point was simple. Some blacks will follow idiots like him.

Again I ask you to prove it.. and it has to be more that the 2 soundbites, Ohall I think I know more about Rev. Wright than you..so convince me? I will say I've heard this man preach for years..so yea you at a little disadvantage here..but if you have something that can prove to me he's a racist I will listen.. balls in your court...:up: Please no opinions, real proof Ohall...it's like david duke, there's enough out there to show he's a racist.. use simular material to show Rev. Wright the same.

ohall
09-19-2008, 12:43 PM
That's funny... because Florida is tied for the most active registered hate groups of any state in the United States... Orlando has a National Alliance office and an active branch of the Ku Klux Klan....

You guys are losing, it's just that simple. You look like a skinhead to me in your pictures. This means you are a skinhead?

MDFINFAN
09-19-2008, 12:43 PM
Racism has nothing to do with Obama slides in the polls. (Which is the topic of this thread by the way) To say that's the reason why is an excuse and deflection from reality. Obama's troubles come from his polices and votes. Not racism. The reason why he is in this position is because he doesn't offer any true "change". His campaign slogan about Mccain is "more of the same". Guess what. So is Obama. More Big Government, More Debt and More loss of liberties. How is that "change"?


At least your consistent..:lol:

ohall
09-19-2008, 12:48 PM
Again I ask you to prove it.. and it has to be more that the 2 soundbites, Ohall I think I know more about Rev. Wright than you..so convince me? I will say I've heard this man preach for years..so yea you at a little disadvantage here..but if you have something that can prove to me he's a racist I will listen.. balls in your court...:up: Please no opinions, real proof Ohall...it's like david duke, there's enough out there to show he's a racist.. use simular material to show Rev. Wright the same.

And I've answered you many times. Google his video of the day he threw Obama under the bus. All the evidence is there.

He is an American hating bigot. I think most ppl understand that.

poornate
09-19-2008, 01:00 PM
He is racist, and the point was simple. Some blacks will follow idiots like him.

That wasn't the meaning of what you said... Not in the context of the conversation... They were asking if blacks or whites were more racist and you said Reverend Wright... case closed... you inferred a stereotype from your personal bias and projected it onto tens of millions of people... Maybe it was a slip and that was not how you intended it... But there is really no other way to read it.

poornate
09-19-2008, 01:07 PM
You guys are losing, it's just that simple. You look like a skinhead to me in your pictures. This means you are a skinhead?

How is this related to the organizations in Orlando? And "us guys" are losing? What "us guys"? The skinheads? Damn you love to divert and label... it's like a hobby for you, isn't it? I guess looking like a racist and sounding like one is a wonderful distinction...

(I know you don't mean Obama and his supporters are losing... You mean the campaign who is winning in every single poll... so you must mean something different)

ohall
09-19-2008, 01:07 PM
That wasn't the meaning of what you said... Not in the context of the conversation... They were asking if blacks or whites were more racist and you said Reverend Wright... case closed... you inferred a stereotype from your personal bias and projected it onto tens of millions of people... Maybe it was a slip and that was not how you intended it... But there is really no other way to read it.

So now you are going to tell me what I meant? You are arrogant aren't you?

All people are equally racist is the point. But you keep thinking whites are more racist than blacks or Asians or any other race out there.

Thankfully in this country racism can't be used to keep minorities down any longer. We have FED laws that protect minorities from that and we have for decades. But that still doesn't stop ppl from using it as a crutch.

Blackocrates
09-19-2008, 01:09 PM
No, it's easier to pretend it doesn't exist.

I'm surrounded by it here in Texas just outside of Houston. My step-grandfather and his friends are some of the most racist people I have ever met. Any crime that ever happens, the assumption is that it's a black man or a Mexican. When it turns out to be a white man (quite a few times it was my cousin), "aw, he was just out foolin' around, not like those n-s." I've heard that exact phrase numerous times.

I was in Western Louisiana in 1998 when the hate crime in Jasper occured about 50 miles away. A comment from a local Leesvillian: "wonder what he did to those boys."

I wish I could say it was different in other places I've lived, but it wasn't. The targets usually differed. In Arizona, it was Latinos (which were all apparently Mexican and illegal).


I have to echo the same sentiment. I live in West Virginia and man racism is the norm here. It's so bad that blatantly racist people do not consider themselves to be racist because it's so ingrained in them. They believe in order to be racist you have to be physically violent or publically racist (cross burning) to be considered racist.

When I lived in San Diego, you could see a lot of racism in east county.

Race is still an issue with people in this country. So much so that a lot of people that would normally vote democrat in this election are choosing to vote otherwise only because of race. It's been documented time and again, especially in WV.

Dolphan7
09-19-2008, 01:11 PM
Closing this thread if this doesn't change tone in about the next 2 posts!

ohall
09-19-2008, 01:14 PM
How is this related to the organizations in Orlando? And "us guys" are losing? What "us guys"? The skinheads? Damn you love to divert and label... it's like a hobby for you, isn't it? I guess looking like a racist and sounding like one is a wonderful distinction...

(I know you don't mean Obama and his supporters are losing... You mean the campaign who is winning in every single poll... so you must mean something different)

Yes Obama is up by tie to 4 points when he should be up by double digits. You make a wonderful point again, great job!

My point again was simple. You are trying to use guilt by association. You claim I live by some large/active KKK group so anyone living in this area must also be in the KKK or agree with their opinions. Your buddy tried the same thing with his post in this THREAD and a personal message he sent me.

As far as labeling ppl, you can't lecture anyone about that my friend. You labeled an entire city with your Orlando/KKK post!

Blackocrates
09-19-2008, 01:14 PM
He is racist, and the point was simple. Some blacks will follow idiots like him.

But you don't even know him.

ohall
09-19-2008, 01:17 PM
But you don't even know him.

And you knew Hitler?

By your logic if you didn't know him he didn't do all the awful things he did.

Nice.

poornate
09-19-2008, 01:17 PM
So now you are going to tell me what I meant? You are arrogant aren't you?

All people are equally racist is the point. But you keep thinking whites are more racist than blacks or Asians or any other race out there.

Thankfully in this country racism can't be used to keep minorities down any longer. We have FED laws that protect minorities from that and we have for decades. But that still doesn't stop ppl from using it as a crutch.

In that case I will close this line with this... i didn't tell you what you meant... i said in my statement that you may have intended it differently... i told you what you SAID in the context of the conversation...

And as far as those FED laws to protect minorities from abuse in this obviously still challenged environment, the laws that you point out, aren't you the one always screaming to throw them out? I am just asking...

FinFatale
09-19-2008, 01:20 PM
I see defense for Rev. Wright but yet didn't Senator Obama distance himself from him just recently?????????? I don't think it was because he was a great endorsement...........was Senator Obama's white half being racist???????? just curious?????????

(posted in a " deeper tone". I don't want D7 to go after me)

poornate
09-19-2008, 01:21 PM
Yes Obama is up by tie to 4 points when he should be up by double digits. You make a wonderful point again, great job!

My point again was simple. You are trying to use guilt by association. You claim I live by some large/active KKK group so anyone living in this area must also be in the KKK or agree with their opinions. Your buddy tried the same thing with his post in this THREAD and a personal message he sent me.

As far as labeling ppl, you can't lecture anyone about that my friend. You labeled an entire city with your Orlando/KKK post!

I'm not labeling Orlando... or any other city... i am stating that as an element, virulent racism exists in every part of our society... 12% of Americans said that they would not vote for a black person for president regardless of their stances or policies... How can it be argued to not be a widespread factor in this election, but more importantly, in our society?

Blackocrates
09-19-2008, 01:22 PM
Thankfully in this country racism can't be used to keep minorities down any longer. We have FED laws that protect minorities from that and we have for decades. But that still doesn't stop ppl from using it as a crutch.

That's a very naive comment. Racism is still hurting minorities all around this country, just because there are a few laws to try to help minorities doesn't mean that minorities aren't still being stomped on.

ohall
09-19-2008, 01:24 PM
In that case I will close this line with this... i didn't tell you what you meant... i said in my statement that you may have intended it differently... i told you what you SAID in the context of the conversation...

And as far as those FED laws to protect minorities from abuse in this obviously still challenged environment, the laws that you point out, aren't you the one always screaming to throw them out? I am just asking...

And I clarified that it, but you still continue with your nonsense.

I think AA is a joke, yes. That however has nothing to with how I feel about discrimination. No one should be discriminated because of their race. Everyone should be judged equally by their personal merits, not based on the color of their skin. I am not a hypocrite. Reverse racism is still racism.

Blackocrates
09-19-2008, 01:27 PM
And you knew Hitler?

By your logic if you didn't know him he didn't do all the awful things he did.

Nice.

Now Rev. Wright = Hitler? Mercy! That's logical? The point of my post was that you're jumping to conclusion from a few soundbites, you don't have enough information to make your conclusion. With regards to Hitler there is more than enough information to reach a conclusion about his racist beliefs/actions.

poornate
09-19-2008, 01:28 PM
I am not continuing on with any nonsense... and I disagree about AA... but i appreciate your clear support for a meritocratic society... and I am more than willing to accept that you didn't mean how your statement read....

ohall
09-19-2008, 01:29 PM
That's a very naive comment. Racism is still hurting minorities all around this country, just because there are a few laws to try to help minorities doesn't mean that minorities aren't still being stomped on.

No it's not, that is a lie. AA is reverse racism. No one should be judged by their skin color, no one should be given more because of their skin color either.

We have FED laws to protect discrimination. Anyone that feels they were over looked because of their skin color can act. This is America for Gods sake.

Now if you want to talk about poor ppl, we can have a more honest discussion. Being poor is not a minority thing alone my friend.

poornate
09-19-2008, 01:32 PM
Now Rev. Wright = Hitler? Mercy! That's logical? The point of my post was that you're jumping to conclusion from a few soundbites, you don't have enough information to make your conclusion. With regards to Hitler there is more than enough information to reach a conclusion about his racist beliefs/actions.

Beat me to it... i have given up on the rev Wright point here... But Hitler? What a damn stretch... Nice to see you in the PoFo, BTW...

FinFatale
09-19-2008, 01:32 PM
And I clarified that it, but you still continue with your nonsense.

I think AA is a joke, yes. That however has nothing to with how I feel about discrimination. No one should be discriminated because of their race. Everyone should be judged equally by their personal merits, not based on the color of their skin. I am not a hypocrite. Reverse racism is still racism.


Yes it is....I face discrimination often and I am not afforded the right to affirmative action. Honest to God there are people out there that think because I am French I don't shave my darn armpits, just an example.(btw I do ! for those inquiring minds) lol. Blacks are not the only ones that face difficulties. Two years ago I applied for job, multilingual was a posted requirement which I am, yet someone else got the job from within, a black lady that only spoke English with half the experience I had. I was annoyed, oh yeah , to say the least.... no explaination.....who is to say she deserved that job........I was the better " humanbeing" for that job............I am still peeved......

Blackocrates
09-19-2008, 01:34 PM
Being poor is not a minority thing alone my friend.

I never mentioned anything about being poor.

poornate
09-19-2008, 01:36 PM
[/B]

Two years ago I applied for job, multilingual was a posted requirement which I am, yet someone else got the job from within, a black lady that only spoke English with half the experience I had. I was annoyed, oh yeah , to say the least.... no explaination.....who is to say she deserved that job........I was the better " humanbeing" for that job............I am still peeved......

But who is to say that she DIDN'T deserve that job... and who is to say that AA had anything to do with her getting it... or who is to say that she didn't have other qualifications that overrided her inability to not speak French... Do you see how this is easily reversible?

Blackocrates
09-19-2008, 01:38 PM
Nice to see you in the PoFo, BTW...

Thank you, it's nice to be back from my timeout.

Dolphan7
09-19-2008, 01:38 PM
Now Rev. Wright = Hitler? Mercy! That's logical? The point of my post was that you're jumping to conclusion from a few soundbites, you don't have enough information to make your conclusion. With regards to Hitler there is more than enough information to reach a conclusion about his racist beliefs/actions.That isn't what he said, and it isn't what he meant. I understood clearly what he was trying to say.

Dolphan7
09-19-2008, 01:42 PM
But who is to say that she DIDN'T deserve that job... and who is to say that AA had anything to do with her getting it... or who is to say that she didn't have other qualifications that overrided her inability to not speak French... Do you see how this is easily reversible?It may not have been in her case, but her point is that this does happen. Are you in favor of hiring based on skin color over qualifications?

FinFatale
09-19-2008, 01:43 PM
But who is to say that she DIDN'T deserve that job... and who is to say that AA had anything to do with her getting it... or who is to say that she didn't have other qualifications that overrided her inability to not speak French... Do you see how this is easily reversible?


Nate , the requirements for the job was to be multilingual, not just English speaking......infact the main language they required was Spanish which I speak also. I also speak German and Italian........and although I can't write Greek I can speak it.....she was not qualified for the job......yet she got the job...........then after they got some grant they had applied for, six months or so, they called me and begged me to take the job citing they had made a mistake...........suspicious to say the lest. needless to say I told them to take the job and shove it..................

Blackocrates
09-19-2008, 01:43 PM
That isn't what he said, and it isn't what he meant. I understood clearly what he was trying to say.

He's the one that put Hitler out there. He could have made his point without Hitler, but he didn't.

FinFatale
09-19-2008, 01:47 PM
He's the one that put Hitler out there. He could have made his point without Hitler, but he didn't.


I could be wrong here, I will admit I often am, but I see no Rules in our TOS agreement about using " hitler" in one's post. I read Mr. Ohall exactly as he meant it and I agree. You don't have to KNOW a person personally to know what he is or isn't in many cases. I didn't know Ted Bundy personally but I sure as heck know what he was. I'd like to add Charlie Manson to that list as well.........

Dolphan7
09-19-2008, 01:52 PM
He's the one that put Hitler out there. He could have made his point without Hitler, but he didn't.
Well he chose Hitler, what are you going to do? His choice.

You do understand that he wasn't equating Hitler to Rev Wright don't you?

poornate
09-19-2008, 01:55 PM
The difference is that it is KNOWN what Hitler is and was... and what he stands for... but Reverend Wright is not clear cut... and you will find an array of sentiment regarding him on as small a stage as this board...

Dolphan7
09-19-2008, 01:56 PM
I could be wrong here, I will admit I often am, but I see no Rules in our TOS agreement about using " hitler" in one's post. I read Mr. Ohall exactly as he meant it and I agree. You don't have to KNOW a person personally to know what he is or isn't in many cases. I didn't know Ted Bundy personally but I sure as heck know what he was. I'd like to add Charlie Manson to that list as well.........
Bingo we have a winner!

Bob why don't you tell her what she won!:up:

Blackocrates
09-19-2008, 02:06 PM
I could be wrong here, I will admit I often am, but I see no Rules in our TOS agreement about using " hitler" in one's post. I read Mr. Ohall exactly as he meant it and I agree. You don't have to KNOW a person personally to know what he is or isn't in many cases. I didn't know Ted Bundy personally but I sure as heck know what he was. I'd like to add Charlie Manson to that list as well.........

God Bless! I explained in the following post that there wasn't enough information to label Rev. Wright but there is for Hitler. I think it's common sense. What I meant by 'know' is that he didn't have enough information on him to draw his conclusion.

He made a slight comparison. You don't have to know Wright to draw a conclusion that he's bad. You don't have to know Hitler to draw a conclusion that he's bad. Wright = bad, Hitler = bad. That's what I read.

ohall
09-19-2008, 02:14 PM
Now Rev. Wright = Hitler? Mercy! That's logical? The point of my post was that you're jumping to conclusion from a few soundbites, you don't have enough information to make your conclusion. With regards to Hitler there is more than enough information to reach a conclusion about his racist beliefs/actions.

I made an extreme example. Obviously Rev. Wright is not even on the same planet as far as comparing him to Hitler. As far as I know Rev. Wright is a good man, that has done many many good things for his community. This doesn't change my opinion that he is in fact an American hating bigot. Don't assume I've only heard or seen a few sound/video bites of Rev. Wright.

Black Liberation theology is not exactly what I would call white friendly. I had a cousin that was deep into this. Yes I have black cousins.

Blackocrates
09-19-2008, 02:17 PM
Well he chose Hitler, what are you going to do? His choice.

You do understand that he wasn't equating Hitler to Rev Wright don't you?

What do you mean what am I going to do? I guess post a comment like I did. :rolleyes:

I understand that he was saying you don't have to personally know somebody to judge them. I should have been more clear in the original post, when I said he doesn't know Wright. I thought he would be able to imply that I was saying he didn't know enough about Wright to make a conclusion that he's racist. He hasn't seen a sermon, hasn't looked up all of his other contributions, etc. He based his judgment on a soundbite or two.

However, he also slightly equated them. It's reasonable to imply that he meant Wright = bad, Hitler = bad. He's made those judgments without personally knowing them. What I took exception to was a soundbite from Wright = bad, as compared to Hitler's actions = bad.

ohall
09-19-2008, 02:19 PM
I never mentioned anything about being poor.

Who said you did?

I did!

poornate
09-19-2008, 02:21 PM
BLT is not anti-white... It can be abused to be that way... just like the peaceful religion of Islam can be abused to become fundamentalists anarchy and terrorism... But Trinity Church is not anti-white... you can see that by it's diverse membership... and it's actions in all of the community... Recognizing things you disagree with in American society and hating America are two different things... i really don't want to rehash the Rev. Wright stuff in this thread...

FinFatale
09-19-2008, 02:30 PM
Bingo we have a winner!

Bob why don't you tell her what she won!:up:

Yipee!!!!!!!!!! I hope it's a box of rocks!!!!:woot:

MDFINFAN
09-19-2008, 02:41 PM
No it's not, that is a lie. AA is reverse racism. No one should be judged by their skin color, no one should be given more because of their skin color either.

We have FED laws to protect discrimination. Anyone that feels they were over looked because of their skin color can act. This is America for Gods sake.

Now if you want to talk about poor ppl, we can have a more honest discussion. Being poor is not a minority thing alone my friend.

Funny that you should mention that, because anytime someone acts "it's called using the race card"...and all we hear is here we go again...it's a no win situation.. period..

MDFINFAN
09-19-2008, 02:51 PM
And I've answered you many times. Google his video of the day he threw Obama under the bus. All the evidence is there.

He is an American hating bigot. I think most ppl understand that.

Which lead me back to prove it..because that day didn't prove a thing except he can act ignorant...I was disappointed in that performance, as many times as I've heard this man preach or lecture, he's a lot smarter than that day...

Ohall, Wright's history doesn't show him to be a racist..I'm sorry soundbite have convinced a lot of you guys of that..but some ppl speak non PC.. He's one of them. I'm a ex officer in the Army, do I think some of our actions has cause others to not like us...Yes I do. I know history and I don't rewrite to serve my own senses, nor will I rewrite it to serve a lie for our country.. Unfortunately too many ppl believe the lies...like wmd, immenint threats, connection to al qaida.. I use those because their recent... While we're a great country, we also have some bone headed moments in how we handle others.. Most intelligent ppl in America accept that, but it doesn't make them anti americans.. they love their country just as much as everyone else, but because they point out flaws doesn't make them less..it a point of something we need to do better.. It's political season so I understand how Rev. Wright is being used for political purposes, but that doesn't made the allegations true... but that's another thread and another conversation..

myke1072
09-19-2008, 02:54 PM
Some will vote for him because he is black. It's an issue that cancels itself out, imo.

FinFatale
09-19-2008, 02:54 PM
Which lead me back to prove it..because that day didn't prove a thing except he can act ignorant...I was disappointed in that performance, as many times as I've heard this man preach or lecture, he's a lot smarter than that day...

Ohall, Wright's history doesn't show him to be a racist..I'm sorry soundbite have convinced a lot of you guys of that..but some ppl speak non PC.. He's one of them. I'm a ex officer in the Army, do I think some of our actions has cause others to not like us...Yes I do. I know history and I don't rewrite to serve my own senses, nor will I rewrite it to serve a lie for our country.. Unfortunately too many ppl believe the lies...like wmd, immenint threats, connection to al qaida.. I use those because their recent... While we're a great country, we also have some bone headed moments in how we handle others.. Most intelligent ppl in America accept that, but it doesn't make them anti americans.. they love their country just as much as everyone else, but because they point out flaws doesn't make them less..it a point of something we need to do better.. It's political season so I understand how Rev. Wright is being used for political purposes, but that doesn't made the allegations true... but that's another thread and another conversation..


I have to ask you MD, why did Senator Obama after twenty years distance himself from Rev. Wright?

MDFINFAN
09-19-2008, 02:55 PM
BLT is not anti-white... It can be abused to be that way... just like the peaceful religion of Islam can be abused to become fundamentalists anarchy and terrorism... But Trinity Church is not anti-white... you can see that by it's diverse membership... and it's actions in all of the community... Recognizing things you disagree with in American society and hating America are two different things... i really don't want to rehash the Rev. Wright stuff in this thread...

I don't know why that concept is so hard for ppl to understand, pointing out flaws in our country now mades one anti american, wow... We've lost the capacity to intelligently intepret information.. maybe our education system does need fixin..

PassRush
09-19-2008, 02:55 PM
I am a McCain supporter, but I am sure that race does play a card in some minds. Its a shame, but anybody can vote for any candidate for any reason they chose; right or wrong. Then again its also fair to say that there are some voters who will vote for the "black" candidate, for that same reason, and that is just as wrong.

SpurzN703
09-19-2008, 03:00 PM
So, there was not racism earlier, when he had the lead, in fact, a comfortable lead, but now, with fall coming, racism is "in the air", makes sense.

I agree. Besides, if racism is the reason, how did Obama defeat Clinton for the nomination? I mean, why would the folks who voted for Obama change position for another white person?

Certainly racism exists in the election but on both sides. As I'm sure a ton of whites voted for Clinton b/c of her color and the same for the blacks and Obama.

Yes there are more whites then blacks but that doesn't eliminate the fact that there is racism on both ends of the spectrum.

FinFatale
09-19-2008, 03:09 PM
Some have argued that Wright's ignorant rants are commonplace in black churches. Interviewed by ABC News, NPR's Michelle Norris denied that Wrights comments were radical. She said that Wright's bigoted and hateful words were a well-known and routine part of his Sunday sermons, and "… not something that's unusual" for black pastors. She claimed that Wright's tone was just a part of "being black in America."
Oh really?
As the former executive director of the Los Angeles chapter of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, the organization founded by Martin Luther King Jr. in 1957, I traveled nearly every Sunday to visit black churches from San Bernardino to San Diego, and everywhere in between. Did I occasionally hear sermons that mirrored the ignorance and bigotry of Wright's recent comments? Of course I did. But the majority concentrated on messages of sin and salvation, and themes of uplift for communities struggling with single parent households, community violence, drug-peddling street gangs, and endless economic struggles.

http://www.theroot.com/id/45436

article written by "Joe R. Hicks, Vice President of Community Advocates, Inc., is the former Executive Director of the L.A. City Human Relations Commission, where he served from 1997 to 2001 under Mayor Richard Riordan. He was also the Co-Founder and Executive Director of the Multi-Cultural Collaborative, which served as an umbrella group for a diverse group of community-based leaders. In the early 1990s, Hicks was Executive Director of the Greater Los Angeles chapter of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, the well-known civil rights organization founded by Martin Luther King, Jr.
For more than 30 years, Hicks has been an active figure in local and national issues related to civil rights and intergroup relations. His comments and opinion articles have appeared in local, national and international media. Hicks also served a three-year term as a member of the Board of Governors for the California State Bar, and he continues to serve on numerous boards. In demand as a lecturer, Hicks is currently writing a book that chronicles his 30-year journey across the nation's racial and political landscape.
Hicks lives in L.A. with his wife and two daughters. "

SpurzN703
09-19-2008, 03:10 PM
Btw, black aren't so racist..I posted this awhile back, here's who blacks consider leaders for them...and you'll note Hillary and Bill are there.:up:

And this was a recent poll during Obama's and Hillary's historic run.

http://www.finheaven.com/images/imported/2008/09/080714BlackLeader1_904ljede-1.gif

How many people even knew of Obama before the election? It's in my opinion that Obama is only the top choice in this poll b/c he's the hot ticket.

Am I wrong?

poornate
09-19-2008, 03:11 PM
I have to ask you MD, why did Senator Obama after twenty years distance himself from Rev. Wright?

Obama could live with the fallout from the soundbites being used against him... but he could not live with Wright refusing to shut-up until after the election... he became political cancer and Obama lobbed him off...

FinFatale
09-19-2008, 03:12 PM
PARTNERSHIP FOR A BUFFALO BILLS FREE AMERICA

where do you sign up???????????? lol

poornate
09-19-2008, 03:13 PM
http://www.theroot.com/id/45436

article written by "Joe R. Hicks, Vice President of Community Advocates, Inc., is the former Executive Director of the L.A. City Human Relations Commission, where he served from 1997 to 2001 under Mayor Richard Riordan. He was also the Co-Founder and Executive Director of the Multi-Cultural Collaborative, which served as an umbrella group for a diverse group of community-based leaders. In the early 1990s, Hicks was Executive Director of the Greater Los Angeles chapter of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, the well-known civil rights organization founded by Martin Luther King, Jr.
For more than 30 years, Hicks has been an active figure in local and national issues related to civil rights and intergroup relations. His comments and opinion articles have appeared in local, national and international media. Hicks also served a three-year term as a member of the Board of Governors for the California State Bar, and he continues to serve on numerous boards. In demand as a lecturer, Hicks is currently writing a book that chronicles his 30-year journey across the nation's racial and political landscape.
Hicks lives in L.A. with his wife and two daughters. "

Again... this is one person's perception that Wright is racist....

SpurzN703
09-19-2008, 03:14 PM
No, it's easier to pretend it doesn't exist.

I'm surrounded by it here in Texas just outside of Houston. My step-grandfather and his friends are some of the most racist people I have ever met. Any crime that ever happens, the assumption is that it's a black man or a Mexican. When it turns out to be a white man (quite a few times it was my cousin), "aw, he was just out foolin' around, not like those n-s." I've heard that exact phrase numerous times.

I was in Western Louisiana in 1998 when the hate crime in Jasper occured about 50 miles away. A comment from a local Leesvillian: "wonder what he did to those boys."

I wish I could say it was different in other places I've lived, but it wasn't. The targets usually differed. In Arizona, it was Latinos (which were all apparently Mexican and illegal).

I believe it. I can guarantee a bunch of whites guys out in the sticks talk like that. Though I'm sure if you rolled with a group of black guys that you'd get the same talk, only reversed. It's just how it is.

poornate
09-19-2008, 03:17 PM
How many people even knew of Obama before the election? It's in my opinion that Obama is only the top choice in this poll b/c he's the hot ticket.

Am I wrong?

How long does it take for someone to be looked at as a leader? Of course he's a newer addition... but Jesus only preached for three years... it looks like he has had an enduring legacy.... He has reached the masses... same principle...

(It's my version of the Wright=Hitler comment.... you like it? :lol:)

Blackocrates
09-19-2008, 03:36 PM
I have to ask you MD, why did Senator Obama after twenty years distance himself from Rev. Wright?

I have the answer to that, because it was politically convenient. Obama is running for office and he wants to win.

Blackocrates
09-19-2008, 03:41 PM
How long does it take for someone to be looked at as a leader? Of course he's a newer addition... but Jesus only preached for three years... it looks like he has had an enduring legacy.... He has reached the masses... same principle...

(It's my version of the Wright=Hitler comment.... you like it? :lol:)

:lol: Jesus = saved me from my sins; Obama = saved me from conservatives.

MDFINFAN
09-19-2008, 03:49 PM
I have to ask you MD, why did Senator Obama after twenty years distance himself from Rev. Wright?

For one reason and one reason along...Wright said Obama is a politician and just talking political stuff. Basically he knew Obama under the bus.. If a friend did that to me, I'd throw him under the bus too.

MDFINFAN
09-19-2008, 03:53 PM
How many people even knew of Obama before the election? It's in my opinion that Obama is only the top choice in this poll b/c he's the hot ticket.

Am I wrong?

Ppl in the midwest knew of Obama, he was introduced to a larger audience during the 2004 convention...and during this run he's really made himself known..and his speech on race didn't hurt... I think a lot of ppl at that point, understood this guy understands..but not just in the black community, I think in the american community...

But note he's didn't get an 50% majority, this poll actually tells me that blacks in generally have no one leader they look to..as many of them said myself as they did for the 2nd person listed..

MDFINFAN
09-19-2008, 03:55 PM
http://www.theroot.com/id/45436

article written by "Joe R. Hicks, Vice President of Community Advocates, Inc., is the former Executive Director of the L.A. City Human Relations Commission, where he served from 1997 to 2001 under Mayor Richard Riordan. He was also the Co-Founder and Executive Director of the Multi-Cultural Collaborative, which served as an umbrella group for a diverse group of community-based leaders. In the early 1990s, Hicks was Executive Director of the Greater Los Angeles chapter of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, the well-known civil rights organization founded by Martin Luther King, Jr.
For more than 30 years, Hicks has been an active figure in local and national issues related to civil rights and intergroup relations. His comments and opinion articles have appeared in local, national and international media. Hicks also served a three-year term as a member of the Board of Governors for the California State Bar, and he continues to serve on numerous boards. In demand as a lecturer, Hicks is currently writing a book that chronicles his 30-year journey across the nation's racial and political landscape.
Hicks lives in L.A. with his wife and two daughters. "

Is he saying Wright is a racist or that Wright preaches the same way that a lot of black pastors preach.. I can find you a person who's black that will call Wright racist, and that the Joe something on Fox and MSNBC, he's a McCain surrogate...so I don't get your point..Trinity also have uplifed church services, they also teach sin and salvation, I don't get this post...

PassRush
09-19-2008, 04:04 PM
PARTNERSHIP FOR A BUFFALO BILLS FREE AMERICA

where do you sign up???????????? lol

I believe that I am the only remaining member, but I am bringing it back, just throw it in your sig, our numbers will rise again:woot:

Okay, I need to get back on topic

SpurzN703
09-19-2008, 04:07 PM
How long does it take for someone to be looked at as a leader? Of course he's a newer addition... but Jesus only preached for three years... it looks like he has had an enduring legacy.... He has reached the masses... same principle...

(It's my version of the Wright=Hitler comment.... you like it? :lol:)

I dunno man, I think it's a simple as hey look, a black guy for president, let's support him no matter what.

If there had never been a white president before and one suddenly came up, I think you'd see the same reaction.

Gonzo
09-19-2008, 04:10 PM
I believe it. I can guarantee a bunch of whites guys out in the sticks talk like that. Though I'm sure if you rolled with a group of black guys that you'd get the same talk, only reversed. It's just how it is.Houston isn't the sticks, nor is Phoenix. And unlike you, I'm not making assumptions, I'm stating exactly what I have witnessed.

MDFINFAN
09-19-2008, 04:14 PM
I dunno man, I think it's a simple as hey look, a black guy for president, let's support him no matter what.

If there had never been a white president before and one suddenly came up, I think you'd see the same reaction.

That's a bit insulting don't you think.. I think we have enough intelligence, either racial group, to realize the person would have to be of some substance, I bet if say a sharpton was running, I bet you wouldn't see as many black voters vote for him.. I just don't, I know in my circle of friends you wouldn't.. The person has to have that it, or blacks like anyone else would turn away.. Obama has that something extra to go along with his policies and stances, to include judgement, upside, ability to speak to everyone who's willing to listen, and flexibility to change and adapt to present situations.. I would think whites in the same situation would someone just as dynamic.. so it's not just because he's black.:rolleyes:

Gonzo
09-19-2008, 04:18 PM
I dunno man, I think it's a simple as hey look, a black guy for president, let's support him no matter what.

If there had never been a white president before and one suddenly came up, I think you'd see the same reaction.That's incredibly insulting.

Blackocrates
09-19-2008, 04:21 PM
I bet if say a sharpton was running, I bet you wouldn't see as many black voters vote for him..

Sharpton did run in 2004 and nobody voted for him. I think that proves your point.

SpurzN703
09-19-2008, 04:24 PM
How long does it take for someone to be looked at as a leader? Of course he's a newer addition... but Jesus only preached for three years... it looks like he has had an enduring legacy.... He has reached the masses... same principle...

(It's my version of the Wright=Hitler comment.... you like it? :lol:)

I dunno man, I think it's a simple as hey look, a black guy for president, let's support him no matter what.

If there had never been a white president before and one suddenly came up, I think you'd see the same reaction.

poornate
09-19-2008, 04:33 PM
That must explain Jackson's presidency in 84....

The_Dark_Knight
09-19-2008, 04:34 PM
OK, I'm jumping into this thread REALLY late, but let me see if I got this straight...

This CNN reporter is saying that there's no logical reason whatsoever that Obama slipped in the polls...other than the fact that he's black.

Am I the only one disgusted by such a suggestion? Talk about planting the seeds of hatred and weeding out any progress in race relations.

"CNN...the most trusted name is news"

MDFINFAN
09-19-2008, 04:58 PM
OK, I'm jumping into this thread REALLY late, but let me see if I got this straight...

This CNN reporter is saying that there's no logical reason whatsoever that Obama slipped in the polls...other than the fact that he's black.

Am I the only one disgusted by such a suggestion? Talk about planting the seeds of hatred and weeding out any progress in race relations.

"CNN...the most trusted name is news"

You're not the only one disgusted by this, I hate the piece also..but if I look at one angle, is race a player in this election, I'd be less than honest to say it has no bearing on these polls. So in order to discuss it, we have to find a common ground to start, that's something that's never easy to do..it doesn't take long before someone starts the blame or what about this, or they do this game before we can even get a good intelligent conversation about the merits of the article.. I guess if we can answer yes or no, then maybe we could get an opinion without the opinions.. whew...hope that made sense. This election has, as I've said before, made us think about everything we haven't had to think about before, race, gender, age, and parties, then the politics and issues. It's been a long race in that Obama and Hillary kept it going until June..and now the general election of historic nature for both parties.. So I'm sure we've all had to confront our own thoughts on all these subjects during this process at some point, I just wish we could discuss our thoughts without the accusations... it would be easier..

BlueFin
09-19-2008, 05:05 PM
ability to speak to everyone who's willing to listen, and flexibility to change and adapt to present situations

Unless you take away his teleprompter.;)

Gonzo
09-19-2008, 05:13 PM
Unless you take away his teleprompter.;)
Yes, it's the teleprompter. Certainly helps McCain, my friends. :lol:

MDFINFAN
09-19-2008, 05:49 PM
Unless you take away his teleprompter.;)

Well at least he can use one...instead of reading from a paper even in prep rally...

ohall
09-19-2008, 06:39 PM
Which lead me back to prove it..because that day didn't prove a thing except he can act ignorant...I was disappointed in that performance, as many times as I've heard this man preach or lecture, he's a lot smarter than that day...

Ohall, Wright's history doesn't show him to be a racist..I'm sorry soundbite have convinced a lot of you guys of that..but some ppl speak non PC.. He's one of them. I'm a ex officer in the Army, do I think some of our actions has cause others to not like us...Yes I do. I know history and I don't rewrite to serve my own senses, nor will I rewrite it to serve a lie for our country.. Unfortunately too many ppl believe the lies...like wmd, immenint threats, connection to al qaida.. I use those because their recent... While we're a great country, we also have some bone headed moments in how we handle others.. Most intelligent ppl in America accept that, but it doesn't make them anti americans.. they love their country just as much as everyone else, but because they point out flaws doesn't make them less..it a point of something we need to do better.. It's political season so I understand how Rev. Wright is being used for political purposes, but that doesn't made the allegations true... but that's another thread and another conversation..

You can think w/e you like. I don't think there is a shadow of a doubt the man is an American hating bigot. Anyone that thinks the US Government created AIDS to kill blacks is without a bigot to me.

But you can I guess agree with him and continue to defend him, it's America, have at it.

ohall
09-19-2008, 06:42 PM
Obama could live with the fallout from the soundbites being used against him... but he could not live with Wright refusing to shut-up until after the election... he became political cancer and Obama lobbed him off...

Those sound bites were and are accurate. Again, please, youtube the video of when Rev. Wright threw Obama under the bus. All the evidence is there in non sound bite form.

MDFINFAN
09-19-2008, 06:52 PM
You can think w/e you like. I don't think there is a shadow of a doubt the man is an American hating bigot. Anyone that thinks the US Government created AIDS to kill blacks is without a bigot to me.

But you can I guess agree with him and continue to defend him, it's America, have at it.

And that's fine Ohall, you're entitled to your opinion, and I'm glad we all don't have to share it..that's america..an america he fought for, remember he is an ex marine..

There are allegations that we created AID's..we did allow columbians to sell drugs on the streets of LA, there is such a thing as the tuskegee experient, we did allow soldiers to be on the field of atom bombs testing, so we could check how radiation affects humans.. So there's a lot of things ppl can have opinions on, one of his is that we did aids..big deal he can't prove it, and he can only go by what others write, and there's a lot of literature on the subject, and most of the allegations came from white ppl..I guess all of us in some manner or form are bigots by reading these things and having an opinion.


I met a woman, who's a republican yesterday, and she told me we went into Iraq because they had hundreds of thousands of terrorists, and that's why we attacked...at that point..I just said OOOOOKay...repub's have hard heads.. that was for you..:d-day:, not all repubs... but she did deflate my thoughts of her, because she was hot, blonde, blue eyes, beautiful smile, great shape, and then the let down, a empty head. Man, what a waste..:sidelol:

ohall
09-19-2008, 06:53 PM
And that's fine Ohall, you're entitled to your opinion, and I'm glad we all don't have to share it..that's america..an america he fought for, remember he is an ex marine..

There are allegations that we created AID's..we did allow columbians to sell drugs on the streets of LA, there is such a thing as the tuskegee experient, we did allow soldiers to be on the field of atom bombs testing, so we could check how radiation affects humans.. So there's a lot of things ppl can have opinions on, one of his is that we did aids..big deal he can't prove it, and he can only go by what others write, and there's a lot of literature on the subject, and most of the allegations came from white ppl..I guess all of us in some manner or form are bigots by reading these things and having an opinion.


I met a woman, who's republican yesterday, and she told me we went into Iraq because they had hundreds of thousands of terrorist, and that's why we attacked...at that point..I just said OOOOOKay...repub's have hard heads.. that was for you..:d-day:, not all repubs... but she did deflate my thoughts of her, because he was hot, blonde, blue eyes, beautiful smile, great shape, and then the let down, a empty head. Man, what a waste..:sidelol:

Do you think the US Government created AIDS to kill blacks MD?

MDFINFAN
09-19-2008, 06:59 PM
Do you think the US Government created AIDS to kill blacks MD?

Personally no.... but i've read others theory on it, I'm not sure we didn't create it, I don't think it was to kill blacks...we have a lot of black (secret) programs that if release accidentially could do harm..I don't know if Aids was one of them..

ohall
09-19-2008, 07:03 PM
Personally no.... but i've read others theory on it, I'm not sure we didn't create it, I don't think it was to kill blacks...we have a lot of black (secret) programs that if release accidentially could do harm..I don't know if Aids was one of them..

So you say no and then you say maybe. Got it.

lol

finintheburgh
09-19-2008, 07:56 PM
Which lead me back to prove it..because that day didn't prove a thing except he can act ignorant...I was disappointed in that performance, as many times as I've heard this man preach or lecture, he's a lot smarter than that day...

..


md this is the point i was trying to make earlier.

it is socialy exceptable for a black man to make racist remarks. rev wright did and you come back with he can act ignorant and hes smarter than that. but if a white man makes those kind of remarks his career is more than likely over.
im not trying to get into is rev wright a racist conversation. just showing that when it comes to race its a one sided sword. you have plenty of black leaders who have said many racist things yet they are still followed.(jackson and sharpton) its not exceptable to white and racist but it is to be black and racist.

Blackocrates
09-19-2008, 09:04 PM
I met a woman, who's a republican yesterday, and she told me we went into Iraq because they had hundreds of thousands of terrorists, and that's why we attacked...at that point..I just said OOOOOKay...repub's have hard heads.. that was for you..:d-day:, not all repubs... but she did deflate my thoughts of her, because she was hot, blonde, blue eyes, beautiful smile, great shape, and then the let down, a empty head. Man, what a waste..:sidelol:

:lol:

I've had the same experience. I met a cool, beautiful woman a few years ago then found out she was a hardcore right winger and had some outlandish opinions. I remember shaking my head and saying, "what a waste". :lol:

milldog
09-19-2008, 09:49 PM
I live 2 or 3 miles away from Oakland. I have lived in the Oakland/Montverde/Clermont area for 9 years and I've never heard any one use the word ******. Do I think no one here uses the word? Of course not, that would be an idiotic thing to think. However you obviously don't know a darn thing about the Oakland area. One of the largest black areas in the greater Orlando area is right next to the Oakland city limits.

You can wonder all you want to. As far as I'm concerned you're not exactly the most stable person I've ever met on a MBoard. People like you run around making all kinds of insulting insinuations and then run away with your ball when you get called on it.

I can't wait for the next melt down.

Thanks for the assessment doc. Should I send you a check? You're an angry dude and it's ok, there's help for that!

MDFINFAN
09-19-2008, 10:49 PM
So you say no and then you say maybe. Got it.

lol

You are too much... I said no.. but I allow for others to have a difference of opinion, something you have a hard time with.:tongue:

MDFINFAN
09-19-2008, 11:39 PM
md this is the point i was trying to make earlier.

it is socialy exceptable for a black man to make racist remarks. rev wright did and you come back with he can act ignorant and hes smarter than that. but if a white man makes those kind of remarks his career is more than likely over.
im not trying to get into is rev wright a racist conversation. just showing that when it comes to race its a one sided sword. you have plenty of black leaders who have said many racist things yet they are still followed.(jackson and sharpton) its not exceptable to white and racist but it is to be black and racist.

I think Imus is functioning alive and well, so is Limbaugh...don't be so extreme, so is Graham's star, and others I can name, but you get the point. Rev. Wright was speaking liberation talk..it puts color of leader to deeds, I've said this before if Obama does something he'd say, now we have a black leader who's doing the same as the white leaders he took over from, I can promise you he'd say that. He even said as much in a interview. If he was in africa, and blacks were oppressing whites, He'd say that too.

Remember in those same soundbite sermons he said... other countries in history oppressed too...Egypt...why would he talk about a black country if he's a racist..he should trying to put the best light on the ppl he's supposed to be defending.. Let's do a experiment..

Let's see how much you guys know about Wright:
Name That Preacher: Take the Quiz! Jeremiah Wright made two of the statements that appear below. The others were made by Martin Luther King Jr. and Billy Graham, pastoral advisor to George W. Bush and Hillary Clinton. Which statements did Wright make? Answers and sources follow.
1. "The world now demands a maturity of America that we may not be able to achieve. It demands that we admit that we have been wrong."
2. "Perhaps a more difficult but no less necessary task is to speak for those who have been designated as our enemies. . . . Surely we must understand their feelings, even if we do not condone their actions. Surely we must see that the men we supported pressed them to their violence. Surely we must see that our own computerized plans of destruction simply dwarf their greatest acts."
3. "Is AIDS a judgment of God? I could not say for sure, but I think so."
4. "I knew that I could never again raise my voice against the violence of the oppressed in the ghettos without having first spoken clearly to the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today-my own government."
5. "I've told you for over three decades now: God will forgive you for sowing wild oats. But God's forgiveness don't stop the crop. Them oats you sowed will bring a crop. You will reap what you sow. But stop calling your crops your cross. 'Well . . . that child is just my cross.' No, that child is your crop. A cross is a sacrificial vehicle of redemption that you voluntarily pick up; a crop is the result of something you sowed. Our choices have consequences, our behaviors have consequences."
6. "I was increasingly compelled to see the war as an enemy of the poor and to attack it as such."
7. "A lot of Jews are great friends of mine. They swarm around me and are friendly to me, because they know that I am friendly to Israel and so forth, but they don't know how I really feel about what they're doing to this country, and I have no power and no way to handle them."
8. "This stranglehold [of the Jews] has got to be broken or the country's going down the drain."
9. ". . . the long line of military dictators seemed to offer no real change, especially in terms of their need for land and peace. The only change came from America, as we increased our troop commitments in support of governments which were singularly corrupt, inept, and without popular support. All the while the people read our leaflets and received the regular promises of peace and democracy and land reform. Now they languish under our bombs and consider us . . . the real enemy."
10. "A true revolution of values will soon look uneasily on the glaring contrast of poverty and wealth. With righteous indignation, it will look across the seas and see individual capitalists of the West investing huge sums of money in Asia, Africa, and South America, only to take the profits out with no concern for the social betterment of the countries, and say, 'This is not just.' It will look at our alliance with the landed gentry of South America and say, 'This is not just.' The Western arrogance of feeling that it has everything to teach others and nothing to learn from them is not just."
11. "If you're here without a church home and you know that the lord has set you free, you want a church home, come on! Red, white, black, yellow, Asian, Hispanic, come on!"

Let's see who knows the racists..

ohall
09-20-2008, 01:11 AM
You are too much... I said no.. but I allow for others to have a difference of opinion, something you have a hard time with.:tongue:

I appreciate what you are saying, however I was asking you what you think. For you to go on and give such a large out would leave IMO anyone to think you are also saying maybe. Especially when you spend so much time defending the obvious when it comes to Rev. Wright.

ohall
09-20-2008, 01:15 AM
Thanks for the assessment doc. Should I send you a check? You're an angry dude and it's ok, there's help for that!

If you are picking up on anger through the Internet I suggest you need to go and look in the mirror. Short of wishing someone and their family death I'd say you couldn't tell if someone was angry or not. Know what I mean? Yea I thought so.

The_Dark_Knight
09-20-2008, 02:52 AM
You're not the only one disgusted by this, I hate the piece also..but if I look at one angle, is race a player in this election, I'd be less than honest to say it has no bearing on these polls. So in order to discuss it, we have to find a common ground to start, that's something that's never easy to do..it doesn't take long before someone starts the blame or what about this, or they do this game before we can even get a good intelligent conversation about the merits of the article.. I guess if we can answer yes or no, then maybe we could get an opinion without the opinions.. whew...hope that made sense. This election has, as I've said before, made us think about everything we haven't had to think about before, race, gender, age, and parties, then the politics and issues. It's been a long race in that Obama and Hillary kept it going until June..and now the general election of historic nature for both parties.. So I'm sure we've all had to confront our own thoughts on all these subjects during this process at some point, I just wish we could discuss our thoughts without the accusations... it would be easier..
I understand what you're saying MD, but there's a BIG difference between Obama and say Jackson or Sharpton. Obama hadn't been a public figure out in the public eye screaming racism and accusing white people in general of racial discrimination as Jackson and Sharpton have in the past. Obama's national public debut at the 2004 democratic convention was a positive introduction of who he was. When I saw him for the first time, I didn't see him as a black man, I saw him as a speaker who is a democrat. Skin color???? Jesus...that was probably down towards the bottom of the list of things I "noticed" so to speak. I'm intelligent enough that I form my opinion of a person on MANY factors...color of his skin?? Gimme a break.

I just find it utterly insulting that an arrogant reporter at CNN has to accuse my dislike of Obama (which I don't "dislike" him...I just don't agree with him) is based on the color of his skin and not my assessment of his stance on the issues. I guess in his arrogance, this reporter's view is that I can't have a brain and come to my own conclusions based on who Obama is, what he wants, what he stands for...and if I don't agree with Obama, I HAVE to be racist.

THAT is what pisses me off more than anything!!

The_Dark_Knight
09-20-2008, 03:23 AM
I think Imus is functioning alive and well, so is Limbaugh...don't be so extreme, so is Graham's star, and others I can name, but you get the point. Rev. Wright was speaking liberation talk..it puts color of leader to deeds, I've said this before if Obama does something he'd say, now we have a black leader who's doing the same as the white leaders he took over from, I can promise you he'd say that. He even said as much in a interview. If he was in africa, and blacks were oppressing whites, He'd say that too.

Remember in those same soundbite sermons he said... other countries in history oppressed too...Egypt...why would he talk about a black country if he's a racist..he should trying to put the best light on the ppl he's supposed to be defending.. Let's do a experiment..

Let's see how much you guys know about Wright:
Name That Preacher: Take the Quiz! Jeremiah Wright made two of the statements that appear below. The others were made by Martin Luther King Jr. and Billy Graham, pastoral advisor to George W. Bush and Hillary Clinton. Which statements did Wright make? Answers and sources follow.
1. "The world now demands a maturity of America that we may not be able to achieve. It demands that we admit that we have been wrong."
2. "Perhaps a more difficult but no less necessary task is to speak for those who have been designated as our enemies. . . . Surely we must understand their feelings, even if we do not condone their actions. Surely we must see that the men we supported pressed them to their violence. Surely we must see that our own computerized plans of destruction simply dwarf their greatest acts."
3. "Is AIDS a judgment of God? I could not say for sure, but I think so."
4. "I knew that I could never again raise my voice against the violence of the oppressed in the ghettos without having first spoken clearly to the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today-my own government."
5. "I've told you for over three decades now: God will forgive you for sowing wild oats. But God's forgiveness don't stop the crop. Them oats you sowed will bring a crop. You will reap what you sow. But stop calling your crops your cross. 'Well . . . that child is just my cross.' No, that child is your crop. A cross is a sacrificial vehicle of redemption that you voluntarily pick up; a crop is the result of something you sowed. Our choices have consequences, our behaviors have consequences."
6. "I was increasingly compelled to see the war as an enemy of the poor and to attack it as such."
7. "A lot of Jews are great friends of mine. They swarm around me and are friendly to me, because they know that I am friendly to Israel and so forth, but they don't know how I really feel about what they're doing to this country, and I have no power and no way to handle them."
8. "This stranglehold [of the Jews] has got to be broken or the country's going down the drain."
9. ". . . the long line of military dictators seemed to offer no real change, especially in terms of their need for land and peace. The only change came from America, as we increased our troop commitments in support of governments which were singularly corrupt, inept, and without popular support. All the while the people read our leaflets and received the regular promises of peace and democracy and land reform. Now they languish under our bombs and consider us . . . the real enemy."
10. "A true revolution of values will soon look uneasily on the glaring contrast of poverty and wealth. With righteous indignation, it will look across the seas and see individual capitalists of the West investing huge sums of money in Asia, Africa, and South America, only to take the profits out with no concern for the social betterment of the countries, and say, 'This is not just.' It will look at our alliance with the landed gentry of South America and say, 'This is not just.' The Western arrogance of feeling that it has everything to teach others and nothing to learn from them is not just."
11. "If you're here without a church home and you know that the lord has set you free, you want a church home, come on! Red, white, black, yellow, Asian, Hispanic, come on!"

Let's see who knows the racists..
MD, not intending to call you...just keeping it "fair and balanced"...:lol:

You were one of the ones that raked Trent Lott over the coals when he made comments at Strom Thurmond's 100th birthday in which he said Thurmond would have made a great President when he ran...even though at the time Thurmond as a proponent of segregation. And now where's Trent Lott?? Funny thing is...Lott never said anything racist. ;)

Now to your quiz...
http://bartcopnation.com/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=2&topic_id=434408

ANSWERS: Jeremiah Wright said 5 & 11; Billy Graham said 3, 7, & 8; MLK said the rest. SOURCES: On Hillary's relationship with Graham, see Time Magazine, Aug. 8, 2007(www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1650798,00.html (http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1650798,00.html)); quotes 5 & 11 come from a sermon Wright delivered on January 27, 2008 (www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=4808fe74-023d-417b-8537-33763c33e399 (http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=4808fe74-023d-417b-8537-33763c33e399)); quote 3 comes from a speech Graham delivered in Columbus, Ohio, in 1993, though he later retracted the statement (www.aegis.com/news/ads/1993/AD931840.html (http://www.aegis.com/news/ads/1993/AD931840.html)); quotes 7 & 8 come from a conversation between Graham and Nixon recorded for posterity on the Nixon tapes (www.slate.com/id/2063030 (http://www.slate.com/id/2063030)); MLK's quotes come from his speech "Beyond Vietnam: A Time to Break Silence," delivered April 4, 1967 (www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/mlkatimetobreaksilence.htm (http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/mlkatimetobreaksilence.htm)).

milldog
09-20-2008, 10:57 AM
If you are picking up on anger through the Internet I suggest you need to go and look in the mirror. Short of wishing someone and their family death I'd say you couldn't tell if someone was angry or not. Know what I mean? Yea I thought so.

Well your assumption that we are winning the war in Iraq in a round about way said the same to me. I've lost someone close to me and all you can say is were winning the war. What an insensitive statement. I took it as an insult. Maybe I shouldn't have said that, but you seem blinded by your parties interests. So go ahead and blab all you want, I really could care less. Like I said, you're comments are funny to me, just lacking substance. This war will never be won and is because of a huge lie! All this war has done is put our country in horrible debt, but hey, were winning, lol.:err:

BAMAPHIN 22
09-20-2008, 03:12 PM
Will Prejudice Trump Economy For Voters?



According to the poll released Saturday, a little over one-third of white Democrats and independents agreed with at least one negative adjective about blacks, and they are less likely to vote for Obama than those who don't hold such views.

"There are a lot fewer bigots than there were 50 years ago, but that doesn't mean there's only a few bigots," said Stanford University political scientist Paul Sniderman, who helped analyze the exhaustive survey.

The pollsters set out to determine why Obama is locked in such a close race with Republican presidential candidate John McCain even as the political landscape seems to favor Democrats; President George W. Bush's unpopularity, the Iraq war, and a national sense of economic hard times cut against Republican candidates, as does the fact that Democratic voters outnumber Republicans.

Lots of Republicans harbor prejudices, too, but the survey found they weren't voting against Obama because of his race. Most Republicans wouldn't vote for any Democrat for president - white, black or brown.



http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/09/20/politics/main4462623.shtml

MDFINFAN
09-20-2008, 03:26 PM
MD, not intending to call you...just keeping it "fair and balanced"...:lol:

You were one of the ones that raked Trent Lott over the coals when he made comments at Strom Thurmond's 100th birthday in which he said Thurmond would have made a great President when he ran...even though at the time Thurmond as a proponent of segregation. And now where's Trent Lott?? Funny thing is...Lott never said anything racist. ;)

Now to your quiz...
http://bartcopnation.com/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=2&topic_id=434408

You weren't suppose to google.. but I knew ppl would..

The difference is I know Wright isn't a racist, I know thurmond change parties because of race and or course I was alive to hear Stormin stances on race, so there's no doubt what he was.. The repub party took on AA and other issues as a divider, because they believe in divide and conquer..AA was used as a race baiter, and I know that and it worked..so don't waste your time trying to convince me other wise.. It's one of the reasons Blacks haven't join the repub party in large numbers, starting from civil rights to AA.. The politics of both parties piss me off, so that's why I'm a indepent...the repub party has done too much for me to join probably in my lifetime, the Democratic party allow too much strong arming by the repubs, and in some instances are too liberal for me. But most of all, both don't do the things they say they will do for the ppl who vote for them..period.

The_Dark_Knight
09-20-2008, 03:45 PM
You weren't suppose to google.. but I knew ppl would..

The difference is I know Wright isn't a racist, I know thurmond change parties because of race and or course I was alive to hear Stormin stances on race, so there's no doubt what he was.. The repub party took on AA and other issues as a divider, because they believe in divide and conquer..AA was used as a race baiter, and I know that and it worked..so don't waste your time trying to convince me other wise.. It's one of the reasons Blacks haven't join the repub party in large numbers, starting from civil rights to AA.. The politics of both parties piss me off, so that's why I'm a indepent...the repub party has done too much for me to join probably in my lifetime, the Democratic party allow too much strong arming by the repubs, and in some instances are too liberal for me. But most of all, both don't do the things they say they will do for the ppl who vote for them..period.
And this has...WHAT...to do with Trent Lott's non-racist comments celebrating Thurmond's 100th birthday?? See where I'm going with this? Lott made ZERO racist comments but yet, he makes celebratory remarks of a man who lived to be a century in age and he was LAMBASTED as a racist.

And I didn't Google...I Yahooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo'd!! :lol:

Blackocrates
09-20-2008, 05:32 PM
Here's another little nugget.

http://http://news.yahoo.com/page/election-2008-political-pulse-obama-race (http://news.yahoo.com/page/election-2008-political-pulse-obama-race)

Dolphins9954
09-20-2008, 06:14 PM
Here's another little nugget.

http://http://news.yahoo.com/page/election-2008-political-pulse-obama-race


Well according to this article it's the Racist Democrats to blame. I can already see the ground work being laid in case of an Obama loss. Racism will be the excuse. Nevermind Obama's policies and votes. That doesn't matter at all.:up:

BAMAPHIN 22
09-20-2008, 07:57 PM
Mr. Cafferty, It’s not Race, It’s Obama! (http://foxforum.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/09/18/frj_0918/)



“Race is arguably the biggest issue in this election, and it’s one that nobody’s talking about. The differences between Barack Obama and John McCain couldn’t be more well-defined. Obama wants to change Washington. McCain is a part of Washington and a part of the Bush legacy. Yet the polls remain close. Doesn’t make sense…unless it’s race.”

I don’t know which is more shocking 1) your offensive suggestion that many McCain supporters recognize Barack Obama’s superiority (it’s so well-defined!), but refuse to vote for him because they are racists. 2) your simplistic analysis of the differences between the candidates, particularly your wild assertion that Obama, a Washington senator, is not really part of Washington because he wants to change it 3) your frightening disconnect with the majority of Americans and what determines their vote.

Jack, as a news analyst, you make a living off giving reasons for your intuitions. But, strangely, here you saw no reason to back up your accusation with facts. Now, I admit, that would have been a daunting task.


You would have had to explain why the very white Al Gore lost to George W. Bush—the man you say is a spitting image of John McCain. Then you would have had to explain why four years later another white man, John Kerry, met a similar fate against the same candidate—the one who looks just like John McCain.

You now have a black Democratic candidate going up against “a third Bush term”—as you dub it. If his principle domestic and foreign policy is nearly indistinguishable from Gore and Kerry, why would you be so quick to blame it on racism? If the two white guys lost, why wouldn’t the black guy lose too?


http://foxforum.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/09/18/frj_0918/

Dolphins9954
09-20-2008, 08:11 PM
Mr. Cafferty, It’s not Race, It’s Obama! (http://foxforum.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/09/18/frj_0918/)



http://foxforum.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/09/18/frj_0918/


And this is exactly the point. Using Racism is a poor excuse and sad reason to blame Obama's loss if it happens. To do that would be to totally ignore the reality of Obama's policies and votes. Which is the REAL reason.

MDFINFAN
09-20-2008, 09:55 PM
And this has...WHAT...to do with Trent Lott's non-racist comments celebrating Thurmond's 100th birthday?? See where I'm going with this? Lott made ZERO racist comments but yet, he makes celebratory remarks of a man who lived to be a century in age and he was LAMBASTED as a racist.

And I didn't Google...I Yahooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo'd!! :lol:

By talking about Storm, I'd thought you'd get the gist of Lott's comment in terms of how it was recieved, it may not have been racist to you, but for a lot of ppl who knew Storm's life and stances to compliment him in that way signal agreeing with him by a lot of ppl, both black and white.. If it didn't seem that way, I don't thiink the actions that followed those comments would have taken place.. btw, the remarks didn't bother me that strongly, but I knew it would cause him some problems..

jtsacksyou
09-21-2008, 09:24 PM
dont know if this was mentioned.. but this is a two way street. Race is a HUGE reason Obama is so popular. I dont know the statistics or anything, but from what I have seen black people are more supportive to Obama. Also, I have seen the uninformed voter go for Obama as well. I worked the polls during the Ohio Primary and I had people coming in and I'd say which ballot would you like? They'd be like what are you talking about? and I'd say do you want the democratic or republican ballot and theyd be like I dont know I just wanna vote for Obama. If you don't even know the party, dont vote! I believe we should have a test based on general knowledge of each candidate before you are allowed to vote. If you can't tell me Obama and McCain's platform, you dont deserve to vote. Thats just my opinion. We keep kids from voting to keep the uninformed citizens from voting.. why not do more?

poornate
09-21-2008, 11:35 PM
You mean like a "literacy test"...?:err:

jtsacksyou
09-22-2008, 06:25 PM
You mean like a "literacy test"...?:err:
to an extent.. yes, but I believe they should not be based on whether you are good at reading, writing or anything like that. It should be something like. "What is John McCain's stance on gun control?" and if they can't pass a test like that then is that vote really what the people want counted? I know what it feels like to not know politician's stances. I really don't pay too much attention to my local government and therefore instead of straight ticket voting or choosing the better name, i choose not to vote for any of those candidates. I don't want my uninformed vote to get in the way of those who are voting because they know what each person brings to the table.

Blackocrates
09-22-2008, 06:31 PM
dont know if this was mentioned.. but this is a two way street. Race is a HUGE reason Obama is so popular. I dont know the statistics or anything, but from what I have seen black people are more supportive to Obama. Also, I have seen the uninformed voter go for Obama as well. I worked the polls during the Ohio Primary and I had people coming in and I'd say which ballot would you like? They'd be like what are you talking about? and I'd say do you want the democratic or republican ballot and theyd be like I dont know I just wanna vote for Obama. If you don't even know the party, dont vote! I believe we should have a test based on general knowledge of each candidate before you are allowed to vote. If you can't tell me Obama and McCain's platform, you dont deserve to vote. Thats just my opinion. We keep kids from voting to keep the uninformed citizens from voting.. why not do more?

Oh my! :unsure:

Blackocrates
09-22-2008, 06:36 PM
Well according to this article it's the Racist Democrats to blame. I can already see the ground work being laid in case of an Obama loss. Racism will be the excuse. Nevermind Obama's policies and votes. That doesn't matter at all.:up:

I don't think anybody expects a republican to vote for Obama, whether it's because of his color or policies. True, it's the white democrats that may waffle over race. How do you account for the reason some democrats are voting democratic in every race yet they're still undecided on the presidential race? Hardly any of the candidates in the same party differ so what would be the reason they hesitate on Obama?

jtsacksyou
09-22-2008, 08:08 PM
Oh my! :unsure:
so it doesn't bother you that we have people that don't know what party their candidate is in that want to vote?

Blackocrates
09-22-2008, 08:13 PM
so it doesn't bother you that we have people that don't know what party their candidate is in that want to vote?

It bothers me that you're advocating something that's unconstitutional and illegal.

Dolphins9954
09-23-2008, 01:11 AM
I don't think anybody expects a republican to vote for Obama, whether it's because of his color or policies. True, it's the white democrats that may waffle over race. How do you account for the reason some democrats are voting democratic in every race yet they're still undecided on the presidential race? Hardly any of the candidates in the same party differ so what would be the reason they hesitate on Obama?


I guess his votes and policies have nothing to do with it right? It must be those racists Democrats. Nevermind the Patriot Act, Fisa, Iraq, Free Speech Zones, Big Government, Debt, Spending, Inflation and the fact that he offers no change at all. Only the same. That can't be it at all. If Obama loses. Racism would be a poor and scapegoat of an excuse.

Blackocrates
09-23-2008, 06:00 AM
I guess his votes and policies have nothing to do with it right? It must be those racists Democrats. Nevermind the Patriot Act, Fisa, Iraq, Free Speech Zones, Big Government, Debt, Spending, Inflation and the fact that he offers no change at all. Only the same. That can't be it at all. If Obama loses. Racism would be a poor and scapegoat of an excuse.

There are voters out there that are undecided about Obama, yet they are voting for democrats in other offices. These democrats that they are voting for are highly unlikely to be that different from Obama on policy matters. So what's the difference that's causing the hesitation? It's not policy.

Dolphins9954
09-23-2008, 08:23 AM
There are voters out there that are undecided about Obama, yet they are voting for democrats in other offices. These democrats that they are voting for are highly unlikely to be that different from Obama on policy matters. So what's the difference that's causing the hesitation? It's not policy.


Obama flips on FISA and Oil Drilling.

His vote to give immunity to Tele-com companies that were illegally spying on the American people.

The Paramilitary enforcement of Free Speech zones at his convention.

Obama's vote for the Patriot Act.

A whole bunch of Hillary supporters holding a grudge.

The fact that Obama's War and Foreign Policy is no different than Bush and Mccain's.

His "rockstar" trip around the world in his new jet with campaign slogans all over it.

The fact that no matter how many times you say "change". You have to prove it.

Obama's mistruths about having no ties to lobbyists. And criticizing Mccain for his ties. When Obama has them as well.

Obama's lie about not taking money from Oil companies. And his criticism of Mccain taking money from Oil companies.

The Tax Policy Center's conclusion that Obama and Mccain will add another 4 to 5 trillion dollars to the debt.

The fact that Obama needs to raise taxes on everyone. Not just the Rich. And still would put us in debt.

Biden saying that paying high taxes is our Patriotic duty.

Obama's support for all these bailouts and the illegal Federal Reserve.

And above all the fact that Obama really doesn't offer a change or a difference at all. More Big Government, More Debt and More loss of liberties. These are all the true reasons if Obama did lose. Racism would be a sad excuse and cop-out from reality. Votes and policies is the reason. The same reason why so many White Guys lost their elections as well.

Blackocrates
09-23-2008, 09:30 AM
I know about all that stuff, but a lot of these democrats that always vote the party line are waffling and it's not because of jets, illegal federal reserve or what have you because those are right wing concerns. The war, fisa, etc. were also voted for by the majority of other democrats. These aren't Obama only positions, he falls in line with the party.

Dolphins9954
09-23-2008, 12:06 PM
I know about all that stuff, but a lot of these democrats that always vote the party line are waffling and it's not because of jets, illegal federal reserve or what have you because those are right wing concerns. The war, fisa, etc. were also voted for by the majority of other democrats. These aren't Obama only positions, he falls in line with the party.





Poll: Obama struggling to win over Clinton voters

Barack Obama's support from backers of Hillary Rodham Clinton is stuck smack where it was in June, a poll showed Tuesday, a stunning lack of progress that is weakening him with members of the Democratic Party in the close presidential race.

An Associated Press-Yahoo! News poll shows that among adults who backed his rival during their bitter primary campaign, 58 percent now support Obama. That is the same percentage who said so in June, when Clinton ended her bid and urged her backers to line up behind the Democratic senator from Illinois.


http://news.yahoo.com/page/election-2008-political-pulse-hillary-s-voters



You want to put blame. Put it on Hillary and her supporters. Their bitter and holding a grudge. This is a 100x better reason and excuse for Obama's woes. Racism is a joke. White Guys lose elections all the time. It's no different if Obama loses. Votes, Policies and one bitter rival is the true reason.

Blackocrates
09-23-2008, 09:48 PM
Dolphins9954,

So your AP report is completely valid, but the AP report I posted is what? Just for giggles I guess.

I don't deny that Clinton supporters are bitter, I don't deny that people don't like Obama for policy reasons. However, I also don't deny that people don't like Obama because of his skin color. Why is it that you and other conservatives on here draw a line just above the racial aspect? Why is every other reason valid but not race? Why are you ignoring surveys and studys that have been documented?

Dolphins9954
09-23-2008, 10:01 PM
Dolphins9954,

So your AP report is completely valid, but the AP report I posted is what? Just for giggles I guess.

I don't deny that Clinton supporters are bitter, I don't deny that people don't like Obama for policy reasons. However, I also don't deny that people don't like Obama because of his skin color. Why is it that you and other conservatives on here draw a line just above the racial aspect? Why is every other reason valid but not race? Why are you ignoring surveys and studys that have been documented?


Because that's is just an excuse. If Obama really had good ideas and good votes and policies. Not to mention really offering some kind of change. Instead of his smoke and mirrors illusion tricks. Then he would be in a better position. The article you provided along with mine shows that it's the Dems to blame. If you really want someone or something to blame call Hillary. Or call out your fellow Dems. It seems that they are the one's with the problem. I happen to think the opposite of Racism. I think Obama winning the nomination is a good example of Americans looking past race. What Obama did should be a great example of America getting past our racist past. If a black man can win the nomination of one of the two parties. I think that is a good thing. And a blow to racism. To bad his policies and votes suck. But it's still a good thing.

milldog
09-23-2008, 10:09 PM
Please try to keep personal jabs out of the discussion.


Dolphins9954,

So your AP report is completely valid, but the AP report I posted is what? Just for giggles I guess.

I don't deny that Clinton supporters are bitter, I don't deny that people don't like Obama for policy reasons. However, I also don't deny that people don't like Obama because of his skin color. Why is it that you and other conservatives on here draw a line just above the racial aspect? Why is every other reason valid but not race? Why are you ignoring surveys and studys that have been documented?

There are definately people who wouldn't vote for him because of his skin color. If you can't see that, **REMOVED**!

Blackocrates
09-23-2008, 10:09 PM
Because that's is just an excuse. If Obama really had good ideas and good votes and policies. Not to mention really offering some kind of change. Instead of his smoke and mirrors illusion tricks. Then he would be in a better position. The article you provided along with mine shows that it's the Dems to blame. If you really want someone or something to blame call Hillary. Or call out your fellow Dems. It seems that they are the one's with the problem. I happen to think the opposite of Racism. I think Obama winning the nomination is a good example of Americans looking past race. What Obama did should be a great example of America getting past our racist past. If a black man can win the nomination of one of the two parties. I think that is a good thing. And a blow to racism. To bad his policies and votes suck. But it's still a good thing.

It's not an excuse, it's a reason. I'm saying there are a lot of reasons why people won't vote for Obama, one of which is his skin color. That's where we differ. I'm not ignoring what's been documented, I'm not pretending that racism isn't playing a part in this election. I don't know the extent of it, but I know it's there.

I do blame democrats, I've said that in previous posts.

milldog
09-23-2008, 10:10 PM
This isn't even debateable. End of story!

Dolphins9954
09-23-2008, 10:47 PM
There are definately people who wouldn't vote for him because of his skin color. If you can't see that,


Of course there is. But to blame that as the reason is not honest and truthful. How can you ignore Obama winning this nomination? If that isn't a prime example of racism losing. I don't know what is. If racism is really the only reason for Obama's troubles. (As this thread says). Then he wouldn't have one the nomination. It really doesn't matter who wins this November. You will get the same result no matter what. This whole election is one big giant facade and charade. And so will the excuse of racism if Obama loses.

Clipse
09-23-2008, 11:13 PM
Of course Rascism is involved. Barack Obama had 90+% of the black vote in just about all the primaries, is that not rascism? While I'm sure most of us (me included), would hope there isn't any rascism, the fact is there is. I guarantee there are people out there who won't vote for Obama because he's black. There are people out there who won't vote for McCain because he's white. Theres people who will only vote for Obama because he's black.

With that being said, it really won't make much of a difference anyways. Generally speaking, most democrats will vote for the democratic candididate as most republicans will vote for the rebublican candidate.

Clipse
09-23-2008, 11:15 PM
Of course there is. But to blame that as the reason is not honest and truthful. How can you ignore Obama winning this nomination? If that isn't a prime example of racism losing. I don't know what is. If racism is really the only reason for Obama's troubles. (As this thread says). Then he wouldn't have one the nomination. It really doesn't matter who wins this November. You will get the same result no matter what. This whole election is one big giant facade and charade. And so will the excuse of racism if Obama loses.

Actually, to be honest, Rascism has alot to do with why Obama won the nomination. I'm sure that the 90+% of the African American vote every primary had alot to do with him winning.

poornate
09-24-2008, 09:08 AM
Of course Rascism is involved. Barack Obama had 90+% of the black vote in just about all the primaries, is that not rascism? While I'm sure most of us (me included), would hope there isn't any rascism, the fact i there is. I guarantee there are people out there who won't vote for Obama because he's black. There are people out there who won't vote for McCain because he's white. Theres people who will only vote for Obama because he's black.

With that being said, it really won't make much of a difference anyways. Generally speaking, most democrats will vote for the democratic candididate as most republicans will vote for the rebublican candidate.

The truth is that we vote for those we find kinship with... If presented two candidates, one who shares a cultural identity with you, which can be race, and one who does not... if their views and programs are similar... which one would you gravitate towards?

Finding kinship between two candidates with the same political ideology, even if that is based on race, is far different than excluding a candidate based on the color of his skin.... The Democrats have always gotten 80-90% of the black vote... that isn't going to change in this election significantly... More black votes will be a result of more blacks voting.... You cannot say that black voters will not vote for a white candidate, because that is all black voters have ever gotten to do....But when 12% of Americans say they won't vote for a black candidate BECAUSE he is black, regardless of his politics, that cannot be dismissed....

milldog
09-24-2008, 09:58 AM
Of course there is. But to blame that as the reason is not honest and truthful. How can you ignore Obama winning this nomination? If that isn't a prime example of racism losing. I don't know what is. If racism is really the only reason for Obama's troubles. (As this thread says). Then he wouldn't have one the nomination. It really doesn't matter who wins this November. You will get the same result no matter what.
. And so will the excuse of racism if Obama loses.

Agreed! I took it as you didn't think that some people wouldn't elect him because of his skin color. That's the only point I was making. Do I believe that it's the reason he's slid in some polls, heck no! You've cleared it up for me! Thanks!:up:

milldog
09-24-2008, 09:59 AM
Of course Rascism is involved. Barack Obama had 90+% of the black vote in just about all the primaries, is that not rascism? While I'm sure most of us (me included), would hope there isn't any rascism, the fact i there is. I guarantee there are people out there who won't vote for Obama because he's black. There are people out there who won't vote for McCain because he's white. Theres people who will only vote for Obama because he's black.

With that being said, it really won't make much of a difference anyways. Generally speaking, most democrats will vote for the democratic candididate as most republicans will vote for the rebublican candidate.


TRUE!!!!

Clipse
09-24-2008, 11:46 AM
The truth is that we vote for those we find kinship with... If presented two candidates, one who shares a cultural identity with you, which can be race, and one who does not... if their views and programs are similar... which one would you gravitate towards?

Finding kinship between two candidates with the same political ideology, even if that is based on race, is far different than excluding a candidate based on the color of his skin.... The Democrats have always gotten 80-90% of the black vote... that isn't going to change in this election significantly... More black votes will be a result of more blacks voting.... You cannot say that black voters will not vote for a white candidate, because that is all black voters have ever gotten to do....But when 12% of Americans say they won't vote for a black candidate BECAUSE he is black, regardless of his politics, that cannot be dismissed....
I agree to an extent. Generally speaking, we will vote for the nominee of our party.

However, you are right, 80-90% of African Americans vote democratic but NEVER have they voted 90% almost every primary for a candidate. I can guarantee alot of people didnt know **** about Obama politics, all they knew was he was black, so thats who they voted for. Not being rascist, I'm just speaking the truth, if Obama was white, Clinton would've got more African American vote, especially after all her husband did for the African American community.

The_Dark_Knight
09-24-2008, 11:56 AM
I agree to an extent. Generally speaking, we will vote for the nominee of our party.

However, you are right, 80-90% of African Americans vote democratic but NEVER have they voted 90% almost every primary for a candidate. I can guarantee alot of people didnt know **** about Obama politics, all they knew was he was black, so thats who they voted for. Not being rascist, I'm just speaking the truth, if Obama was white, Clinton would've got more African American vote, especially after all her husband did for the African American community.
Young man...you are wise BEYOND your years!!!!

:yourock:

phinfan3411
09-24-2008, 12:01 PM
I believe before the Iowa caucus, if you spoke to most black people, and asked them if Obama had a chance, they would have overwhelmingly said "no". Posters have mentioned before that other black candidates did not do well (Jesse, Al). I do not think Obama would have either, but he won Iowa. Once they knew he had a chance, it was over, as far a the black vote goes, for Hillary. Nobody is going to back a candidate that doesn't have a chance, black or white.

poornate
09-24-2008, 01:24 PM
I agree to an extent. Generally speaking, we will vote for the nominee of our party.

However, you are right, 80-90% of African Americans vote democratic but NEVER have they voted 90% almost every primary for a candidate. I can guarantee alot of people didnt know **** about Obama politics, all they knew was he was black, so thats who they voted for. Not being rascist, I'm just speaking the truth, if Obama was white, Clinton would've got more African American vote, especially after all her husband did for the African American community.

So what? Don't listen to TDK, I see nothing here that makes me believe you got my point at5 all.... so i'll try again...

Given two candidates with extremely similar political ideologies... how is a choice made? Some women voted for Clinton because she was a woman, some women voted for Edwards because he was cute... some people voted for Obama because he was black, some voted voted for him because he went to Harvard... some people knew all of their policies and some didn't.... they were, outside of wonk land, fairly similar... There is nothing wrong with getting behind someone because of views of cultural kinship... I notice when people are from my state, went to my school, have the same name as me... it makes you feel connected to them... So given two candidates, Clinton and Obama, with almost identical ideological stances on the hot-button issues facing the presidency, there is nothing wrong with people making a choice based on what they see as a tie, a real and meaningful tie, to the candidate... There IS a HUGE problem with people not supporting a candidate who SHARES their views because of his or her race.... there is a big distinction here... they can say that "Well... McCain is a militray man and I support drilling in the artic... perhaps i need to consider reevaluating this vote"... but instead anywhere from 12% to 19% (depending on the poll) of Americans say they will not vote for someone who is black.... The number that excludes Obama from consideration because off the color os skin, with no consideration towards his worth as a person or candidate, FAR eclipses the amount of black voters in our nation... Please try to see the difference... Black voters vote... they have always voted for a white candidate... this can't be turned around... they have never had 12% of the African-American voting participation people come out and say... "I just can't vote for leadership that is a different color than myself"... how base and pathetic racism is as a discernment for promoting to office....

The_Dark_Knight
09-24-2008, 01:45 PM
So what? Don't listen to TDK, I see nothing here that makes me believe you got my point at5 all.... so i'll try again...

Given two candidates with extremely similar political ideologies... how is a choice made? Some women voted for Clinton because she was a woman, some women voted for Edwards because he was cute... some people voted for Obama because he was black, some voted voted for him because he went to Harvard... some people knew all of their policies and some didn't.... they were, outside of wonk land, fairly similar... There is nothing wrong with getting behind someone because of views of cultural kinship... I notice when people are from my state, went to my school, have the same name as me... it makes you feel connected to them... So given two candidates, Clinton and Obama, with almost identical ideological stances on the hot-button issues facing the presidency, there is nothing wrong with people making a choice based on what they see as a tie, a real and meaningful tie, to the candidate... There IS a HUGE problem with people not supporting a candidate who SHARES their views because of his or her race.... there is a big distinction here... they can say that "Well... McCain is a militray man and I support drilling in the artic... perhaps i need to consider reevaluating this vote"... but instead anywhere from 12% to 19% (depending on the poll) of Americans say they will not vote for someone who is black.... The number that excludes Obama from consideration because off the color os skin, with no consideration towards his worth as a person or candidate, FAR eclipses the amount of black voters in our nation... Please try to see the difference... Black voters vote... they have always voted for a white candidate... this can't be turned around... they have never had 12% of the African-American voting participation people come out and say... "I just can't vote for leadership that is a different color than myself"... how base and pathetic racism is as a discernment for promoting to office....
He should indeed listen to me Nate because, regardless of everything you just said, you are overlooking 2 facts.

Before Iowa, Hillary Clinton polled 45% amongst blacks

And Barack Obama received 90-95% of the black vote.

So how did Hillary Clinton lose 35-40% of the black support she had? And CONSISTENTLY had?

I don't believe in coincidence. When in previous democratic primaries, the black vote had been fairly evenly split between the candidates...more or less. This past primary?? Hillary Clinton received nearly NO black vote and Obama received nearly all of it.

Sorry Nate, but if it looks like a duck...walks like a duck...quacks like a duck, please don't insult my intelligence by claiming it's a penguin.

poornate
09-24-2008, 02:11 PM
...because he was a black candidate, and because there were few marked differences between the two, he received the majority of the black votes... cultural kinship.... I ask you TDK, if two men were running with the same policies and both were likable and engaging speakers... if you couldn't decide between them... what would you base your decision on? What is one was a former soldier? What is one was a guy from your home state? What if one spoke your language? What is one was your ethnicity? What if one was Irish? There is no way that kinship is to be disregarded....

The point i am making is that it is okay to attach yourself to someone who YOU agree with based off of externalities when you have two similar choices... it is not okay to exclude someone you agree with because of the melanin found in their skin....THAT is the issue...

The low estimate for United States VOTING citizens who stated that they would never vote for a black person is 12%... assuming that the 12% number is static and that it is true, than that number cancels out EVERY single African American vote in our nation based off of voting against someone's color....

Clipse
09-24-2008, 02:18 PM
Please refrain from making such personal comments about other posters. Thanks!


He should indeed listen to me Nate because, regardless of everything you just said, you are overlooking 2 facts.

Before Iowa, Hillary Clinton polled 45% amongst blacks

And Barack Obama received 90-95% of the black vote.

So how did Hillary Clinton lose 35-40% of the black support she had? And CONSISTENTLY had?

I don't believe in coincidence. When in previous democratic primaries, the black vote had been fairly evenly split between the candidates...more or less. This past primary?? Hillary Clinton received nearly NO black vote and Obama received nearly all of it.

Sorry Nate, but if it looks like a duck...walks like a duck...quacks like a duck, please don't insult my intelligence by claiming it's a penguin.

Don't worry TDK. I will take your input over Nate's any day. **REMOVED**

Clipse
09-24-2008, 02:20 PM
...because he was a black candidate, and because there were few marked differences between the two, he received the majority of the black votes... cultural kinship.... I ask you TDK, if two men were running with the same policies and both were likable and engaging speakers... if you couldn't decide between them... what would you base your decision on? What is one was a former soldier? What is one was a guy from your home state? What if one spoke your language? What is one was your ethnicity? What if one was Irish? There is no way that kinship is to be disregarded....

The point i am making is that it is okay to attach yourself to someone who YOU agree with based off of externalities when you have two similar choices... it is not okay to exclude someone you agree with because of the melanin found in their skin....THAT is the issue...

The low estimate for United States VOTING citizens who stated that they would never vote for a black person is 12%... assuming that the 12% number is static and that it is true, than that number cancels out EVERY single African American vote in our nation based off of voting against someone's color....
So it's ok to vote for Obama because he's black but it's wrong to vote against him because he's black? Wow what a ****ing joke... Both is rascism and if you don't think so, please stop fooling yourself.

Blackocrates
09-24-2008, 02:24 PM
Don't worry TDK. I will take your input over Nate's any day. **REMOVED**

Classy. :rolleyes:

poornate
09-24-2008, 02:25 PM
I'm sorry that you aren't mentally agile enough to understand the distinction... Maybe I'll attempt to enlighten you in a thread that is about a less complex subject than America's racial politics and history.

Clipse
09-24-2008, 02:30 PM
I'm sorry that you aren't mentally agile enough to understand the distinction... Maybe I'll attempt to enlighten you in a thread that is about a less complex subject than America's racial politics and history.
No need at all for that. I really could care less about you enlightening me. You always throw around the "you don't get my point" when in reality, I think you're the one not understanding my point.

Dolphan7
09-24-2008, 02:31 PM
Maybe it is time for a time-out here before things get worse than they already are.

Cool it!

Blackocrates
09-24-2008, 02:32 PM
So it's ok to vote for Obama because he's black but it's wrong to vote against him because he's black? Wow what a ****ing joke... Both is rascism and if you don't think so, please stop fooling yourself.

I'll try to simplify it a little more.

Two candidates, both have comparable policies.
One white.
One black.

An individual is more likely to vote for the person they more closely associate with. Either choice is okay.

Now you have two candidates, both have opposite policies.
One white.
One black.

An individual agrees with the black candidate's policy but votes for the other candidate because the candidate they agree with is black. That's wrong.

There's the difference.

poornate
09-24-2008, 02:36 PM
... thanks SWF... I get entangled by the wording... you just did a much better job...

Clipse
09-24-2008, 02:37 PM
I'll try to simplify it a little more.

Two candidates, both have comparable policies.
One white.
One black.

An individual is more likely to vote for the person they more closely associate with. Either choice is okay.

Now you have two candidates, both have opposite policies.
One white.
One black.

An individual agrees with the black candidate's policy but votes for the other candidate because the candidate they agree with is black. That's wrong.

There's the difference.
Yea I'm so sorry. The many, many African Americans who knew little about Obama's policies during the primaries and only voted for him because he's black isn't ignorant or rascist at all. What was I thinking :rolleyes2:

poornate
09-24-2008, 02:41 PM
What encourages you to believe that after months of campaigning, when Obama had visited EVERY Iowan county, that the African-American voters there were uninformed?

Clipse
09-24-2008, 02:44 PM
What encourages you to believe that after months of campaigning, when Obama had visited EVERY Iowan county, that the African-American voters there were uninformed?
Yep my bad. I forgot that everybody watches the news and pays close attention to politics, keeping all informed. Again, what was I thinking?

Blackocrates
09-24-2008, 02:46 PM
Yea I'm so sorry. The many, many African Americans who knew little about Obama's policies during the primaries and only voted for him because he's black isn't ignorant or rascist at all. What was I thinking :rolleyes2:

WOW! The many, many African Americans who knew little about Obama? Really?

FinFatale
09-24-2008, 02:51 PM
Yep my bad. I forgot that everybody watches the news and pays close attention to politics, keeping all informed. Again, what was I thinking?

I'd like to think that more and more people are paying attention but I had a lady tell me the other day she wished that " the guy with the guitar " was running because she liked him and would have voted for him. I asked his name and she said , HuckaMEE. Others I have spoken to are just sick of all the nasty crap associated with politics. Friday evening I had two different people tell me that McCain choose Sarah Palin so he wouldn't be asasinated........I mean......lol

Clipse
09-24-2008, 02:52 PM
WOW! The many, many African Americans who knew little about Obama? Really?
I said Obama's policies, not Obama.

Blackocrates
09-24-2008, 02:58 PM
I'd like to think that more and more people are paying attention but I had a lady tell me the other day she wished that " the guy with the guitar " was running because she liked him and would have voted for him. I asked his name and she said , HuckaMEE. Others I have spoken to are just sick of all the nasty crap associated with politics. Friday evening I had two different people tell me that McCain choose Sarah Palin so he wouldn't be asasinated........I mean......lol

:lol: That was a good one.

poornate
09-24-2008, 03:01 PM
Yep my bad. I forgot that everybody watches the news and pays close attention to politics, keeping all informed. Again, what was I thinking?

Considering the arduous nature of the Iowa caucus system... and the fact that only around 10% of Iowans voted in the Democratic Primary... and that only 2% of Iowans are black... I'd wager that the estimated 6-8,000 black iowans who voted were pretty up to speed on who the candidates were to bother voting....

Besides... everything you say disregards the fact that Obama also won the white vote... and that the national support for Clinton in the African American community exceeded the African American support for Obama until months later.... AFTER Super Tuesday...

Blackocrates
09-24-2008, 03:05 PM
I said Obama's policies, not Obama.

I just accidentally left the word out. I'm still shocked that you would assume such a horrible thing, but that's your call. I seem to recall it wasn't black people calling Obama a muslim. It wasn't black people that claimed he wouldn't say the pledge of allegiance. It wasn't black people that claimed Obama wasn't a citizen. Etc.

The_Dark_Knight
09-24-2008, 03:42 PM
I'll try to simplify it a little more.

Two candidates, both have comparable policies.
One white.
One black.

An individual is more likely to vote for the person they more closely associate with. Either choice is okay.

Now you have two candidates, both have opposite policies.
One white.
One black.

An individual agrees with the black candidate's policy but votes for the other candidate because the candidate they agree with is black. That's wrong.

There's the difference.
Then using that argument, the following should have happened in the democratic primaries:

Hillary Clinton should have received 90% of the white vote and 90% of the women's vote.

Barack Obama should have have only received 10% of the white vote and 90% of the male vote.

Well, we all know THAT didn't happen. "AFLAC!!!!!!"

Clipse
09-24-2008, 03:45 PM
Apparently you two do not understand the point i was making, so I will try to simplify it as much as possible for you.

Many people only voted for Obama because he's black. Many people only voted for Clinton because she's a woman. Many people only voted against Obama because he's black. Many people only voted against Clinton because she's a woman. Many people voted against McCain because he's old. I'm sure many people will only vote for McCain because he chose a woman for his running mate, and I'm sure there are people who won't vote for him because of the same reason. This happened alot during the primary season, but primary season is over now. Although many people leanded towards Clinton or Obama based on race/gender, they are still democrats and will vote democrat in the General Election regardless of who the democratic nominee is.

The point I'm trying to make that voting based on color/gender does happen and it is wrong. However, as I stated before, the race/gender based voting won't make much of a difference anyways because those voters only make up a small amount of voters. The vast majority of voters will vote for the nominee of their party. Most independents will vote for the candidate they feel has better policies.

FinFatale
09-24-2008, 03:46 PM
I just accidentally left the word out. I'm still shocked that you would assume such a horrible thing, but that's your call. I seem to recall it wasn't black people calling Obama a muslim. It wasn't black people that claimed he wouldn't say the pledge of allegiance. It wasn't black people that claimed Obama wasn't a citizen. Etc.


I can't post here what Jesse Jackson said but...............it wasn't very complimentary to Senator Obama and if I am not mistaken last time I checked Jesse Jackson is black.

Blackocrates
09-24-2008, 04:21 PM
Then using that argument, the following should have happened in the democratic primaries:

Hillary Clinton should have received 90% of the white vote and 90% of the women's vote.

Barack Obama should have have only received 10% of the white vote and 90% of the male vote.

Well, we all know THAT didn't happen. "AFLAC!!!!!!"

Again you're twisting it. I gave one example for the primaries, white or black. Poornate listed a lot, geography, school, etc. If two candidates are similar on policy then voters are likely to vote for the person they feel more close to, however they want to define it. I only listed white and black to keep the example simple. Bottom line if two candidates are similar a voter can vote however they want. But if there are two candidates with opposing policies and a voter votes for the candidate they disagree with on policy because the other candidate is black, that is wrong.

Blackocrates
09-24-2008, 04:38 PM
I can't post here what Jesse Jackson said but...............it wasn't very complimentary to Senator Obama and if I am not mistaken last time I checked Jesse Jackson is black.

Of course you can find a black person here and a black person there that doesn't like Obama. I listed those examples to show that it wasn't blacks that were uninformed, it was white people that were believing the lies. I was just giving examples against R&R's outrageous claim that many, many african americans were uninformed.

I don't know what the point of your post is. Are you trying to prove that I was wrong when I said, blacks didn't do this and blacks didn't do that, by showing there was one black person that... what? I truly don't get what you're trying to say. Is Jesse Jackson your example of an uninformed black person? Cause the point of my response to R&R was about uninformed black people.

Blackocrates
09-24-2008, 04:48 PM
The point I'm trying to make that voting based on color/gender does happen and it is wrong. However, as I stated before, the race/gender based voting won't make much of a difference anyways because those voters only make up a small amount of voters. The vast majority of voters will vote for the nominee of their party. Most independents will vote for the candidate they feel has better policies.

2.5% points (according to Stanford University, given in a link earlier) is a significant difference.

Clipse
09-24-2008, 05:29 PM
Again you're twisting it. I gave one example for the primaries, white or black. Poornate listed a lot, geography, school, etc. If two candidates are similar on policy then voters are likely to vote for the person they feel more close to, however they want to define it. I only listed white and black to keep the example simple. Bottom line if two candidates are similar a voter can vote however they want. But if there are two candidates with opposing policies and a voter votes for the candidate they disagree with on policy because the other candidate is black, that is wrong.
I really wish you would stop. You know very well there are many African Americans who voted for Obama strictly on race alone. You and I both know so please stop acting like it never happened.

Edit- Please disregard this post. I forgot that Obama walks on water and Barack and all his Barackheads are never, ever wrong therefore causing any debate to be pointless.

Blackocrates
09-24-2008, 05:50 PM
I really wish you would stop. You know very well there are many African Americans who voted for Obama strictly on race alone. You and I both know so please stop acting like it never happened.



I never said they didn't. I said that when given two candidates that are similar in policy, voters will pick someone they feel more comfortable/closer/familiar with. This may be because of race, location, looks, sex, height, hair color, education, etc. Nothing wrong with that.

But when a voter votes for a candidate which they disagree with all because the voter they agree with has some arbitrary difference like race, sex, etc. That is wrong.

It's pretty simple. The difference is when somebody votes against somebody they agree with (second original scenario) as compared to voting for somebody they agree with (first original scenario). The 'wrong' is the reason why that individual voted against the person they agree with. In this election the study's have shown that the reason is race.

My original post addressing you was more simply put.

Dolphan7
09-24-2008, 06:10 PM
Well we know for sure that 12% won't vote for Obama because he is black (or half black).

What we don't know is what is the % of blacks who are voting for Obama for the same reason - that he is black.

Anyone know that %?

I would bet that it is higher than 12%.

MDFINFAN
09-24-2008, 06:57 PM
Well we know for sure that 12% won't vote for Obama because he is black (or half black).

What we don't know is what is the % of blacks who are voting for Obama for the same reason - that he is black.

Anyone know that %?

I would bet that it is higher than 12%.

I bet it'll be about 10%... Generally 88% vote for the Dems every presidential election cycle, I'd say it'll be 94% this election cycle.. mostly the new registered voters will push it up to there.. Blacks have their hard core repubs too, no matter who's the dem nominee. I'd say 4-5% of the black repubs break off to vote for him.. that's where I'm getting the 94% from. But I don't know why that's an issue since most blacks vote Dem any way whether it's Obama or Kerry or Gore or Clinton.. I think you guys are reading too much into it.. You act like blacks have voted for the dems with only about 60%..come on..it's always been the high 80's

Clipse
09-24-2008, 08:40 PM
I bet it'll be about 10%... Generally 88% vote for the Dems every presidential election cycle, I'd say it'll be 94% this election cycle.. mostly the new registered voters will push it up to there.. Blacks have their hard core repubs too, no matter who's the dem nominee. I'd say 4-5% of the black repubs break off to vote for him.. that's where I'm getting the 94% from. But I don't know why that's an issue since most blacks vote Dem any way whether it's Obama or Kerry or Gore or Clinton.. I think you guys are reading too much into it.. You act like blacks have voted for the dems with only about 60%..come on..it's always been the high 80's
Agreed. African Americans have always voted 80-90% democrat. The primaries were a different story as far as voting for him because he's black goes, but as for the General Election, African Americans are going to vote democrat no matter who the candidate is.

Clipse
09-24-2008, 08:50 PM
I never said they didn't. I said that when given two candidates that are similar in policy, voters will pick someone they feel more comfortable/closer/familiar with. This may be because of race, location, looks, sex, height, hair color, education, etc. Nothing wrong with that.

But when a voter votes for a candidate which they disagree with all because the voter they agree with has some arbitrary difference like race, sex, etc. That is wrong.

It's pretty simple. The difference is when somebody votes against somebody they agree with (second original scenario) as compared to voting for somebody they agree with (first original scenario). The 'wrong' is the reason why that individual voted against the person they agree with. In this election the study's have shown that the reason is race.

My original post addressing you was more simply put.
I see what you're saying but I don't see where this isn't wrong. Obama and Clinton had policies that were alike, but they also had policies that were different, that's what you should base your vote on. Who do you trust to carry out their policies, thats what you should base your vote on. Is this person lieing and pandering to the voters, this is what you should base your vote on. Which candidate has more experience, this is what you should base your vote on.

Voting for someone because they seem like the kind of person you would like to have a drink with, or because they were born in the same state as you, or because they have the same color skin as you, or because you think the candidate is cute, or because the candidate has great speaches, voting for reasons like that are plain ignorant imo.

poornate
09-24-2008, 10:25 PM
I see what you're saying but I don't see where this isn't wrong. Obama and Clinton had policies that were alike, but they also had policies that were different, that's what you should base your vote on. Who do you trust to carry out their policies, thats what you should base your vote on. Is this person lieing and pandering to the voters, this is what you should base your vote on. Which candidate has more experience, this is what you should base your vote on.

Voting for someone because they seem like the kind of person you would like to have a drink with, or because they were born in the same state as you, or because they have the same color skin as you, or because you think the candidate is cute, or because the candidate has great speaches, voting for reasons like that are plain ignorant imo.

At least you finally see what we are saying... As far as Clinton and Obama having serious differences in policy? Not the case... You might think it is ignorant to vote based on externalities... but in the end it is important to feel a relationship with your selection... Race is definitely valid, being a unique experience shared by Obama and black voters (same as women and Clinton, war veterans and McCain, Southerners and Edwards, Hispanics and Richardson, Catholics and Kennedy, etc, etc... all the way back to the start of it all)... I feel a kinship to him because he is young, he is an academic, he is community minded... these are things besides for his policy issues that make me, well, honestly, like him... and that is valid.

This is no different than when I defended Romney (as much as I disliked his personality) when he was dogged for his religion... You can't NOT support people for reasons unassociated with who they are as a person... it is wrong... but I would find it neither wrong nor surprising if the bulk of Mormons were in the tank for him... because they believe they know something intimate about him and they can relate to him...

I've got to ask... why do support McCain? What policies? What informs your political belief system? I'm curious... you don't see many weed promoting Republicans in their teens....

poornate
09-24-2008, 10:33 PM
Well we know for sure that 12% won't vote for Obama because he is black (or half black).

What we don't know is what is the % of blacks who are voting for Obama for the same reason - that he is black.

Anyone know that %?

I would bet that it is higher than 12%.

... doesn't really matter.... if 12% of voters refuse to vote for Obama because he's black, that more than cancels out every black vote cast in the next election... and since Democrats have historically garnered at least 80% of the black vote, that means that any victory in November, and lead in a poll up until the election, is a massive landslide in regular support when compared to previous election cycles...

Clipse
09-24-2008, 11:04 PM
At least you finally see what we are saying... As far as Clinton and Obama having serious differences in policy? Not the case... You might think it is ignorant to vote based on externalities... but in the end it is important to feel a relationship with your selection... Race is definitely valid, being a unique experience shared by Obama and black voters (same as women and Clinton, war veterans and McCain, Southerners and Edwards, Hispanics and Richardson, Catholics and Kennedy, etc, etc... all the way back to the start of it all)... I feel a kinship to him because he is young, he is an academic, he is community minded... these are things besides for his policy issues that make me, well, honestly, like him... and that is valid.

This is no different than when I defended Romney (as much as I disliked his personality) when he was dogged for his religion... You can't NOT support people for reasons unassociated with who they are as a person... it is wrong... but I would find it neither wrong nor surprising if the bulk of Mormons were in the tank for him... because they believe they know something intimate about him and they can relate to him...

I've got to ask... why do support McCain? What policies? What informs your political belief system? I'm curious... you don't see many weed promoting Republicans in their teens....
Actually, I havent finally realized what you're saying. As a matter of fact I thought I made similar arguments to this one throughout the whole thread.

I support McCain because I was raised in an Army family, the rest of my family supports him, I like alot of his polcies, and Obama has alot of policies I don't agree with. McCain has experience, Obama barely has any expereince. And I like McCain's Foreign Policies alot.

And as far as being a "weed promoting" teen, I don't know how you could automatically come to the conclusion that I "promote" it. I listen to Bob Marley, his music is very influential and has good vibe. Thats why I have my avatar, it's not there to "promote" marijuana. With that being said I do smoke, and see nothing wrong with it. Legalization and Taxing of marijuana is something that needs to be done anyways.

Edit- Most of these "weed promoting" teens know nothing about politics anyways and won't even get off their *** to vote. And alot of the ones who are going to vote, will vote for Obama because they like his "enthusiastic" speaches, and I know that for a fact because I recall seeing a poll where alot of young people claimed a big part part of the reason they are voting for him is because they love his speaches. I will try and find the link to that poll if you want. So with that being said, I realize speaches doesn't make a great president, actions do.

Second Edit- As far as your whole "kinship" argument goes, that shouldn't push anybody to vote for somebody. I don't feel any "kinship" at all with John McCain, I'm voting for him based solely on Policies, Foreign Policy, Experience, etc.

Third Edit- There's a borderline with what is legit and what isn't. I will give you the best example I can.

My father is voting for John McCain. He is a 20 year army veteran. He has fought for this country. I'm sure he feels some "kinship" with John McCain being they're both military vets. With that being said, that "kinship" has not pushed him at all to vote for McCain. The reason being, he was going to vote for McCain regardless whether or not he was a Military vet because he likes most of his policies, and doesn't like alot of Obama's policies. McCain wants to stay in Iraq, and my father has no problem with that, he knows the "surge" is working, he was there. Based on the whole "Foreign Policy" alone, he was going to vote for McCain. So the point is, that "kinship" is legit because it hasn't pushed him to vote for McCain. A "kinship" would be wrong when say a Democratic woman liked both Clinton and Obama about equally as far as the Political side of it goes. However, she doesn't know who to vote for so she picks Clinton because she too is a woman. That would be wrong, because surely that woman cand find several things other that the face that Clinton is a woman to help influence her vote.

poornate
09-24-2008, 11:23 PM
Actually, I havent finally realized what you're saying. As a matter of fact I thought I made similar arguments to this one throughout the whole thread.

I support McCain because I was raised in an Army family, the rest of my family supports him, I like alot of his polcies, and Obama has alot of policies I don't agree with. McCain has experience, Obama barely has any expereince. And I like McCain's Foreign Policies alot.

And as far as being a "weed promoting" teen, I don't know how you could automatically come to the conclusion that I "promote" it. I listen to Bob Marley, his music is very influential and has good vibe. Thats why I have my avatar, it's not there to "promote" marijuana. With that being said I do smoke, and see nothing wrong with it. Legalization and Taxing of marijuana is something that needs to be done anyways.

Edit- Most of these "weed promoting" teens know nothing about politics anyways and won't even get off their *** to vote. And alot of the ones who are going to vote, will vote for Obama because they like his "enthusiastic" speaches, and I know that for a fact because I recall seeing a poll where alot of young people claimed a big part part of the reason they are voting for him is because they love his speaches. I will try and find the link to that poll if you want. So with that being said, I realize speaches doesn't make a great president, actions do.

Second Edit- As far as your whole "kinship" argument goes, that shouldn't push anybody to vote for somebody. I don't feel any "kinship" at all with John McCain, I'm voting for him based solely on Policies, Foreign Policy, Experience, etc.

That's not true... whether you realize it or not, you just proved everything we have said... I asked why you support McCain... you replied..
1. I was raised in an Army family.
2. My family suports him.
3. Then his policy, so forth and so on...
... point made. Thanks.

What policies do you support, by the way?

What part of his foreign policy do you agree with? (This one... wow... gotta know this one... better listen to a little more of Bob marley's message... kidding here... I am really curious)

Oh... and of course MJ should be legalized, regulated and taxed... how silly not to...

Clipse
09-24-2008, 11:30 PM
That's not true... whether you realize it or not, you just proved everything we have said... I asked why you support McCain... you replied..
1. I was raised in an Army family.
2. My family suports him.
3. Then his policy, so forth and so on...
... point made. Thanks.

What policies do you support, by the way?

What part of his foreign policy do you agree with? (This one... wow... gotta know this one... better listen to a little more of Bob marley's message... kidding here... I am really curious)

Oh... and of course MJ should be legalized, regulated and taxed... how silly not to...
Please tell me how I made your point. And please read my Third Edit. I will be back after the Colbert Report.

poornate
09-25-2008, 12:02 AM
That's great and all... but I don't think that picking someone, when given two equal choices, on a feeling of mutuality is wrong... excluding someone off of gender, religion, or race is different... one is for inclusive reasons, one is for exclusive reasons... if you can't see the difference there is no reason to keep talking about it....

I still am curious as to why YOU support McCain... What part of his foreign policy do YOU agree with? What issues speak to YOU?

Clipse
09-25-2008, 12:03 AM
The way I see it, we are all close to an agreement here. We're pretty much arguing over nothing at this point. What's legit and what isn't. It's really not going to make much of a difference anyways.

Clipse
09-25-2008, 12:09 AM
That's great and all... but I don't think that picking someone, when given two equal choices, on a feeling of mutuality is wrong... excluding someone off of gender, religion, or race is different... one is for inclusive reasons, one is for exclusive reasons... if you can't see the difference there is no reason to keep talking about it....

I still am curious as to why YOU support McCain... What part of his foreign policy do YOU agree with? What issues speak to YOU?

I agree, there is no reason to keep discussing it. What's legit "kinship" and what isn't legit "kinship" is a petty argument.

I could name all my reasons why I support McCain. I can tell you what I like about his foreign policy. Unfortunately that would take forever and would only result in us debating back and forth for days. Fortunately, I love debating, so perhaps I will make a post stating why I support McCain sometime when I have the time :up:

poornate
09-25-2008, 12:19 AM
I agree, there is no reason to keep discussing it. What's legit "kinship" and what isn't legit "kinship" is a petty argument.

I could name all my reasons why I support McCain. I can tell you what I like about his foreign policy. Unfortunately that would take forever and would only result in us debating back and forth for days. Fortunately, I love debating, so perhaps I will make a post stating why I support McCain sometime when I have the time :up:

Last thought... I don't think there is any illegitimate kinship... I also don't think that there is any illegitimate way to exclude someone based off of of externals... enough.

Please make that "Your Policy" post... because I am fascinated by really young people who are staunchly conservative.... you're like a political yeti and I am curious....

Clipse
09-25-2008, 12:27 AM
Last thought... I don't think there is any illegitimate kinship... I also don't think that there is any illegitimate way to exclude someone based off of of externals... enough.

Please make that "Your Policy" post... because I am fascinated by really young people who are staunchly conservative.... you're like a political yeti and I am curious....

If it floats your boat sure. Just for you, I will add Obama policies and why I disagree with them.

And to be honest I'm really not that conservative. I'm an Independent. I thought I would be voting Democrat this year, but Obama just doesn't excite me at all. I liked Clinton alot more to be honest.

poornate
09-25-2008, 12:33 AM
Isn't that funny... I detested Clinton... policy aside... as a person... she was on the board for Wal-Mart... so much dirty laundry... I liked Bill Richardson.... Obama was my #2... I liked Ron Paul a little on the other side until I actually read a more in depth look at him, his policies, his past, and why people support him... This coming up is not a dig BTW... I was so excited by the prospect of McCain at first for the Republicans because I felt like it would be an election that I could not personally lose in... that was because I was expecting, you know, John McCain... he has morphed quite a bit over the nomination run....

Clipse
09-25-2008, 12:48 AM
Isn't that funny... I detested Clinton... policy aside... as a person... she was on the board for Wal-Mart... so much dirty laundry... I liked Bill Richardson.... Obama was my #2... I liked Ron Paul a little on the other side until I actually read a more in depth look at him, his policies, his past, and why people support him... This coming up is not a dig BTW... I was so excited by the prospect of McCain at first for the Republicans because I felt like it would be an election that I could not personally lose in... that was because I was expecting, you know, John McCain... he has morphed quite a bit over the nomination run....

I can understand why alot of people don't like Clinton.

As far as Ron Paul, I liked his drug policies. He at least introduced a bill to legalize marijuana for "responsible adults". He also pushed for the legalization of Industrial Hemp. And of course lighter sentences on pe[/URL]ople with drug related crimes, I really liked this one, way too many people are serving time they shouldn't be serving because they used drugs.
[URL]http://www.ontheissues.org/tx/Ron_Paul_Drugs.htm (http://www.siteadvisor.com/sites/wikipedia.org?ref=safesearch&aff_id=365-9&premium=false&suite=true&client_ver=2.6.0.6261&locale=en-US)

poornate
09-25-2008, 09:48 AM
Some of Paul's ideas were alluring... but the swarms of nutjob followers he attracted with their states rights agendas were a huge turnoff, more over his belief in all the conspiracies spoke to his character, and his ties to very questionable groups just killed him in my mind...

Clipse
09-25-2008, 12:03 PM
Some of Paul's ideas were alluring... but the swarms of nutjob followers he attracted with their states rights agendas were a huge turnoff, more over his belief in all the conspiracies spoke to his character, and his ties to very questionable groups just killed him in my mind...
Yea the state's rights ideas comes from him being Libertarian. Something I didn't agree too much with either.

BAMAPHIN 22
09-26-2008, 07:58 PM
Blame deep-seated racism if Obama loses



Pssst! I have a not-so-secret to tell you: America is no place for uppity black folks. At least that's what I've been finding out lately.



Republican Rep. Lynn Westmoreland of Georgia actually used this dated word, which means a black person -- usually striving to get educated and live a better life -- who doesn't know her place: "Just from what little I've seen of her and Mr. Obama, Sen. Obama, they're a member of an elitist-class individual that thinks that they're uppity."




Another Georgian, Rick Goddard, invoked it too: "Last night, Newt Gingrich
disarmed a very uppity newscaster who tried to question him on the capabilities and leadership of Gov. Palin," the retired Air Force general said about a black journalist.




This sentiment isn't limited to grass-chewing Southerners, considering a recent AP-Stanford University poll that validates what I've suspected: If Barack Obama doesn't win in November, we can blame racism.
Now before you undecideds and independents go sucking your teeth, thinking, "Well, what do you expect a nappy-headed black woman to say?" hear me out: The issue is really about modern-day "racial misgivings" rather than the straight-up, hate-filled "racism" we associate with hanging nooses of bygone days. Many whites surveyed associated blacks with being "lazy," "violent" and responsible for their own troubles. Blame these deep-seated racial beliefs for Obama's inertia in the polls. He'd be way ahead if 40 percent of white Americans didn't have negative views of African Americans.


http://www.suntimes.com/news/douglas/1186919,CST-EDT-douglas26.article