Hatewatch Tweets
Hatewatch is managed by the staff of the Intelligence Report, an investigative magazine published by the Alabama-based civil rights group Southern Poverty Law Center.
Let’s Call the ‘Birthers’ What They Are
Perhaps the time has come to state the obvious.
The people who have been selling claims that President Obama is not American — the Donald Trumps, the Orly Taitzes, the miserable state legislators hawking their snake-oil laws insisting that presidential candidates prove their citizenship — are mostly a pack of racists. In the cases where they are not, they are shameless opportunists perfectly willing to exploit racism for their own personal benefit, proponents of a second Republican “Southern strategy.”
And let’s not give a pass to the 25% of Americans who a Harris poll found last month believe Obama was not born in this country despite endless knockdowns by serious news organizations. Common sense — along with an important new study revealing the high levels of racism among those who make such claims — make it obvious what’s going on here. These people are either plainly stupid, or, far more often, whites who see Obama as the Other, the dark-skinned person who represents a racially changing society that they loathe and fear and resent.
But the really vile players in this whole sorry episode aren’t so much the feckless American public, a population notorious for its predilection for groundless conspiracy theories and magical thinking. They are the politicians and the commentators, the so-called responsible leaders and analysts of our society, people who are perfectly willing to consciously lie to get a little attention. They’re ambitious pols like Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachmann, talking heads like Lou Dobbs and Rush Limbaugh — people who question Obama’s citizenship as a cynical way of employing racism to gin up their ratings and political support.
Take a look at Trump, the narcissistic New Yorker who has become the chief hawker of the myth that Obama was born in Kenya, telling every reporter who would listen that he knew Obama had no birth certificate. When the president finally released that certificate to the public yesterday, Trump’s distract-them-at-any-cost reaction was to crow about how he was responsible for this enlightening release — and then to immediately question how Obama, who he described against all the evidence as a “terrible student,” got into Harvard Law School.
Yes, Donald, we get your drift. Obama’s a black guy who rose from humble origins — not like you, a little Richie Rich who became a real estate mogul after your daddy handed it all to you — and he got into a school far better than any you ever attended. And while you say lamely that you get along with “the blacks” just fine, you just don’t think it’s possible that any black man could be smart enough on his own to get into Columbia University, go on to Harvard Law School, become an editor and then president of the prestigious Harvard Law Review, and then graduate magna cum laude.
In recent weeks, some Republican leaders have tried to distance themselves from the “birther” claims about Obama, saying the issue had become a distraction from the many real problems facing the nation. That all sounds very nice, but let’s remember that these same leaders refused to tamp down the nuts before, saying, as did House Speaker John Boehner, that it was not their job to end the attacks. The truth, of course, is that the specious birther claims were lighting up the more unpleasant elements in the Republicans’ base, and Boehner had no interest in squelching that.
An interesting perspective on that base’s attitudes was revealed in a USA Today story yesterday, detailing the results of a study led by Eric Hehman of the University of Delaware and appearing in the March issue of the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. In a nutshell, Hehman and his partners concluded “that current criticisms of Obama are a result of his race, rather than his agenda.” They also found that “higher prejudice predicted Whites seeing Obama as less American, which, in turn, predicted lower evaluations of his performance.”
As The New York Times pointed out in its lead editorial today, “It is inconceivable that this campaign to portray Mr. Obama as the insidious ‘other’ would have been conducted against a white president.” Perhaps the sane people among us can now agree on the obvious: The continuing conspiracy theories about Obama — from his country of birth to his religion to his relationships with the radical left — come from people who are essentially motivated by antipathy toward black people.
on April 28th, 2011 at 12:54 pm
Can we please remove the phrase “common sense” from the language? The mere existence of the fanatical Christian Right and its bastard child the birther movement should indicate that good sense is, and never was, common.
on April 28th, 2011 at 1:59 pm
I do not buy into the “birther” insinuations, implications and self-serving conspiracy theories. However, your column moves on and sounds more like a liberal idealogical rant than a “hate” piece. I’m tired to death [not a PC term?] of hearing “racial this” and “racist that” applied to almost everything except bowel movements. The “birthers” need to go away. So also does the ideology that has crept into your “hatewatch”. You need to continue to be as successful and effective as ever in your tracking of hate groups, and less political.
on April 28th, 2011 at 2:02 pm
Unfortunately, I doubt even this will make the birther’s shut up.
on April 28th, 2011 at 2:04 pm
In the New York Times there is a “Timeline” that an Journalist created and is true about Barack Obama’s Mother.
She also attended Harvard and got very good grades…
What is all this stupidness about his Birth Certificate…because our New President is African American and White? Many of us Americans voted him in and I hope to The Man Upstairs he will become President again…
The Republicans have to learn to get along with every one…yet they act like 3rd grade boys, not men at all…
thank you…
on April 28th, 2011 at 2:04 pm
I disagree that birthers are inherently racist. Stupid? I’m comfortable with that. Biased? Absolutely. Ignorant? Put me down with that.
The problem is that the far right, the right wing nuts – hate liberals. All liberals. Anything remotely liberal. This is hate-think, but it isn’t necessarily directed toward race, as it is the perception of political posture.
So what’s the difference between the hate of racism and liberal-hate? There is no difference. Both hate. But I have to say, it looks identical. The clue is the absence of speech about race. Don’t look for “code” words – that’s conspiracy-think. (and the left is every bit as guilty as the right in that arena).
When Clinton was in power – do you remember the hate for him? He was a gangster, a murderer, rapist, and god-knows-what else. There were some vague areas where they could direct their animosity.
With Obama – the guy is pretty squeaky clean. So they have to make up stuff. His father wasn’t an American, so maybe…
And he knew a genuine ’60′s radical. Actually knew him. By name! So he might be a communist in sheep’s clothing.
And that’s where this idiocy comes from. But I’m loathe to call it racism.
on April 28th, 2011 at 2:05 pm
You guys just keep at it!
You complain about the ‘racists’; but you are as, if not more biggoted against them, than they allegedly are.
The difference being they don’t pretend to be self-righteous non-racists; and you do; which puts you guys in the Pharisees league.
Don’t you guys have any honour? In my culture we have people from far right, far left, commie, capitalist, white and black who are happy to agree to disagree; who hear each others criticisms; and use such as honest feedback to see their own blindspots.
If you want the moral high-ground; when do you start to demonstrate that you are in fact capable of it? That you are not — like those, if not more than those you critique — frothing at the mouth with hate filled venom???
on April 28th, 2011 at 2:06 pm
I want to know why Pres. Obama didn’t produce the document, as every President before him did in a timely manner before the election results?
It was frankly hateful for Obama to put the country through all this unnecessary pain. That includes also his school records.
Now there is credible evidence the birth certificate has been altered. When will President Obama come clean with the American people – it disrespectful what our President is doing.
on April 28th, 2011 at 2:09 pm
Why does the SPLC insist on slinging mud? Senator McCain went through the same process, correctly, by initiative of the Democratic isle, and ultimately produced his long-form birth certificate. This was a requirement for Congress to validate the eligibility of the Senator. It had nothing to do with the color of his skin, rather, his eligibility.
How does a signing a waiver, by then Speaker Pelosi allow then Senator Barack Obama to bypass the requirement of having to prove natural born residency? Equal treatment means equal treatment, regardless of someone’s religious background or skin color. The SPLC champions this virtue, so the SPLC should be the last group to claim racism.
Creating a pejorative, or using one as an innuendo to describe someone’s values, those with which you disagree, is simply slinging mud.
It’s time to grow up.
on April 28th, 2011 at 2:12 pm
Very true. And it’s so convenient that these ‘patriots’ cannot be blamed for anything themselves because, for goodness sake, they’re “just asking questions and being open-minded” and they are “just doing their duty as concerned americans who care.” Can’t use that defense all the time.
on April 28th, 2011 at 2:13 pm
Mark,
Your emotions cloud your judgment here. I need only take you back to last year when Obama was awarded the Peace Prize. It could be argued that he received it for his “blackness” because he has no other accomplishments. The left will do that, you know. But more likely he received the Peace Prize due to his left leanings.
The Communists did an excellent job piggy-backing in on the civil rights movement during the 60s and indeed MLK sought aid from the communists because they supported his cause. Although MLK was not a communist this support clouded the two very divergent philosophies to the point that opposition to communism was equated with opposition to civil rights.
BHO’s stealthy scholastic RECORDS do not support his scholastic achievement just as his mediocre work history does not support his Peace Prize. It is entirely possible that these “racists” are simply achievement bigots—and I count myself among them.
A study from any university finding racism against a black liberal is no surprise and as predictable as Obama’s Peace Prize. I recall my ex-wife’s girlfriends convincing her that I was a racist simply because I had expressed conservative views. That’s how successful your smear campaign has been. After seven years of marriage she finally asked for that divorce. Since she was black she just couldn’t stay married to a white racist, you see?
on April 28th, 2011 at 2:14 pm
Very nicely said, Mark. This post should be submitted to newspapers across the country as an editorial… your sensible take on this crazy issue needs to be widely seen and heard.
on April 28th, 2011 at 2:14 pm
Another request, this one of Eric Hechman (U. Delaware, cited by USA Today) and lots of other people: Please stop capitalizing White, Black, etc.
on April 28th, 2011 at 2:23 pm
I have long believed that much of the anti-Obama furor in this country is generated by racism, some more veiled than others. Would any of these attacks on the man occur were he white? People like Beck & Limbaugh & Bachmann & Palin & Trump NEED to keep priming the pump, for their own selfish reasons. Comparing the educational backgrounds of Trump & Obama reminds me of a line from the early 1960′s NY Times: Some college graduates need their sheepskins to cover their intellectual nakedness!!
on April 28th, 2011 at 2:26 pm
I encounter people like the “Birthers” all the time, and there are two words that describe them perfectly: Stupid Bigots.
I’ve also noticed a relationship between expressed hatred towards liberals and “Immigrants!” and tendency to believe “Birther” and related conspiracies.
Another sad relationship is that in every case I’ve encountered (so far), they also were “Good Christians” and liked to force their (Religious Right) beliefs on everyone in their area. The thing that really offends me is that they violate the very teachings of the One they claim to follow.
on April 28th, 2011 at 2:26 pm
Wow it seems that it is getting to the point that racists are trolling the SPLC website in order to (lamely) express their views on what is the matter with the SPLC. I do see the point made by Dale regarding the hate against all liberals, but I do see the added racial aspect of the hate directed against President Obama. I suppose it is a matter of working with what you perceive to have in your arsenal.
on April 28th, 2011 at 2:34 pm
I am surprised at the SPLC. you, the SPLC, is against hate & etc but you publish this letter by Mark Potok which is filled with hate? Unless you publish it show that hate comes in many forms. How many “birthers”, Southern Republicans or any republicans, any Democrats who do question the birth issue is really a racist or just do not like anyone other than a white protestant male as president, we may never know. One thing we can say, there are probably more people of many stripes including birthers, rightfully so, to have the right to question any president on their ability to be president, before and after they have been elected president. We learned with Nixon, no president should have an presidential honeymoon, especially when their policies(whether Republican or Democrat) only affects the minority few who support the respective parties instead of the majority of the people of this great country.
on April 28th, 2011 at 2:40 pm
Ishamel, The reason President Obama didn’t produce it sooner is that He. Did. Not. Have. It. He had to prove a Special Circumstance for Hawai’i to make a scan of it and certify it. Then he had to send his attorney to Honolulu to get it. Hawai’i stopped issuing certified copies of the long form at least 10 years ago.
on April 28th, 2011 at 2:42 pm
“Your emotions cloud your judgment here. I need only take you back to last year when Obama was awarded the Peace Prize. It could be argued that he received it for his “blackness” because he has no other accomplishments. The left will do that, you know. But more likely he received the Peace Prize due to his left leanings.”
No, it couldn’t be argued. No more than Obama has any “left” leanings.
“The Communists did an excellent job piggy-backing in on the civil rights movement during the 60s and indeed MLK sought aid from the communists because they supported his cause. Although MLK was not a communist this support clouded the two very divergent philosophies to the point that opposition to communism was equated with opposition to civil rights.”
If you had any understanding of history you would have known that Communists were proudly and radically on the side of Civil Rights since before the beginning of the 20th century. People like you used red-baiting to attack civil rights, and now you try to shift the blame onto MLK. Typical.
“BHO’s stealthy scholastic RECORDS do not support his scholastic achievement just as his mediocre work history does not support his Peace Prize. It is entirely possible that these “racists” are simply achievement bigots—and I count myself among them.”
I would be inclined to agree with you on the fact that Obama certainly did not deserve a Nobel Peace prize, but that prize seems to have been already cheapened in meaning even before Obama got it. If anything Obama’s Nobel prize just makes it clear to the world that it is a worthless honor.
“A study from any university finding racism against a black liberal is no surprise and as predictable as Obama’s Peace Prize.”
Ah yes, here comes the typical conservative tactic- stick “liberal” on the front of some word, and you automatically win the argument without having to address any of the evidence, or present any of your own. Inconvenient facts? They came from LIBRULS!
” I recall my ex-wife’s girlfriends convincing her that I was a racist simply because I had expressed conservative views. ”
Dude, you expressed racist views right in this comments section, and you probably don’t even notice it. I’ll give you one guess as to what it was. If you are that oblivious under these conditions, I can only imagine what you must have said in the presence of your wife and/or her girlfriends.
on April 28th, 2011 at 2:44 pm
Probably we should have a certain amount of respect for the Trumpster even if he did inherit his money. After all, he could have been another Huntington Hartford, who ran his inherited money and his A&P supermarket chain into the ground with his self-indulgence. He could have been John Paul Getty (I forget the number) who ran through billions of dollars looking for personal fulfillment and ending up miserable. At least Trump took his money and made it grow. But for Trump the end he seeks is not money but power, and he is far more evil than any of these others. The rest of the people you mention are just clowns. Trump is a clown but he is a clown out of a Stephen King novel.
on April 28th, 2011 at 2:45 pm
“I want to know why Pres. Obama didn’t produce the document, as every President before him did in a timely manner before the election results?
It was frankly hateful for Obama to put the country through all this unnecessary pain. That includes also his school records.
Now there is credible evidence the birth certificate has been altered. When will President Obama come clean with the American people – it disrespectful what our President is doing”
See, as I predicted, no amount of evidence will convince these people. Go ahead and cite your sources that say the birth certificate has been altered, Ishmael.
Oh and yes, Obama is putting the country through so much PAIN with this. Millions out of work, no healthcare, no safety nets, 2 1/2 useless wars, foreclosures…and yet that scoundrel waits YEARS to release the very certificate that nutcases like you have been clamoring for all this time.
on April 28th, 2011 at 2:48 pm
To Ishamel Royer (if indeed you really exist and are not some right-wing troll block-copying WorldNetDaily talking points):
The President did produce his birth certificate, more than two years ago. What he released yesterday was a long form, issued by the government of Hawaii only as a special exception, and which he did to finally try to shut nutcases like you up. As he sanguinely observed, for a microscopic, fringe-y group of crazies like yourself, it probably won’t work. He’s much more patient about this than I am. Go soak your head.
on April 28th, 2011 at 2:54 pm
Dang, hate much?
No rhetoric in this article.
on April 28th, 2011 at 3:01 pm
@Stoner Witch
There’s a *big difference* between being, “open minded” or “patriotic” versus following the law.
If a requirement is in place for an individual to obtain a particular office, then _everyone_ applying for the office must meet the requirement. Just like in order for someone to obtain a drivers license s/he must pass the test. If you don’t pass the test, you don’t receive your license.
Congress only validated one of the candidates, Senator McCain.
No amount of finger pointing, name calling, or sarcastic remarks changes the fact that President Obama didn’t, until today, provide any evidence that he was a natural born citizen.
There exists no provision in the legislature to allow the Speaker of the House to provide a waiver to Congress exempting a candidate from the rules.
Period. Paragraph.
on April 28th, 2011 at 3:03 pm
The urban myth of a conspiracy surrounding this document will now shift to questioning its validity.
There will be no convincing of the ignorant.
But I do hope the so-called “legitimate” voices who have demanded to see “proof” now, once and for all, recant, relent and apologize.
on April 28th, 2011 at 3:14 pm
In regards to my triumph over the frequently seen intellectual phony who slipped up with the undignified “dude” word, let me say this: If one doesn’t know he is a racist, he can only be a racist when others assign him that label.
Hence we have the Rosetta stone to racism. If you say I am, I must be. The acceptance of this absurd logic is the pinnacle of SPLC’s success.
on April 28th, 2011 at 3:16 pm
Dick Lancaster, your ex-wife was right. You are a racist. You are also blinded by anti-communism as American foreign policy has been for the past 100 years. Among other things this blindness led to the holocaust and the Taliban. I’m sure you have no problem with that since the nazis and the Taliban were “conservative.”
You make lots of claims about our president but offer no support for them. Such unsupported claims are a hallmark of racism so that is no surprise.
Daniel and Ishameful you are both fools as is anyone who lends credence to your unsupported claims.
“Swampfox” Braidfute it is indeed a compliment to be called “biggoted against …racists.” Do you have a clue what either word means? Go back to the swamp you oozed out of!
on April 28th, 2011 at 3:18 pm
I am so laughing at all the dumb trolls. A few regulars pretty much lambasted you people, but I want to join in on the fun. To the guy who was talking about the civil rights movement and MLK, Jr., you are obviously a race baiter by saying Obama got his Nobel Peace Prize for his blackness. How nice. He didn’t deserve, but given your views, you don’t very intellectual. I guess the idea of blacks and other non-whites being able to vote, sit in a bus where ever they want, and going to any store is offensive to you.
As for the SPLC, how are they hating? Are they promoting a mythical idea of superiority? Give me a break. And yes, many of these birthers simply cannot stand that a black (or biracial) man named Barack Hussein Obama II is president of the United States. That is the truth, Ruth.
on April 28th, 2011 at 3:22 pm
@aadila
Apologize for what? Why should anyone apologize for demanding equal treatment?
on April 28th, 2011 at 3:25 pm
“No amount of finger pointing, name calling, or sarcastic remarks changes the fact that President Obama didn’t, until today, provide any evidence that he was a natural born citizen.”
Incorrect. Obama provided his normal birth certificate, and the long form was verified by the governor and secretary of health of Hawaii long ago. In addition to this, the announcements of his birth in Hawaii were also released around that time. Of course the birthers all became instant civil clerks who insisted that the certificate of live birth which was released wasn’t sufficient. Strange because he used it to get a passport, as did I with my own birth certificate.
If you never bothered to look any of that info up, it’s on you.
on April 28th, 2011 at 3:28 pm
Ruslan more than a million dollars is the kind of “worthless” prize I would gladly accept. Not to mention being in the company of the likes of henry Kissinger :-)
on April 28th, 2011 at 3:31 pm
Let’s call the Birthers what they are…Loony Tunes.
Obama has released the original long form birth certificate, the medical document with his little footyprints on it.
The birthers will probably contest the validity of this document and try to drag this out indefinitely.
Birthers are loony tunes. Not mainstream.
on April 28th, 2011 at 3:35 pm
As usual, Mark Potok has hit the nail on the head. The birthers ARE DAMNED SURE RACISTS, whether you racist-deniers want to keep denying it or not. ANYONE who continues to espouse “birtherism” is ANTI-American – the worst sort out there.
on April 28th, 2011 at 3:39 pm
“I want to know why Pres. Obama didn’t produce the document”
He did. The Obama campaign posted his short form birth certificate before the election. The short form is all he legally had to produce to prove his US citizenship.
Now he’s produced the original long form as well, to finally put this Birther nonsense to rest where it belongs.
on April 28th, 2011 at 3:40 pm
Mark, I do not know if Trump is a racist. He has not said anything overtly to confirm the charge. Trump knows himself and we only know the public Trump. I have never been able to understand how persons can deny something which has been conclusively proved before. It is certain that Trump is a gambler and enjoys his “victory” about coercing President Obama into making his birth certificate public. Trump, the chronic compulsive gambler, is “upping the ante” by his subsequent harping on our president’s scholastic record. Trump sells gambling and entertainment. I consider Trump’s antics to be political comedy but I am also sad that our president was bullied into doing it. I think President Obama acted with wisdom and openness throughout his campaign and continues on that path. Trump is like a vacuum cleaner salesman who barges into your home and dumps dirt on your floor to prove to you he can solve all your problems that he caused.
on April 28th, 2011 at 3:52 pm
@Ruslan Amirkhanov
The Governor of Hawaii has no bearing whatsoever in Federal politics. If this were a State issue specific to Hawaii, then you would be correct; but because this is a Federal issue specific to U.S. Congress, your comment has no bearing whatsoever.
The process is very clear: Congress vets who potential candidates based on a very strict set of rules. Those rules must be followed by everyone *at the time of application* for candidacy.
You might ask yourself, Hhow could Congress allow this process to be violated?”
The answer is simple. The Democrats abdicated their responsibility to properly validate their choice. Whether this was intentional or not, ignoring the rules doesn’t exempt you from them.
Now that the WhiteHouse has released his long-form birth certificate, Congress should take this opportunity to validate it, as they should have done in the first place.
If they find the long-form certificate to be in proper order, we can get on with life. If they find it to be not in proper order the drama will continue.
on April 28th, 2011 at 3:52 pm
So were all racists, huh? Funny, blacks comprise only 15% of the population and yet Obama won the Presidency. Go figure.
As I’ve said many times before, I would have voted for Colin Powell over anyone. And guess what? He is black.
But the Left insist on calling me a racist because I didnt feel Obama qualified to lead the nation. Give me someone with management experience, please, not a community organizer. Well, were all paying for it now with a mumbo jumbo foreign policy, and not much of a leadership presence at the wheel of the ship.
on April 28th, 2011 at 3:55 pm
Some say every presidential candidate had to produce his birth certificate. President Obama is the first one have heard of being asked to do so. Someone else said John McCain was the only one who produced his birth certificate and he was born in Panama to American parents. Barack Obama was born in Hawaii to an American mother. The Swift Boaters won’t give up; they will keep on distracting us from focusing on the real problems the country faces.
on April 28th, 2011 at 3:56 pm
When was the last time a white presidents birth certificate was challenged as being altered?
on April 28th, 2011 at 3:57 pm
Daniel,
Obama did provide evidence that he was a natural born citizen, it is not his fault that you and others like you are ignorant of how individual states handle records of birth, nor is it his fault that you do not understand which documents, from which states, are able to meet official requirements.
Face it, nothing that Obama has done or will do will convince the fringe, to which you apparently belong, that the man legitimately won an election against his “white” opponent. The birther movement was ridiculous from day one, and its time to admit that whatever tiny shred of credibility it could claim has collapsed.
Dick Lancaster,
A great many people on the “left” also believe that Obama’s receipt of the Nobel Peace Prize was unjustified by deeds, and for that matter don’t have a particularly high opinion of Obama or his policies. This has nothing to do with whether or not the man’s presidency is legitimate.
In any case, you hardly seem in a position to accuse Mark of clouded judgement when in the same post you essentially admit that you believe that all peer-reviewed social sciences have a liberal bias. I suppose one thing to do when prevented with overwhelming evidence is to accuse academia itself of being pro-Obama, but I do wonder if there are any specific methodological or logical flaws in the article Mark cites that you would like to draw our attention to. Have you even read it?
on April 28th, 2011 at 4:03 pm
I like others was somewhat disappointed that Mr. Obama saw fit to release the document – but only to the extent that, as expected, Trump and those if his ilk would take credit for “Calling ‘him’ out”. Now, many of those who were so vocal in the “birther movement” are crawfishing and back-peddling, saying that they are glad it is over…BULL! President Obama did what he thought was best for the country…which is a hell-of-a-lot more than any of the “birthers”can say. Kudos to our President… a man who stands head and shoulders above all his birther critics!
on April 28th, 2011 at 4:04 pm
I have been calling it racism since President Obama came onto the scene in 2008 and Sarah Palin followed with instant fear mongering and race baiting. I’m sick to death of those who say it has nothing to do with race! It has EVERYTHING to do with race and has from the very beginning. I blame the media as much as I do the sick racist and corporate whore mongers like Sarah Palin and Donald Trump because they allowed these people to be their train wreck for ratings. Fox News gave all of them a platform as well as pushed the whole notion that the President was “different”, he must be hiding something and the rest of the media jumped on the band wagon!
Francis Marion Braidfute I’m sorry but you don’t know what the h*** you are talking about. The birthers, teabag republicans do NOT admit to being racist, in fact quite the opposite. The real situation in this Country is the lack of honesty about it and the fact that “this racist movement” has brought the KKK out into the light of day, whereas their was a time when they only came out after dark, hidden under sheets. They have been given permission to be the hateful, racist they are, while the ones who don’t wear sheets can now agree, but immediately deny if caught!
on April 28th, 2011 at 4:30 pm
“In regards to my triumph over the frequently seen intellectual phony who slipped up with the undignified “dude” word, let me say this: If one doesn’t know he is a racist, he can only be a racist when others assign him that label.”
Triumph? Dick, please. I almost feel like conceding this to you just because I have to pity someone who announces his “triumph” on a blog comments section.
If I am an intellectual phony, as you claim, then by all means show me how. Hic Rhodus, hic salta, dude.
Now to address your typical conservative talking point, it is entirely possible for one to be racist without actually realizing it, and that’s the kind of racism that annoys people the most. It is possible to be unconsciously racist because:
1. Racism isn’t just about the intention of the speaker, but also the perception of the listener or viewer.
2. Racism is largely based on prejudices people hold, which build up over time.
In regards to #1, anybody can say or do something racist, but this does not mean that all such actions are equal. Yes, someone could theoretically be too sensitive, or maybe just misunderstand someone’s words. On the other hand, the reality of race and white privilege means that many white people tend not to think about race as much as minorities, and thus do not consider any racial connotations of their comments.
Since you were unable to spot your racist comment in the post I responded to, it was your assertion that Obama was given the Nobel prize for his “blackness”. This presupposes that blackness is favored in America, despite the fact that virtually EVERY sociological or economic survey or study says the exact opposite, i.e. that “blackness” is actually a detriment in US society, not some advantage. A perfect example are the various studies which showed that applicants with “black sounding” names are far less likely to receive call backs on their job applications than white applicants, despite having equal or better qualifications. If “blackness” was some kind of path to all kinds of perks and privileges, those companies in the studies should have been falling over themselves to call back those applicants with names like Tyrone Jackson.
Also, the Nobel Peace prize is an international prize. So even if “blackness” were some kind of advantage in America, it should make little difference on the international scene.
So while there are HUGE arguments against Obama getting the Nobel, you picked one which has no validity, and happened to be based on race. I am no psychologist, but I would recommend you ask yourself why you came to the conclusion that Obama won because he was black. Why do you feel that “blackness” equals free handouts? Be honest as to whether or not you have some kind of resentment towards blacks.
on April 28th, 2011 at 4:36 pm
“So were all racists, huh? Funny, blacks comprise only 15% of the population and yet Obama won the Presidency. Go figure.”
For the record, there were two choices, and the other side picked a blithering moron for a running-mate. That didn’t help the McCain team.
“But the Left insist on calling me a racist because I didnt feel Obama qualified to lead the nation.”
Uh…who exactly? Is the Left a person? Yes, race is a factor in why some people didn’t vote for Obama, whether they admit it or not, but this article is not claiming that people who didn’t vote for Obama were racist.
In terms of voting, the racism charge probably best applies to those who were strongly opposed to McCain, yet still voted for him despite all this.
“Give me someone with management experience, please, not a community organizer. ”
Oh you mean like Sarah Palin? Yeah, choosing that running mate sure killed the “experience” argument pretty quickly.
“Well, were all paying for it now with a mumbo jumbo foreign policy, and not much of a leadership presence at the wheel of the ship.”
Well the foreign policy is definitely screwed up, but par for the course as far as America goes.
on April 28th, 2011 at 4:55 pm
I don’t know whether any other respondents have said this already, but I’d like to suggest that racism and anti-liberalism are hardly mutually exclusive and I think it impractical to choose just one. The other factor left out here is the force of conservative Christians (black and white) that are not only afraid of Obama’s liberalism and intellectual open-mindedness, but deathly afraid that he might actually be a Muslim who will order another 9/11 (in the extreme) or bring the wrath of God on this nation somehow because he doesn’t go to church EVERY single Sunday. (I would note that Rev. Franklin Graham has said that D Trump has more integrity than Obama and he apparently doesn’t object to the Donald’s level of Christianity, even though Trump only goes to church when he can and his morals are far more questionable!) Strong case for racism if I ever saw one…
The challenge that this president faces that no other president has ever had to face is that he embodies so many things that “scare” mostly white, but not exclusively white, conservative Christians: his skin is brown, he’s racially mixed, he’s extremely intelligent, well-educated, likable and attractive, he’s a liberal thinker who humbly believes there’s more than one path to God, and he’s not anti-gay or anti-Muslim. Mr. Obama not only has to solve all of this country’s problems yesterday, but he also has to overcome overt and covert racism, xenophobia and my-God-is-the-only-true-God-because-the-Bible-tells-me-so conservative Christians who, out of some delusional sense of entitlement, believe the president is there for THEIR benefit and pleasure, forget everyone else. Pretty tall order!
on April 28th, 2011 at 5:17 pm
The biggest racist organization I have seen to date is the poorly named Southern Poverty Law Center and a definite racist and hate-monger is Mark Potok. I read these blogs, and watch his interviews on you tube. According to them, If you speak out against the president, you are automatically a racist, If you speak out with concerns about the policies of B.S.O, by questioning his statements or the current government or if you are a member of the tea party, you are either a racist or a nutcase.
According to them, If you believe in the constitution and support the bill of rights, you are a homegrown terrorist. Every militia/tea party in the united states is filled with evil, white men bent on killing innocents and creating chaos. If you do not agree with Potok and the SPLC then you must be an evil racist, because that is the only possible reason you would not agree with them.
I belong to the tea party. I think every member of congress should be held accountable for their actions while in congress. If I am dissatisfied with them, I vote to remove them in my local election. I will do the same thing in the presidental election. I do not think B.H.O. is a proper representative for the U.S. and her citizens. His poor record dealing with our allies and his foriegn policies are the reasons I dislike him and think he should be removed from office, either by impeachment or in the next election.
God save the USA.
on April 28th, 2011 at 5:23 pm
If the short form was all that was needed, why did Obama release a long form now? Is is a political move?
on April 28th, 2011 at 5:29 pm
“The biggest racist organization I have seen to date is the poorly named Southern Poverty Law Center and a definite racist and hate-monger is Mark Potok.”
Please demonstrate this alleged racism of the SPLC and Mr. Potok. SOURCES!!! FOR THE LOVE OF GOD CAN I GET SOME SOURCES FOR ONCE!!
I am sick and tired of conservatives popping in and saying something like “these are the most racist, hateful people ever,” and then not even elaborating on the statement. Comments sections like this are for debate and discussion- this is not Youtube or Yahoo. BRING THE PAIN!!!
“I read these blogs, and watch his interviews on you tube. According to them, If you speak out against the president, you are automatically a racist, If you speak out with concerns about the policies of B.S.O, by questioning his statements or the current government or if you are a member of the tea party, you are either a racist or a nutcase.”
LINKS!! SOURCES!!! For once in my life I’d like to see a conservative on this blog actually back up their claims about others with some links or something.
I and many other posters have routinely spoken out against Obama countless times. None of us have been called racist. I have also castigated Obama in numerous other venues; never have I been called racist for doing so.
If speaking out against the president is what brands you a racist, why am I not getting called racist and you are.
“According to them, If you believe in the constitution and support the bill of rights, you are a homegrown terrorist.”
According to them means that they actually say this somewhere. LINK PLEASE!
“Every militia/tea party in the united states is filled with evil, white men bent on killing innocents and creating chaos. If you do not agree with Potok and the SPLC then you must be an evil racist, because that is the only possible reason you would not agree with them.”
AGAIN, LINK PLEASE!
“I belong to the tea party. I think every member of congress should be held accountable for their actions while in congress. If I am dissatisfied with them, I vote to remove them in my local election.”
How much scrutiny do you give to Republican candidates?
Where were you to protest out of control spending during the Bush administration?
” I will do the same thing in the presidental election. I do not think B.H.O. is a proper representative for the U.S. and her citizens.”
Why not?
“His poor record dealing with our allies and his foriegn policies are the reasons I dislike him and think he should be removed from office, either by impeachment or in the next election.”
Obama has done nothing warranting impeachment. Please explain his poor record dealing with America’s allies? He is on good terms with France, the UK, Germany, and pretty much the whole EU. He is also on good terms with Russia, and regardless of whether or not you like it(or the Russians for that matter), Russia and the US are allies in every practical sense.
What I don’t see is criticism of Obama’s expansion of the war, and this new debacle in Libya. http://stpeteforpeace.org/obama.html
on April 28th, 2011 at 5:32 pm
Bob,
Please explain what Obama has done that is an impeachable offense. (other than being black)
on April 28th, 2011 at 5:35 pm
I have the feeling that racism is the motive behind many of the radical right. Many of their supporters are overt racists. However, I do not want to fall into their trap by making an accusation without foundation. If I do that, I place myself in the same disagreeable category as them. I rely on their talent to alienate and lose support. It may be the idea is “hate racism and not the racist”. I think Dr. Martin Luther King promoted the philosophy of my summary phrase.
There is the precedent of a false accusation against a president. Robert Welch, the founder of the John Birch Society claimed that President Eisenhower was a communist in his book The Politician (1958). Welch’s false accusation backfired. Welch and his society were repudiated and ridiculed. They were the forerunners of the nuts of the Republican Tea(se) party.
God save our United States from dumb radicals of the right. If you study Jesus, he seems more like a left wing liberal revolutionary than anything else.
on April 28th, 2011 at 5:46 pm
I disagree with some policies Obama has like sending more troops to the stalemate of a war in Afghanistan, a war the United States and NATO cannot win. But from reading some of the comments, some are out of this world. The birther crap is a myth. Period. It’s a myth just like the “9/11 was an inside job” nonsense. It’s not about speaking against the president’s policies. I’ve spoken against his policies. If you want to discredit him, attack his policies. By the way, Bob, if you want to know what a race and hatemonger, look at the dumb white nationalists. And how is pointing certain elements, not all, certain elements in the US population that indeed are bigots? I know there are Tea Party members who don’t like Obama because of his policies. Nothing wrong with that. But there are some that don’t like him for ethnic reasons. If you can’t see that, you’re out of this world. Oh, and the black population in the US is 12%.
on April 28th, 2011 at 5:47 pm
Jenelle, Obama released the long form to shut up the birthers, at least the ones that are reasonable.
on April 28th, 2011 at 5:53 pm
Good point, Ruslan. Why did Obama decide to get involved in Libya? It’s not our fight.
on April 28th, 2011 at 5:59 pm
Stephen D. Calhoun,
interesting that you say Trump never said anything that would indicate he’s a racist. How about when Meg Whitman was busted over her ‘illegal immigrant (as you guys would call them),’ Trump said he would do away with all ‘illegal immigration.’ How about the public spat he had with/about Rosie O’Donnell?
Please explain how would doing away with Latino immigrants, but not European immigrants (as he has brought in his wives, which makes me wonder if he only wants European maids/housekeepers/babysitters/cooks…) not be considered discriminatory? In addition, please do explain how the argument with Rosie O’Donnell not be seen as discriminatory toward the LGBT community, as well as her weight not seen as discriminatory toward people who may just be big-boned, or medical issues such as diabetes/thyroid…?
As far as I’m concerned he’s a tea bandit – trying to steal the show/credit, and may be trying to get corporate donations for his campaign. Afterall, he does like, no, he loves the idea of ‘Other People’s Money.’
What’s interesting here, what some of the folks don’t understand, the corporations are putting money behind these folks making the outrageous claims to advance their own cause/agenda. That cause is to quicken our status to a third world country, destroy what little democracy we have left. Some of you may also need to view the documentary, “Thunder in Guyana,” which shows how turning the population against each other to effect elections – oh, they are part of the way there by getting a status of a person, using people to help destroy unions… yet, no one is looking at the $1 million+ insurance policies that CEO/COO/CFO/BOD’s get, in addition to getting million dollar salaries, paid home alarm monitoring service, paid moving expenses, paid golf club membership, paid drivers-free use of company aircraft…it should be noted that Board of Directors meet from 2-7 times a year and make a minimum of $100k, but, they usually sit on more than one board, in addition to be CEO/VP…of other corporations.
on April 28th, 2011 at 6:05 pm
Leslie, I’ll give you an impeachable offense. The President is sworn to protect the citizens and defend the Constitution (the precise wording eludes me, but you know what I mean.)
So when The State of Arizona passes a law to enforce our existing immigration laws – something the Federal government has not seen fit to do – Obama-meister SUES the State of Arizona!!! I believe this to be an impeachable offense, although I expect that Ruslan will quickly set me to rights.
on April 28th, 2011 at 6:06 pm
This birther stuff is just plain crap and all who stick by it are morons. Now as for Trump and the claims of Obama being a “terrible student” not only lack evidence, but he is trying to set up a claim that Obama was only admitted to Ivy league schools due to affirmative action. This doesn’t work for multiple reasons 1. Ivy League schools are private so affirmative action has never entered into it as they are free to develop their own criteria. 2, ALL colleges seek to boost their academic prestige by seeking geographic diversity and Obama is from Hawaii originally and lived many places afterward so that worked in his favor. He had to have had good scores and good letters of recommendation and he had to have been a good student just to have done as well as he did after he was admitted. People often forget that just because a college takes you it does not mean that they have to keep you.
Bush was no better than an average student yet he got into Yale on his Daddy’s name and while he was there he only got Cs.
We could do away with all of the fools who spout the birther, sovereign and tea party crap with one simple thing : An intelligence test requirement for running for office. If you don’t have the brains you can’t even run for dog catcher. That would get rid of the Palin, Bachmann, Huckabee, Trump and a whole host of others. It would also protect states from the curse of the entertainers. California has been cursed with it twice, Indiana is suffering because they caught the celebrities in office bug with Pence and MN got it with a wrestler. You can be a celeb and run for office if you can prove you’re smart enough to handle it.
on April 28th, 2011 at 6:16 pm
You are absolutely right.Back in 2008 I encountered racism towards Obama when I campaigned for him on the phone. I remember one person referred to him as “the Devil” but I knew what he really wanted to call him. I was hopeful that this bigot was just a rare crank. With the rise of the Tea Party and the Birthers I have been disgusted and sickened to realize that these people calling themselves Americans are strongly invested in their racism. It is a disgrace and shames us as a people and as a supposed “free” and democratic country.
on April 28th, 2011 at 6:21 pm
“the miserable state legislators hawking their snake-oil laws insisting that presidential candidates prove their citizenship”
Yes, lets DO call them what they are – folks who think we should follow the rules that made this nation great for a couple hunderd years! The racist do-do is an excuse to avoid the real topic, what is the man’s background? So we have a BC, now where are the tax records and school records. Why are they sealed? Do you think you can even get a passport after sealing all your records? What a bunch of double standard CRAP!
on April 28th, 2011 at 7:08 pm
Wouldn’t it be a lot easier and more efficient for the SPLC to just have a list of who in America is not a racist, bigot, prejudice, hate monger, nativist ?
I’ve been following the SPLC well over ten years now and I would say only 10 % of the Caucasians in America haven’t been labeled by the SPLC of being one of the above. It’s as if your not a person of color or a white extreme radical leftist, you must be a racist.
If the SPLC would just have a list of who’s not a racist or bigot, the SPLC could cut their staff by 95 % and cut their overhead by 90 %. Business 101.
on April 28th, 2011 at 7:08 pm
I can substantiate that Ruslan won on all counts.
on April 28th, 2011 at 7:10 pm
The problem we sane people face is the fact that this will NOT go away. If the document is not his birth certificate, it’s going to be his college education, and if that is proved, then it will be something from Chicago…whatever it takes to destroy this presidency, without regard to the incredible benefits the Obama administration is attempting to bring to the table to solve some very difficult times.
I voted for a visionary leader, not a “black” visionary leader, just an inspirational man who seemed to have a vision to get us out of the destructive and vindictive politics of Bush. I have never seen Mr. Obama as “black” or “mixed race”, I have seen him as our leader, a disappointing leader at times, for not showing some chutzpa against the Republican gutter politicians, but…still…our leader.
I find it fascinating that the vomit from Palin, DeMint, and all the rest of the slimy snakes gets traction. Their lies carry more weight than the truth ever carries, thus this birther bull has lasted as long as it has.
My only wish, that Trump gets the nomination, that way I am assured that Mr. Obama will be re-elected…by a landslide.
Oh, by the way, I think Trump is an ucken fidiot!!!
on April 28th, 2011 at 7:21 pm
No matter how many times his birth certificate is shown, or verified by those who were actually there, there will still be those who are going to question it’s authenticity. GOD himself could come down here & tell them personally, and they’d STILL have doubts.
on April 28th, 2011 at 7:46 pm
President Obama would not think of telling Trump, Palin, and the rest of those blow-hards this, I will be more than happy to do it for him:
KISS MY AZZ, you haters.
on April 28th, 2011 at 7:50 pm
These tea-baggers, birthers, and other white people want all black people born here and came here to know that we are not yet citizens of America, and never will be. We need to get use to that. We will never be accepted in America, yet we build it. America does not belong to the white man either, he took it. So, why are they crying foul. Where would any of us go if the Indians suddenly rise up and take their lands back. At least black people may be welcomed in Africa. White people, where will you go.
on April 28th, 2011 at 7:55 pm
Leslie,
He consulted the UN for military action against Libya, consulted NATO and the Arab League for military action against Libya, but totally forgot about the US Congress! Additionally, he expanded the murderous war in Afghanistan (which is, in actuality, a war on civilians) into Pakistan, whose government is a ‘US ally’ (but created the Taliban and continues to fund them anyway). This isn’t ending Bush’s war, it’s putting eloquent speech and a friendly face to Bush’s gunboat diplomacy. Sen. Dennis Kucinich, a true democrat, wants to impeach Obama over this. Unlike the conservative anti-Obama people, who never brought up the failures of the Bush administration while it was virtually shredding the constitution, Kucinich is not being hypocritical or selective (there’s no evidence that he’s racist, either).
on April 28th, 2011 at 8:24 pm
Nonsense; Obama is the one who created the whole ridiculous mess by refusing to release the document when first requested. No other modern presidential candidate has worked so hard to conceal who he was and is from the American public; the guy is like a full-blown Nixon from the time he was in the cradle. I know a lot of “birthers” and the irriation that they have is not born of animus but frustration at Mr. Transparency’s duplicity.
on April 28th, 2011 at 9:09 pm
Trump read “somewhere” that Obama was not a good student. I read “somewhere” Trump was not a good husband.
Persentage of wives who could legally run for President by Obama. 100%
Percentage of wives who could run for president by Trump. 33%
on April 28th, 2011 at 10:32 pm
Birtherism has always been about racism and bigotry, and NEVER about a birth certificate.
on April 29th, 2011 at 12:27 am
If this article is true, how do you square the fact that I voted for Alan Keyes twice am also a birther?
on April 29th, 2011 at 2:37 am
This thread is awesome. To use Marine Major James Devereux’s famous misquotation: “SEND MORE CONSERVATIVES!”
on April 29th, 2011 at 8:34 am
Nearly every comment from every poster makes the mistake of blanket condemnation of the now stereotypical TeaBagger-type ‘RightWinger’, as if those in their own rank and file tend toward racism individually. I don’t believe that this it necessarily true. I’ve always been encouraged to ‘follow the money’ in order to sort out the origins of a mass movement such as the ‘birthers’ and others in the Tea Bag Fraternity. Who has all the money? Probably just the relative handful of the Coors family, the Koch Brothers, the Scaife-Mellon family, the Brown Brothers, the DuPonts, JP Morgan, and all the others in the Vast Right Wing conspiracy. This ‘conspiracy’ does NOT encompass any of the Rank and File. Their allegiance is simply bought and paid for by the aforementioned moneyed interests. I think the quest for the origins of ‘their’ racism will be found in there and not out in the streets. Just my opinion.
on April 29th, 2011 at 8:42 am
Jonas Rand said congress was not consulted about Libya.
S.RES.85 — Whereas Muammar Gadhafi and his regime have engaged in gross and systematic violations of human rights, including violent attacks on protesters demanding democratic reforms, that have… (Agreed to Senate – ATS)
Senate resolution 85 passed mar1, 2011 by unanimous consent and gives the President the authority to work with the United Nations to help the Libyan opposition. Every Senator voted yes to allow this.
on April 29th, 2011 at 9:11 am
@ Louis Stouch
The governor of Arizona, Jan Brewer, vetoed the birther bill would require all candidates show their long form birth certificate. Should she also be impeached?
on April 29th, 2011 at 9:36 am
So, according to the far-left Mark Potok, people like Sarah Palin are racists for not being Obama groupies as is Potok. Thanks Mark for yet another demonstration of how incredibly far to the left you are.
on April 29th, 2011 at 9:48 am
Ranger…………..
Obama is the one who created the whole ridiculous mess by refusing to release the document when first requested. No other modern presidential candidate has worked so hard to conceal who he was and is from the American public………………
Alright Leftists calling us all racists, why dont you address this perfectly legit comment?
Well, what, no defense, no rebuttal? No of course not, cause you know its perefectly TRUE. Your hypocrisy makes me sick – you’ve got no answer except were racists.
on April 29th, 2011 at 9:56 am
You guys blew it on this one. Birthers and others who don’t want to see Obama back in the White House are not inherently racist. I was not enamoured with Obama in the beginning and, frankly, voted for him because McCain chose Palin and that was the final straw. No I’m not sexist- I would have preferred Hillary over Obama. Choosing a young new shining star just because he made a good speech at the convention just wasn’t enough reason for someone to be president in my book. I want someone else in the White House and you’re going to say it’s because I’m racist. I agree that the issue of the birth certificate is a non-issue and is being used politically. But now you’re going to go to the race conspiracy theory, which is nonsense. Most of the country liked the idea that Obama was Black and made it to the presidency. His Blackness was part of what got him elected, not the opposite. You need to watch your hate, Hatewatch.
on April 29th, 2011 at 10:56 am
You said “any black man could be smart enough on his own to get into Columbia University, go on to Harvard Law School, become an editor and then president of the prestigious Harvard Law Review, and then graduate magna cum laude.” If that IS the case, present us with the PROOF… Betcha can’t provide a modicum of proof to substantiate chronic running off at the mouth…
on April 29th, 2011 at 11:07 am
Yes indeed most of the country liked Obama though I suspect it was often in spite of his blackness rather than because of it. Perhaps one of the fools who is posting nonsense on this thread would be good enough to point out a comment by Mark Potok or the SPLC suggesting that anyone who opposes Mr. Obama is a racist as most “birthers” undeniably are.
ADM I seriously doubt that the president thought making his birth certificate available would “shut up the birthers” none of whom were ever reasonable. It has, however, been very effective in emphasizing just how loony they are.
Louis Stouch thanks for confirming my opinion that you are a moron as well as a racist and Islamophobe. Clearly any attempt to have a rational discussion with you is wasted.
God save the USA from the likes of Bob!
on April 29th, 2011 at 11:09 am
Drt Miner perhaps you could proofread and repost. Your post is utterly unintelligible.
on April 29th, 2011 at 11:57 am
There is a guy on twitter who said that because the pen used on the birth certificate was not invented until 1980 the birth certificate is not authentic. He doesn’t explain how he knows what kind of pen was used. The nut cases will not give up. Wow, this is so entertaining.
on April 29th, 2011 at 12:09 pm
So, Drt Miner is another one of these fools who believe in the myth of superiority. Sounds like he hates himself. You do know there are black students and professors at Ivy League schools, right? I’m not saying they’re better than blacks who don’t attend Ivy League schools because they’re not. I’m just saying there are actual black professors and students at Ivy League schools. Jonathan Hall, Obama was elected by blacks, whites, Asians, etc. because the people were sick of Bush, Jr. and really he could change. Him being black didn’t matter to many, even though they knew his election would be historic. As I said before, if you cannot realize that some people in the US don’t like Obama because of his ethnic background, then there’s a bridge in NYC I want to sell to you.
on April 29th, 2011 at 1:04 pm
“Nonsense; Obama is the one who created the whole ridiculous mess by refusing to release the document when first requested. No other modern presidential candidate has worked so hard to conceal who he was and is from the American public; the guy is like a full-blown Nixon from the time he was in the cradle.”
LOL WUT
Obama released the same birth certificate which everyone needs to obtain a passport a LONG time ago. How many other candidates were required to release all forms of their birth certificate before.
As I said, they demand the certificate, they get it and move the goal posts by demanding the long form. They get the long form, they either move the goal posts again by claiming it’s forged, or they start whining about how he’s hurting the country by doing this.
on April 29th, 2011 at 1:08 pm
“Leslie, I’ll give you an impeachable offense. The President is sworn to protect the citizens and defend the Constitution (the precise wording eludes me, but you know what I mean.)
So when The State of Arizona passes a law to enforce our existing immigration laws – something the Federal government has not seen fit to do – Obama-meister SUES the State of Arizona!!! I believe this to be an impeachable offense, although I expect that Ruslan will quickly set me to rights”
Indeed, Stouch, I am at your service. You are correct that Obama, like other public servants, is sworn to defend the Constitution. However, that same constitution says that States don’t have the right to pass immigration policy, as it is in the realm of the federal government. The law itself also violates the Constitution, as there is no way in hell it could possibly be applied equally. Does anyone believe for a second that ordinary white Americans would be required to show proof of immigration status? No. But could a Hispanic American be so required? Yes.
on April 29th, 2011 at 1:14 pm
” I want someone else in the White House and you’re going to say it’s because I’m racist. I agree that the issue of the birth certificate is a non-issue and is being used politically. But now you’re going to go to the race conspiracy theory, which is nonsense. Most of the country liked the idea that Obama was Black and made it to the presidency. His Blackness was part of what got him elected, not the opposite. You need to watch your hate, Hatewatch”
Again, who said being against Obama or his policies makes you racist? I have repeatedly spoken out against Obama from the beginning of the campaign, and not one person ever called me racist, despite the fact that I am white. Ever wonder why that is?
Here’s a hint: I don’t claim Obama won because he is black, as if “blackness” is some wonderful power which brings all sorts of privileges. Virtually EVERY scientific sociological study shows that being black in America exposes one to all kinds of discrimination and other negative results. If people are calling you racist, here’s why: You insinuate that Obama won because of some non-existent black privilege, and that it had nothing to do with:
A. People being so fed up with Bush that they decided to vote Democrat.
B. His opponent was never very popular with conservatives, he had been stabbed in the back by the GOP insiders in 2000 and 2008, and he picked a babbling moron for a running mate.
There were the two choices. The guy who couldn’t even excite his base, with a moron for a running mate, and the other guy who, due to his relatively short political career, didn’t have a huge amount of political baggage.
Oh but it just COULDN’T have anything to do with that right? It must have been because he was BLACK! Of course.
on April 29th, 2011 at 1:19 pm
This quote from Lee Atwater explains the racism behind things like Birtherism. In conservative fantasy land, the white conservative always gets to define what’s racist. If it’s not overt racism, fitting the criteria Mr. white conservative provides, then it can’t be considered racist and anyone who thinks otherwise is not only overly-sensitive, but is a REAL racist. Sure. Anyway, here’s the quote:
“You start out in 1954 by saying, ‘N****r, n****r, n****r.’ By 1968 you can’t say (that)—that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states’ rights and all that stuff. You’re getting so abstract now [that] you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites.”
on April 29th, 2011 at 1:31 pm
Dale Launer blogged on April 28th at 2:04 PM about the right wing nuts hating liberals, all liberals and anything remotely liberal. Unfortunately, I have not been able to bask in the glow of the love emanating towards conservatives, all conservatives and anything remotely conservative from liberals, nuts or otherwise. The radical fringes of both ideologies are indeed nuts and are full of it. Also, Mr/Ms Launer commented about the hate directed towards Presidents Obama and Clinton, but inadvertently I’m sure, failed to include the hate directed towards President Bush. Not very balanced, sir/madam.
on April 29th, 2011 at 1:40 pm
Ruslan said
“The law itself also violates the Constitution, as there is no way in hell it could possibly be applied equally. Does anyone believe for a second that ordinary white Americans would be required to show proof of immigration status? No. But could a Hispanic American be so required? Yes.”
That is why when I travel to Arizona I wear my t-shirt that says, “I only look Canadian.”
on April 29th, 2011 at 2:32 pm
@Tango4
Mr. Mission Accomplished was never forced to publish his long form birth certificate in the newspaper. False equivalency.
on April 29th, 2011 at 2:35 pm
so hillary clinton who started the birth certificate issue should be lumped in with the hateful remarks above. she started on this. and well she should have—have none of you even read the constitution that is our document of government. i doubt it. without it, we would be living in your socialist heaven, where you certainly would not be “allowed” to say all that you have said above. morons!!!
on April 29th, 2011 at 2:45 pm
“Hispanics” WERE ordinary white Americans as well as ordinary black Americans until the early 70s when the Nixon Administration invented the new catagory. Thus many white folks could now enjoy minority status and the percentage of whites could decline.
Today’s ordinary white American is not likely to be asked for immigration papers because 20 million of them are not jumping the Canadian border insisting they be immune from immigration laws, provided welfare and jobs and accomidated in the French language. If that were the case, I wouldn’t wear a beret.
on April 29th, 2011 at 2:45 pm
Leslie, you inspired me to quote the Simpsons,
Amendment to be: “…But if we change the Constitution…”
Boy: “….then we can make all kinds of crazy laws!”
on April 29th, 2011 at 3:13 pm
@Dick Lancaster
So the Mexicans of European descent should get a free pass? When I lived there my next door neighbors were originally from Germany and spoke fluent Spanish.
on April 29th, 2011 at 3:17 pm
““Hispanics” WERE ordinary white Americans as well as ordinary black Americans until the early 70s when the Nixon Administration invented the new catagory. Thus many white folks could now enjoy minority status and the percentage of whites could decline.”
Back to fail again huh? Many Hispanic people are of European descent, and yes people fail to take this into account when they lament(or even celebrate) the demographic changes of 2050. But you yourself claim that these people are white, so how does that really mean the percentage of whites actually declined? Only on paper if anything.
“Today’s ordinary white American is not likely to be asked for immigration papers because 20 million of them are not jumping the Canadian border insisting they be immune from immigration laws, provided welfare and jobs and accomidated in the French language. If that were the case, I wouldn’t wear a beret.”
Ok, let’s break down this failed argument into it’s independent, failing components.
1. The problem with the law is that to be Constitutional, it has to be applied equally. The problem is by your own admission, people who are of Mexican or Latino descent, even if they have been citizens for generations, will sometimes be suspected of not being a legal immigrant. This would NEVER happen to a white person, and you know this. Ergo, the law would not be applied equally.
2. If undocumented workers were insisting that immigration law doesn’t apply to them, they wouldn’t be crossing the desert in the first place. They’d be lining up at the border checkpoints demanding that the US let them in, perhaps by granting them automatic 90-day tourist visas as the US does with Mexico.
3. Immigrants are not demanding welfare; they are in fact ineligible for what little welfare relief America provides. If you don’t believe me, go to your city’s local welfare office and ask them. Undocumented workers also often use fake SSN numbers, thus paying SS taxes despite the fact that they cannot claim them.
4. These immigrants are not demanding jobs. The businessmen want cheap labor, and are offering the jobs to the lowest bidder. Various economic policies spearheaded by the US have helped keep millions in poverty in Mexico and Latin America, thus creating a motive for immigration.
5. French people are highly unlikely to want to immigrate to the US, much less illegally, as France and Europe in general has higher standards of living than the US. Health statistics are better, education and job prospects are better, people work less and have more free time. By contrast, Americans work more hours for decreasing wages, in unstable jobs with virtually no safety net in most cases- and they blame poor Mexican peasants for this.
on April 29th, 2011 at 3:24 pm
Dick, I also can’t help but wonder if you reflected on any of my other replies to you, as they were intended to help.
Yes, I did ask for proof that the SPLC brands people racist if they didn’t vote for or support Obama(somehow nobody ever accuses me of being racist, despite being white and openly anti-Obama), but I also helped explain why you are perceived as racist by others. And you can see that the same racist implication you made has already been made by others here.
Do you feel some kind of resentment towards blacks, as is implied by your assertion that “blackness” is given all kinds of rewards, such as the Nobel Peace prize or the Oval office?
on April 29th, 2011 at 5:23 pm
dana pallessen I’m so glad you brought up the Constitution. Have you read it? I has nothing at all to say against socialism. In fact it actually encourages it. Right at the top, underneath “We the People,” it says that one of the reasons for ordaining and establishing it is to “promote the general Welfare.” What could be more socialist than Welfare?
Article I Section 8 specifically authorizes Congress “To establish Post Offices and post Roads;” another thoroughly socialist enterprise.
Article IV Section 3 clearly states that “The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States; and nothing in this Constitution shall be so construed as to Prejudice any Claims of the United States, or of any particular State.” Such commonly held property is the very essence of socialism.
Amendment V, “…nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation,” makes it clear that the government may confiscate private property for public use as long as the private owner is justly compensated. How much more socialist can you get?
I’m afraid it is you who is the moron.
on April 29th, 2011 at 9:10 pm
Everyone running for political office has to prove their citizenship, but ask Obama to prove his and its Racism! Playing this race card is really getting old. By the way it was Hilary Clinton that first raised this question during the primaries. I suppose she’s a racist too! And by the way, reasonable people have to ask, why did it take so long for him to release the Birth Certificate?
If most people see him as less than meeting the standards of a true American it’s most probably because of his many ties to the radical American-hating idiots he continues to associate with. He travels the world bowing to leaders of other countries and apologizing for the greatness of America, and for this he gets the Nobel Peace Prize! Please! What a slap in the face to all the worthy winners that came before him. More and more Americans are beginning to genuinely loathe, fear and resent Obama and this administration, and it has nothing to do with race and everything to do with his totally incompetence.
on April 29th, 2011 at 11:11 pm
Here’s the problem I have with some of the comments posted here/complaints about the military budget by conservatives, isn’t it true that conservatives complain that liberals are soft on defense? Isn’t it true that when the Prez said he wanted to end the wars, conservatives/GOP had a vicious public fit? Isn’t it true, that when the Prez wanted to close GITMO, conservatives/GOP had another vicious public fit that we can’t close it, nor can they have trials in the U.S.?
Now, let’s look at what has been said regarding the last admin – see ‘CorpWatch: IRAQ:The Other Army’ in this article at corpwatch.org a private contractor said, “I’m richer than I’ve ever been.” The article/expose’ reported that these contractors make at least $400-$700 a day, some tax-free. At the same time, the Chileans and Fijians make between $40-$150 a week. The point here, why would the wars end if most of the people yelling to continue to it has a strong conservative/GOP stance? Oh, and don’t yell that the Prez could stop this! The conservatives/GOP has raised roaring hell over everything he tries to do, for instance, when he said he wanted to reassess the NAFTA/CAFTA agreements. In fact, not only did the conservatives/GOP in this country raise hell about NAFTA/CAFTA but so did officials in Canada and Britain.
As far as immigrants coming to this country – let’s look at Mexico for a second. Most of the factories that you think are still there are now in Asia. In fact, in Tijuana, the corporations had shoddy construction and there are power lines (i.e. municipal) that are lying in the streets, electrocuting children and adults. What’s important about this? Usually when corporations come in, they promise to build infrastructure…well, after they left, they didn’t clean up their mess. You also need to recognize that the corporations are hiring recruiters to go to these countries in search of cheap labor/slave-like working conditions, wages…So, again, it’s not their fault. Look around you, immigrants (and not just Latino immigrants) have more jobs than we do – they didn’t hire themselves, employers do.
on April 30th, 2011 at 10:10 am
Guardian :”Everyone running for political office has to prove their citizenship, but ask Obama to prove his and its Racism!”
He did, and it was not accepted by racists. Simple.
on April 30th, 2011 at 1:03 pm
Mark, undoubtedly many of the “birthers” are motivated by racism, rejection and fear of the “other” and disturbed by the change in the familiar. However, intelligent educated elites on the other side of the ideological debate that pursue this issue are not racists but opportunists who see this as just another tactic to negate and harass a political opponent.
Surely we can all remember the unrelenting attack from the right of the Clinton’s administration, and he a member in good standing of the elite, white males club. Our politics have become so polarized and characterized by a winner take all attitude, that any and all tactics will be used to neutralize and defeat an opponent.
on April 30th, 2011 at 1:19 pm
We’ve gotten a bit off topic and it is useless to continue debate with people that think communism embraces the underclass, that “general welfare” in the Preamble has any thing to do with “welfare state” and confuses “territories” with “states”.
The bottom line we must all consider is what Mark Potok assumes in his article and reinforced by one of my favorite critics and that is birthers are racists.
Race does indeed play a factor in politics largely due to the efforts of the SPLC to invent new waves of it. It also played a sugnificant factor in the last Presidential election because we allow ignorant people to vote who saw the history and novelty of a black president and thus voted for novelty rather than notice he had no depth to his history.
Ignorant voters are the product of our school system, led by outside donors such as SPLC’s Teaching Tolerance. The “tolerance” word in that title is similar to the “people” word in “people’s rebublic”.
If you align your malignant cause with an altruistic and just one, you can lull the people to sleep. This is how the left co-opted the civil rights movement. Thus the left is altruistic and its opponents racist. For all of you intellectuals that support the left and actually believe socialism is an altruistic system, that is historically true only for threatened people. The Israeli Kibbutz is the star example. Buy even the Kibutz had a higher national authority and our own communes disintegrated when the peace loving residents found out some were doing much more work than others to support the group. No national nanny state has ever afforded its people a middle class. We are watching ours disappear.
The opponents you call racists are actually political opponents which you have successfully demonized to equate with racists. It is the one thing I admire about the left–their understanding of the baseness of the human race to be secure. The traditionalists are always at a disadvantage because freedom means the allowance of such malignancies.
Mark’s tirade against racists is typical fare to demonize political opponents and I appaud his success. It is not readily apparent that one can be intellectual, articulate and a complete ignoramus. But scores of them debate me in this forum.
on April 30th, 2011 at 2:03 pm
Dick Lancaster,
I am so sure! I thought we had discussed this before! I’m speaking in reference to immigrants. Remember, I said that some immigration is due to civil unrest/wars – now, look at what’s happening, in what that they label ‘Arab Unrest.’ Do you notice how Italy, France, and Germany are complaining about the number of immigrants seeking refuge! As far as people coming from ‘white’ countries, then why is there no complaints about the policy towards Cuba – our one foot policy, is it because they agree that they don’t like ‘communism,’ or is it because the so-called ‘white’ cubans are just as good as any white person because they look white and not one has any black blood in them? Yes, most of us are aware of this too, that the U.S. brought in a lot of people from Spain/U.S. to ‘whiten up the Cubans.’
But, I will tell you this, the problem I have with the birthers/teas/GOP or anyone that still has so-called conservative views, is their lack of good communication/conflict resolution skills – you guys turn simple problems into major problems. Instead of talking, you bully/intimidate by issuing orders. You don’t listen to anyone – which is very much a part of communication.
I will repeat what I said earlier this month – it is interesting that some white Americans get offended at Latino immigrants waving their country of origin flags, and make statements such as, “how dare they wave their flag here! If they love their country so much they should go back!” Meanwhile, these same people appear to have more loyalty to European countries than America, by making statements such as, “my European ancestors this and that, or they don’t fit in our European world…”
Now, again, it is racism against the Prez. If citizenship or natural born is the problem with everyone, then what are we going to do about the American women going to countries around the globe to adopt babies – surely this is something that should be looked at, especially, when you have an American woman that adopts a Russian little boy, decides he’s not what she wants, then sends him alone, back to Russia!
on April 30th, 2011 at 4:45 pm
“We’ve gotten a bit off topic and it is useless to continue debate with people that think communism embraces the underclass, that “general welfare” in the Preamble has any thing to do with “welfare state” and confuses “territories” with “states”.”
Dick, if we’ve gone off topic it’s because you routinely ignore numerous posts that are directed TO you, often in response to your own questions.
For example, you made an assertion that people accuse those who oppose Obama as being racist. I asked you to show where the SPLC, or anyone here, has been writing thus. I informed you that despite being white, and openly opposed to Obama, nobody ever even implies that I am racist. Doesn’t that strike you as odd?
Anyway, Communism “embraces”(your words) the working class, meaning those who must sell their labor power in the marketplace to obtain their means of living.
“Race does indeed play a factor in politics largely due to the efforts of the SPLC to invent new waves of it. It also played a sugnificant factor in the last Presidential election because we allow ignorant people to vote who saw the history and novelty of a black president and thus voted for novelty rather than notice he had no depth to his history.”
Oh yes, race plays a factor, but in your world it only benefits non-white people, despite the tons of evidence showing the precise opposite is true.
Also did anyone ever tell you that there were TWO choices for president? Notice that Obama’s opposition consisted of a Republican who was often out of favor with his party, couldn’t mobilize their traditional base, and picked someone so incredibly moronic for a running mate that prominent conservatives were embarrassed?
“Ignorant voters are the product of our school system, led by outside donors such as SPLC’s Teaching Tolerance. ”
So what you’re trying to say is that you went to public school?
“The “tolerance” word in that title is similar to the “people” word in “people’s rebublic”.
Uh..no.
“If you align your malignant cause with an altruistic and just one, you can lull the people to sleep. This is how the left co-opted the civil rights movement. Thus the left is altruistic and its opponents racist.”
Again, I have explained to you again and again why people might be calling you racist, based on the very words you have written here. Go back and read a few of those sometimes.
” For all of you intellectuals that support the left and actually believe socialism is an altruistic system, that is historically true only for threatened people. The Israeli Kibbutz is the star example. Buy even the Kibutz had a higher national authority and our own communes disintegrated when the peace loving residents found out some were doing much more work than others to support the group.”
The Kibbutzim naturally changed as capitalism took root in Israel; these communal farms are by no means unique. Such forms of communism existed in pioneer America as well. What is your point?
“No national nanny state has ever afforded its people a middle class. We are watching ours disappear.”
Dick, explain why Norway has the highest standard of living while simultaneously having the highest government spending, particularly on welfare programs. It is by any definition, a “nanny-state”, far more than the US. You will also see that in the industrialized world, the more governments put into welfare the better their standards of living.
The middle class is disappearing because too many of them got into debt, which was the compensation for stagnant real-wages since 1970. In addition to this, there was outsourcing, among many other factors. The last factor is because this middle class ignored its own interest and too many egotistical morons thought that following the free-market ideologues and supporting tax-cut-promising politicians would make them all rich. How the mighty fall.
“The opponents you call racists are actually political opponents which you have successfully demonized to equate with racists.”
You are called racist for saying things which are racist, even if the offense wasn’t intentional, even if you used some clever euphemism. For example, you continually imply in your posts that Obama’s blackness won him the presidency. This factor sticks out more than anything else to you for some reason, almost as if you resent blacks and think they are given some kind of privilege they don’t deserve.
Maybe you believe that without consciously or intentionally being a racist, and I’m sure that you act in good faith towards all other races you encounter, but that sentiment may be construed as racist by someone who is non-white. White privilege means never having to think about how your talk on race will be interpreted.
” It is the one thing I admire about the left–their understanding of the baseness of the human race to be secure. The traditionalists are always at a disadvantage because freedom means the allowance of such malignancies.”
Well you “traditionalists” have quite a few other problems. For example, not being able to explain the usefulness of your traditions, or believing certain things were traditional when they weren’t.
” But scores of them debate me in this forum.”
Dick, it’s not really a debate when you just ignore every question or argument put to you repeatedly, instead choosing to bombard us with more bumper sticker politics.
on April 30th, 2011 at 5:03 pm
Indeed, Stouch, I am at your service. You are correct that Obama, like other public servants, is sworn to defend the Constitution. However, that same constitution says that States don’t have the right to pass immigration policy, as it is in the realm of the federal government……………………
Amirkhanov, you are a piece of work. Arizona was not “passing Immigration Policy”. They passed a law which simply enforced EXISTGING FEDERAL Immigration policy. Nothing new here Amirkhanov, no new Policy. Simply enforcement of existing policy.
But your lack of understanding is not surprising in one who no doubt doesnt understand conservatives position on Illegal Immigration. The question is simple – what dont you understand about the word ILLEGAL? Must be the same thing you dont undrstand about enforcing EXISTING Federal policy.
on April 30th, 2011 at 10:33 pm
This whole article is hate related.
It us using the power of Internet to incite incriminating theories of a few. Pitting negative labels and character assassinations on so called breathers. Showing proof of a birth certificate is the first qualification of being a president. Obama is no exception. This article is a product of Hate because it isn’t focused on Obama’s Birth Certificate, but rather name calling and character assassination of a group or person seeking information we as Americans are untitled to know.
on May 1st, 2011 at 9:05 am
As usual Stouch, your chain e-mail based claims are false: http://www.factcheck.org/2010/.....lease-law/
As for illegal immigration, since the businessmen want the immigrants, the fastest, most efficient, cheapest way to solve this problem is for some kind of guestworker program, 90 day visas for Mexico and other Latin American countries, etc. In other words, MAKE LEGAL IMMIGRATION EASIER.
But for some strange reason, nobody on the anti-illegal immigration side is interested in that..I wonder why.
@Russell: That’s some fine butchery of the English language there, but the fact is that Obama went through the same vetting process as everyone else, which incidentally does not entail the public display of one’s birth certificate, long or short, the latter of which he displayed years ago.
on May 1st, 2011 at 11:58 am
@Dick
One of the reasons we have illegal immigration is because of capitalism–not because of socialism. Businesses want to hire cheap labor–its as simple as that. However big business will use the taxpayer funded services for its own ends. For example, workers at Wall Mart are often given the social service forms for food stamps upon being hired. Their part time jobs don’t cover the basic necessities so the state steps in. It isn’t because of socialism but because of capitalism that Wall Mart prefers pert time workers that are not able to unionize.
on May 1st, 2011 at 4:11 pm
Fact Check? The Annenburgs? Paragons of conservative values no doubt.
Whatever Ruslan. I was under the mistaken impression that the intent was to enforce Federal law. I stand corrected IF Factcheck is correct.
Regardless, though, I believe the real intent was to raise the issue in such a way that it could not be ignored. And in that, me thinks it was a resounding success. I dont think we will need to be worrying about blanket amnesty and/or voting rights for illegals ala La Raza for quite awhile now.
on May 1st, 2011 at 7:57 pm
My estimate is that 70% of the birthers are racist ,the other 30% are the tinfoil hat wearing crazy´s who buy into every conspiracy theory they come across
on May 1st, 2011 at 8:32 pm
You people never cease to amaze me . You hate and despise everything “We” love. You hate the South. You hate conservatives. You hate Republicans , who freed the Blacks. Yet you call us rasist, bigits. and all sorts of not nice things. Why do you want to be in a nation with us? Wouldn’t you be a lot happier just to kick us out and live happily ever after in your bastion of liberal love. Do you want it to be unlawful to disagree with you or your philosphy. Sounds a little like a totolitarian system. Please if you can’t accept us kick us out. We will be happy to leave. You can have CokeaCola and Delta but we West Virginia back… Buz
on May 1st, 2011 at 9:56 pm
“This article is a product of Hate because it isn’t focused on Obama’s Birth Certificate, but rather name calling and character assassination of a group or person seeking information we as Americans are untitled to know.
”
Just one, just name ONE other president (you have 43 options) who have had their citizenship questioned. Obama is not the most liberal democrat, nor the most conservative, he does not fight to pass bills tooth and nail nor does he fold and compromise. He is not the youngest or the oldest. There is ONLY one outstanding thing about his presidency that you will never admit. Ohh, yeah, and accusing someone of falsifying their own birthcertificate and being a secret Kenyan, Muslim, alien, antichrist, etc., etc., etc, is definitely not character assasination, right?
on May 1st, 2011 at 10:14 pm
Dick Lancaster,
I’d like to respond to you quote about ‘ignorant voters.’ First off, I’d like to say, do the tea groups know anything about the D? I mean, really, they say they want to decrease government spending…did they know that the D recently sued a small town for $100 million dollars? Really! He sued the city of Rancho Palos Verdes, Califas, because he was denied naming a street after himself! The residents were already angered because they said his development blocked their panoramic views. The D accused the city officials of fraud and civil rights violations. LOL! This was in 2007/2008!
Did you know that the D loves public fights – these are the alleged incidents, Mark Cuban, was called a loser on ESPN. He allegedly said this about my favorite actor Robert DeNiro, “he’s not the brightest bulb on the planet.” He allegedly said that George W. Bush was the worst president ever.
Now, how many voters do you think will side with him? He said that he will do away with illegal immigration after the news of Meg Whitman. I think that will take care of some of the Latin American immigrants who have family members that are citizens. He has tried to ridicule the Prez, which is equally offensive to most black Americans who are citizens. He has ridiculed Rosie O’Donnell, which is equally offensive to the LGBT community. And again, people who are big fans of Robert DeNiro, well, I guess you can count them out too.
Ignorant voters, I don’t think so! I think we are the type of voters that don’t fall for the hype! We are the type of voters that don’t just go along with the program! We didn’t just go along with the program when the GOP wanted to amend the Constitution so that Arnold Schwarzenegger could run for president. Remember that! Oh, but now, it’s all about following the Constitution, but, interpreting it anyway you see fit, or amending it to the way you want it to fit?
on May 2nd, 2011 at 10:36 am
Ruslan…..
Dick, explain why Norway has the highest standard of living while simultaneously having the highest government spending, particularly on welfare programs. It is by any definition, a “nanny-state”, far more than the US. You will also see that in the industrialized world, the more governments put into welfare the better their standards of living……………….
Geez, Ruslan, could it be because the Norwegians have not allowed unlimited immigration? Could it be because they dont have 12 million illegals from another culture? Could it be because they have – like the Japanese – a more cohesive/homogenous society?
I seem to recall your favoring immigration and amnesty, and if I am correct in that assumption, you just killed your own argument. Brilliant! (If not your argument, then the SPLC’s.)
on May 2nd, 2011 at 12:30 pm
“Geez, Ruslan, could it be because the Norwegians have not allowed unlimited immigration? Could it be because they dont have 12 million illegals from another culture? Could it be because they have – like the Japanese – a more cohesive/homogenous society?”
Nope. Norway has pretty open immigration laws like the rest of Europe. I don’t even know where you came up with the idea that they are somehow more strict than the USA, which has some of the strictest immigration/visa laws in the Western world. If you don’t believe me feel free to look up Norwegian nationalist sites. They’ll probably inflate the numbers a bit but I’m sure they won’t be satisfied with the system in place there.
Norway has a higher standard of living because instead of dumping its money into a military-industrial complex, invading and occupying foreign countries, and privatizing and/or deregulating everything in sight, they use their money to fund society, education, job-retraining(which is why workers in Scandinavian countries don’t fear layoffs so much), and of course, health care.
So nice try there.
@Buz: “You people never cease to amaze me . You hate and despise everything “We” love. You hate the South. You hate conservatives. You hate Republicans , who freed the Blacks. Yet you call us rasist, bigits. and all sorts of not nice things. Why do you want to be in a nation with us? Wouldn’t you be a lot happier just to kick us out and live happily ever after in your bastion of liberal love. Do you want it to be unlawful to disagree with you or your philosphy. Sounds a little like a totolitarian system. Please if you can’t accept us kick us out. We will be happy to leave. You can have CokeaCola and Delta but we West Virginia back… Buz”
Real thoughts from a REAL American. Thanks a lot. You make it easy for us totololololololotarians.
on May 2nd, 2011 at 2:38 pm
If I may just tally up the score so far, several conservative posters have claimed that SPLC, among other groups are calling people racist for being against Obama.
Thus far, they have failed to provide any instance of anyone on this board saying thus.
Thank you.
on May 2nd, 2011 at 6:55 pm
Pretty nice retort Ruslan, and without sarcasm this time – I am impressed. I will check it out. And I will add this – I recall reading where many countries have more restrictive immigration policies than do we.
I specifically remember Mexico, who of course is suing the State of Arizona. What cheek. Anyways, illegals were arrested, jailed, and deported. Period, no questions asked. Their illegals being their South American neighbors. I do believe they recently ammended this process, but still.
on May 2nd, 2011 at 7:07 pm
well it didnt take long Ruslan. Everything one wants to know about the Norwegian welfare state right here:
http://norwegiansociety.blogsp.....d-war.html.
For those that are interested. Yes a little off topic, but interesting nonetheless.
Oh, and immigrants comprise 11.4% of Norwegian society, with a net in migration of around 1% per year. I do seem to recall that they are having serious difficulties in assimilating a certain ethnic group – violent crime, you see – but that is another conversation. I can provide references though, indeed.
on May 2nd, 2011 at 7:39 pm
Buz,
I’m laughing so hard at your comment, ‘republicans freed blacks.’ Why gee, isn’t that the good ol’ past, now the blacks are chimps, subhuman, should be deported…as a black woman, I can surely say I don’t feel any love or respect coming from the republican party of today! In fact, I know the republicans want to put blacks back into bondage, slavery, prison and whatever they can to hurt or kill us. As a black woman, I am asking you to prove me wrong.
on May 3rd, 2011 at 7:54 am
Lou, when Americans go to Mexico, like in most countries, they receive a 90-minute visa at passport control, usually the stamp itself counts. The converse is not true. Because of this system, many American citizens work illegally in a number of countries around the world(including Mexico), simply doing “visa runs” every three months(crossing and re-crossing a border). Most countries don’t raise a fuss about it because the Americans are usually doing some kind of job which is useful to that society, such as teaching.
If it were easier to obtain temporary work visas in the US, people wouldn’t be jumping the border, and human traffickers would be at a loss. But for some reason, the anti-immigration crowd, which says it has no problem with legal immigrants, isn’t interested in this solution. I wonder why.
on May 3rd, 2011 at 2:57 pm
First, to the topic. It is easy to see from both from Potok’s article and some commentary why I am a racist. It doesn’t matter what I am, it is how my political opponents wish to define me that makes me a racist. My opposition to their political views and not my experiences of a lifelong interaction with the black community, including a 7 year marriage and a 4 year hitch in the military is my primary sin. My rational arguments can be dismissed because I am labeled a racist.
But having been associated with the other race for so long I am privy to much of the dirty laundry. One of these loads is the light skin/dark skin controversy. You see, there is an inherent racism within the black community itself solely based on skin tone. This, as well as the very real and very recent history of oppression is one of the primary reasons we cannot advance past the name-calling stage and fix our problems. The first fix must come from within the black community itself.
There are those too in the black community that don’t want these problems fixed. They generate enormous amounts of income for race baiters like Jesse Jackson and the Street Clown. And yes, indeed it was the Republicans that freed the slaves and blacks swarmed to it during the post war years up until Wilson’s administration. That’s when the Democrats co-opted many blacks as well as many others with the welfare state. It was George Wallace D. AL who barred the door of the university to black students.
And speaking of the welfare state, a condition directly responsible for the destruction of the black family, Norway is called the Golden Cage by many of its citizens. It is true there is no visible poverty there. But there is no freedom there either at least in the sense that older Americans understand. The 17% VAT tax combined with an almost 50% tax on income is a very real restriction on those who seek private medical treatment, want to send their kids to private schools or do any number of other things that stray from the perfect utopia laid out for them by the government.
I do not oppose Obama because he is black. I oppose him because he is a domestic enemy I swore to defend my country against. I did not oppose Jimmy Carter because he is white. I opposed him because he was an incompetent idiot which he continues to demonstrate to this day.
And to cap this entry, I’d like to say that I do not believe my friend Skinnyminnie means anything she posted in her last commentary. I believe she was letting off steam. And the reason I believe that is because I’ve always read her posts to understand her position, not to search for ammo to shoot down her arguments. And her positions, in keeping with her experiences as posted here, are quite reasonable even though I hardly agree with most of them. I believe we could actually become good friends if we ever met and put our politics aside.
on May 3rd, 2011 at 3:41 pm
Thanks for the cask of whine, Dick.
”
First, to the topic. It is easy to see from both from Potok’s article and some commentary why I am a racist. It doesn’t matter what I am, it is how my political opponents wish to define me that makes me a racist. My opposition to their political views and not my experiences of a lifelong interaction with the black community, including a 7 year marriage and a 4 year hitch in the military is my primary sin. My rational arguments can be dismissed because I am labeled a racist.”
Dick, apparently it’s not “easy” to see from the comments, because myself and others have pointed out precisely why you are labeled as a racist.
Your arguments might have been somewhat rational until you clearly made a conscious decision to ignore every response to them and ramble on like this.
“But having been associated with the other race for so long I am privy to much of the dirty laundry. One of these loads is the light skin/dark skin controversy. You see, there is an inherent racism within the black community itself solely based on skin tone. This, as well as the very real and very recent history of oppression is one of the primary reasons we cannot advance past the name-calling stage and fix our problems. The first fix must come from within the black community itself.”
Trying to air the “dirty laundry” of the black community? Totally not racist.
Besides this is a distraction from the point you attempt to make here: many of the problems of the black community come from outside of that community, so no, the solution can’t come from entire from the black community. Since whites are still a majority ,control most of the wealth, and most of the power, whites need to be willing to see the many obvious examples of institutional racism and do something about it.
“There are those too in the black community that don’t want these problems fixed. They generate enormous amounts of income for race baiters like Jesse Jackson and the Street Clown.”
Labeling civil rights leaders as race baiters. Totally not racist.
” And yes, indeed it was the Republicans that freed the slaves and blacks swarmed to it during the post war years up until Wilson’s administration. That’s when the Democrats co-opted many blacks as well as many others with the welfare state.”
Oh yeah them black folks just wanted them welfare checks right? TOTALLY NOT RACIST. While some welfare benefits were brought into existence by the New Deal, most of the benefits of the New Deal went to whites. In fact even today more whites receive some form of welfare than blacks. Studies have also shown that most people on welfare prior to the 1996 reform did not remain on welfare long(usually less than a year), and the states with the highest welfare benefits had the lowest welfare rolls, with recipients leaving the rolls sooner than in states with lower benefits. The source for this is They Way We Never Were, by Stephanie Coontz. Where’s your sources? Limbaugh? Hannity? Boortz?
Again, arguments like the one above ARE THE REASON PEOPLE CALL YOU RACIST. In one paragraph you insinuate the following:
1. Black people were duped and co-opted by Democrats who offered them welfare(historically nonsensical claim).
2. Black people are lazy and will vote for whoever promises them welfare.
” It was George Wallace D. AL who barred the door of the university to black students.”
Hmm….what was the party affiliation of the president who sent federal troops to open that university?
Yes we all know Lincoln was a Republican. But we also all know about Nixon and the “Southern strategy”, a plan to reach out to angry whites who felt betrayed by the Democratic party after the Dixiecrats were gone. They specifically planned to use racial appeals, often-disguised, to reach out to those with latent racial prejudices.
“And speaking of the welfare state, a condition directly responsible for the destruction of the black family, Norway is called the Golden Cage by many of its citizens. It is true there is no visible poverty there.”
Please show proof that welfare destroyed the black family. All hitherto sociological research has not produced this conclusion.
Who exactly calls Norway a Golden Cage?
” But there is no freedom there either at least in the sense that older Americans understand. The 17% VAT tax combined with an almost 50% tax on income is a very real restriction on those who seek private medical treatment, want to send their kids to private schools or do any number of other things that stray from the perfect utopia laid out for them by the government.”
First of all I would be inclined to call BS on some of this; but many Europeans pay much higher taxes and yet they do not constantly complain about taxes. Do you know why? Because they get their tax money back in the form of government sources they use.
After social security, most of your federal tax money goes to the Pentagon to pay for things which will never benefit you in any way. And yet you thought food stamps were the problem.
“I do not oppose Obama because he is black. I oppose him because he is a domestic enemy I swore to defend my country against.”
Please explain why he is a domestic enemy.
” I did not oppose Jimmy Carter because he is white. I opposed him because he was an incompetent idiot which he continues to demonstrate to this day.”
Well he did let himself get talked into supporting the Afghan mujahadeen, among other unsavory groups. But the distinction is interesting. Carter is just “incompetent”, but Obama is a “domestic enemy”. Why the difference?
So, yet again I have given you more reasons why people call you a racist.
I also notice you make a number of assertions which you do not back up with evidence, and you also repeat many racial “memes” about black people which in many cases are totally unfounded(e.g. welfare destroyed the black family). Did you say things like this around your wife when you were married? Is this the kind of thing her friends complained about?
on May 3rd, 2011 at 4:29 pm
@Dick
By definition the President cannot be a domestic enemy if elected by the majority of the people.
on May 3rd, 2011 at 5:30 pm
Dick Lancaster,
Okay, I am laughing because you got me on that one! I was being sarcastic and trying to push a button.
But, let’s be real! It’s not that the skin color controversy that afflicts the black community exclusively, it also affects people from India, Latin America. This skin color controversy still causes devastating affects in India, keeping the caste system somewhat alive. In Latin America, meaning specifically South and Central America, blacks are still suffering from discrimination (remember Bush went to Mexico and made the remark, “oh, you have black people.”)…But, also, let’s look at who most likely created this problem, it wasn’t the citizens of these countries. Just a couple of years ago, England did a story about women from India using skin-whitening creams that ended up causing 1st & 2nd degree burns.
For this reason, I hold high regards for the Puerto Ricans, there’s no shame in their game-they don’t try to think they’re better than anyone. I’ve had instances where some people from Mexico and Latin America thought I was from one of those countries, and when I told them no, they have made some very nasty/disrespectful comments to me – but, that’s the problem, as I always write, you can’t look at a person and determine where they are from, i.e. when Mariah Carey first came on the scene, the blacks and whites thought she was white, actress Jennifer Beals from the movie Flashdance we just thought ‘what is she!’
on May 3rd, 2011 at 6:18 pm
In response to Dick Lancaster,
I usually remind people who describe Republicans as the “Party of Lincoln” that it is also the party of Rutherford B. Hayes, who in 1877 sold out Reconstruction (thereby clearing the way for the rise of the Klan and southern Jim Crow laws that endured for close to a century) as part of a compromise to grant him the presidency in an election in which he did not win the popular vote (the anomaly that would be repeated in 2000). Both parties have had rival internal factions regarding race (the Democratic party created racists like Strom Thurmond and George Wallace as well as racial progressives like Harry Truman and the Kennedys, while the Republicans — who really began as the racial progressives long ago — produced both moderates like Eisenhower and extremists like Goldwater). The defining political division regarding race came with the passage of Civil Rights Act in 1964, which Lyndon Johnson signed while acknowledging, “We [the Democrats] just lost the south for a generation.” He was right: At that point, the vast majority of avowed racists went Republican, and the vast majority of racial progressives went Democratic. Before 1964, many southern blacks were Republican (because of the legacy of the Dixiecrats). Afterward, they knew which party was hostile and which welcomed them — and they voted with their feet. The modern Republican party has so little support from black people because in the defining 1960s, the party chose to snub them. Black people, whose very existence in the New World was defined by generations of back-breaking toil in fields they didn’t own, making other people rich. Black people have never made political decisions based on which party would give them government welfare. We have voted for the candidates and parties who were willing to reciprocate by offering human dignity, respect and recognition. To suggest otherwise is to demean a people who have worked harder in this land, and received less opportunity as a result of that work, than any other.
Robert Steinback
Deputy Editor, Hatewatch blog
on May 4th, 2011 at 2:37 am
Okay Dick, now I am a little more focused (earlier, had to get ready for night out).
I voted for Obama. I plan to vote for him again. I’m thinking, people are not giving him a chance – meaning, people are trying to railroad him at any and all costs. Sad thing is, we all have a stake in rather he fail or succeed.
I was disappointed to read that you believe he is ‘domestic enemy.’ Please don’t take this personal, but, I believe this is problem one of the reasons your wife left. I think she probably wouldn’t want to be punished/interrogated/imprisoned or even involved in something of this magnitude. The way you said it, it sounds kind of alarming.
Now for me, and this is just my opinions – I would be more afraid and concerned about the D. This is why, and this is my view and conclusion – he say’s he will use his own money, up to $600 million. Yet, when you look at the cities, counties, states, and the fed govt, he has sued – almost all were at least $100 million per suit. These lawsuits put the taxpayers on the hook, regardless if they are won/loss/settled (do you know how much it costs to defend lawsuits?) So, back to the $600 million – is it really his own money, or is it the taxpayers money? One of the lawsuits against the feds was a counter-suit against the DOJ for suing him because he didn’t want to rent to black tenets. There have been numerous black ex-employees coming forward. Did you see what he did to the Pequot tribe in reference to their casinos? Did you know what he did to the Chinese he sued? I think what was disturbing is the suit against Rancho Palos Verdes – a suit for $100 million when this city has revenues of about $20 million. Then the suit against Florida about a flag! So, this is how I sum it up, I think he throws his weight around, and threaten to bankrupt a city – reminds me of the movie Basic Instinct, where government officials are scared that rich people could actually bankrupt a government entity. This to me seems more of a person who really, and I mean really, doesn’t like America! I will say again, is it his $600 million or is it the taxpayers money? So, for the tea party who complains about taxes, I’m at a loss to find they are endorsing a guy who they are probably on the hook for (shortfall in revenues, bankrupt cities/states).
on May 4th, 2011 at 2:58 am
Dick Lancaster,
May I add, I am well aware of the light skin/dark skin controversy. My other side of the family is white and have disowned the black side, but then again, the white side is from the Midwest, so go figure! I don’t think this is dirty laundry actually, remember George Herbert Walker Bush called Jeb’s children, ‘the Brown Ones,’ during a campaign.
Finally, I will add, all blacks are not alike, just like all whites are not alike. Another example of this is, small town folks are different from big city folks. No one ever really knows anyone – you can be married (legally or by common law) a lifetime and think you know someone, and really don’t know them at all.
on May 4th, 2011 at 1:19 pm
To Robert Steinback:
I agree that the defining division regarding race came in 1964, but there was hardly a stampede of avowed racists flocking to the Republican Party. President Johnson himself was a well known racist as well as a malignant narcissist. Among other quotes attributed to him at the time of the civil rights passage was, “This should keep them n****rs voting Democrat for the next 200 years!” The great efforts behind voting rights had little to do with altruism and much to do with power.
As I stated in earlier posts, it was the communists that hitched a ride on the civil rights train thus making opposition to one equate with opposition to the other. The Republican Party had little support from black people as well as white lower class folks due to their “blue blood” reputation; a class rather than a race issue with less than blessed voters. Although the Republican Party has changed dramatically since that time, blacks generally have not followed due to a trait psychologists call “investment”. It is the same trait which prevents science from advancing. In short, it is the reluctance to give up a long held “truth” in the face of new data which disproves that truth. There is also a severe backlash from the base should one of its members stray. It is very difficult to be a black Republican or conservative in a black neighborhood. Free your own people and see how many remain with the Democrat Party.
The sweeping generalization about how black people make political decisions is a bit condescending. But I believe you are talking generally here so I am inclined to dismiss this in the spirit in which it was written. However, many self-appointed black leaders do this routinely.
I do agree that to the exclusion of all other races in contemporary human history it has been the African that has been most exploited. I also believe it is carried in the psyche. For this reason and this reason alone those who don’t carry this psychic memory ought to consider it in legislation, education and other institutions societies build for themselves. But this should only be a consideration; it should never dominate lest we have a “special” race which re-establishes segregation—in this instance, self-segregation.
Since I do not see the Democrat Party offering human dignity, respect and recognition but instead see it generally as a vote buying scam, you have already established that I am demeaning a hard working people. And thus our circle continues; if I oppose your politics, then I must be a racist.
What should concern anyone who believes in our founding principles is that people that think as you do vote and sit on juries.
on May 4th, 2011 at 1:25 pm
A domestic enemy is unlikely to define himself as such during a campaign. Nor is he likely to articulate that trait. It is up to the news media to investigate such matters and if our domestic enemy is supported by our media it is unlikely the public will know very much about his history until it is too late. So, by definition, the people can vote for a wooden puppet if they think it’s the real deal.
on May 4th, 2011 at 1:28 pm
Skinny:
I love you, baby and I know where your heart is. But sometimes I wonder where you keep your brain.
Actually, I do learn a lot from you and I do believe I know where you’re coming from –a different experience that I can accept. I read all your posts so don’t post so many. I have other things to do!
on May 4th, 2011 at 2:24 pm
Dick, I was just wondering if it every struck you that we here have not been ignoring and dismissing your arguments with the word “racist”. We have repeatedly explained to you why your right-wing rants can easily and rightfully been construed as racist.
on May 4th, 2011 at 3:28 pm
“Since I do not see the Democrat Party offering human dignity, respect and recognition but instead see it generally as a vote buying scam, you have already established that I am demeaning a hard working people. And thus our circle continues; if I oppose your politics, then I must be a racist.”
Again, vote buying scam, as if they just fork over money to black folks for votes. Nonsense. Statistics simply do not back up these claims, the “welfare queen” meme was demonstrably false, and still is. THAT, and things like what you said, is why people are calling you racist, not because of your opposition to certain politics.
I am opposed to Obama and the Democrats, and for the fifth or sixth time, NOBODY calls me racist for this. What am I doing differently?
“What should concern anyone who believes in our founding principles is that people that think as you do vote and sit on juries.”
And people who believe urban legends and easily disproved claims can be trusted on juries?
Forget it, just give us some evidence as to how Obama is a domestic enemy.
on May 4th, 2011 at 10:12 pm
Dear Hatewatch Bloggers,
As excited and impressed with praise as I am by the work you do for other minorities I am deeply hurt and disappointed that you are practicing bigotry too. Hate is not a valid disability and in suggesting so you only support those who wish to accommodate hatred at the expense of my Mad ethnicity and see that other hate groups escape justice while the unjustly segregate laws harming those considered to have mental disability continues on. I am an activist in the Madpride movement and against excusing hate. Hate groups are literally getting away with murder today by the employment of this segregate law for insanity created by the sanist bigots. In June I am speaking against it at City University of New York because other Mad activists invited me to do so. Madness is most frequently categorized under the following: genetic distinctness within the human population [a race], behavioral distinctness within the community [a culture], or distinctness from having lived through a traumatizing situation [a caste]. There are many other words once used to describe those today labeled by psychiatrists now being reclaimed by the rebelling equality movement such as lunatic and nut. A person can simply not advance human rights while at the same time practicing sanism in ignorance by use of sanist themes in the context of determinism. You of the SPLC should be aware that the true bigots love sanism immensely because today that form of hatred is allowing all other forms of bigotry to perpetuate itself without fear of legal recourse merely by recasting any of their members whom get into real trouble with law enforcement as suddenly disabled. This allows organized bigotry to practice real terrorism against minorities with impunity in the USA. Major disability advocacy groups are often front organizations funded by the forced treatment industry which supports segregate laws for my people denying the need to treat disabled persons according to their deeds. To spread fear they stigmatize all innocents by trying to de-stigmatize violent offenders and end up making an enormous profit by passing laws that discriminate against innocent Mad people and require them to be for instance force drugged or force shocked whether they are criminals or not simply because they are supposed to have some kind of natural abnormality in the absence of actual violence.
For more information please visit the following sites to learn of this form of hatred:
Mindfreedom.org
Madnessradio.net
No one will ever be equal while calling themselves naturally superior to others nor can you advance equality at the SPLC while denying it to me and all Mad persons upon the basis of race, culture, and castes of which you had not understanding. I would like to welcome you to instead truly fight hate with us. We are underutilized and I believe that underutilization is key to the problems you are really facing in advancing human equality.
April Scheller
on May 4th, 2011 at 10:18 pm
I could not even imagine this is about racism…no…..!!!!!That race card is flipped more than my cell phone. Gimme a friggin break! Hang it up. It is OLD!!!! It is TIRING.
Barry is half Caucasian……did u know? Stoppit!!! Tolerance…..what tolerance? Now if Herman Cain runs for the Highest Office, he is 100 percent black and I would consider voting for him .Listen to him……he makes sense. I do believe he will NOT have “invisibility” clouding his records. I think he is proud of his achievements, and will show us his stuff. Cain 2012
on May 5th, 2011 at 7:23 am
I just wanted to point out again(as it was cut out of my last comment for some reason), that Dick’s quote from LBJ about the Democratic party cannot be verified as far as I can see. It seems to appear only on racist and conservative sites, and is totally contrary to Johnson’s actions regarding race. What he did say is that the Democrats had lost the South for a generation. Looks like it was longer than that.
Anyway, I decided to tally up Dick’s racist score card:
1, Implied that blacks are lazy, and were easily duped into voting for a party because they were promised free money(curiously, many years before 1964 somehow).
2. Implication that welfare primarily benefits black folks to the extent that we should associate welfare with black people.
3. Outright claim that blacks as a whole have a psychological delusion which keeps them from acknowledging facts(this is some SERIOUS psychological projection going on). On the surface this might seem valid, until you realize that many of the “facts” that blacks supposedly won’t acknowledge aren’t facts at all.
4. A general willingness to accept all manner of meme or anecdote that is negative toward blacks, portrays them as lazy, parasitic, etc.
TOTAL RQ(RACISM QUOTIENT): 687
YOU HAVE ACHIEVED THE LEVEL OF: “But I’ve got MANY black friends!!!”
Congratulations, Mr. Lancaster.
on May 5th, 2011 at 2:31 pm
If a quote appears only in racist literature and racists are thus defined by their political opponents based solely on what these opponents consider racist, then it only stands to reason nothing contrary to the beliefs of my political opponents can be true, because all who oppose them are racists.
This is the circular secret of the power of the concept of political correctness.
on May 5th, 2011 at 3:11 pm
Wow Dick, let’s go over this REAL slowly:
You posted an alleged quote from LBJ. I could not find a single source for the quote save for sites which are run by either White Nationalists are hardcore conservatives. This means there is no objective verification for that quote.
If the quote appeared on say Wikipedia, or a site which contained a biography of LBJ, then this would be believable. However this is not the case. In fact I’m going to dig up my copy of They Never Said It!(a book of misquotes), and I would not be surprised if it has been debunked for a long time.
The quote even contains a kernal of racist thinking from the time. It suggests that welfare was all about black people(statistically it isn’t), and that LBJ was giving them a hand-out in return for votes. This is exactly what conservatives and other reactionaries were saying back then, and you’re saying it now. This kind of projection into supposed quotes is almost a tradition on the right.
For an example, a congressman once claimed he had a list of “goals of Communists” operating in the US and the West. Among the goals was the aim of “pushing for independence of overseas colonial countries before they are ready.” No Communist would ever write such a thing.
Face it Dick, you have a proclivity toward believing any urban legend or claim which reflects negatively on black people, while you ignore any information which refutes such claims, even when it is based on tons of scientific facts. Why is that?
on May 5th, 2011 at 3:15 pm
Also since your reply shows your complete inability to understand basic logical concepts, let me break down the significance of not finding a quote save for on certain sites with an analogy.
There are many conspiracy theories which attempt to justify themselves with alleged quotes by various historical figures. If you can’t find a particular quote except for on sites which put forth that theory, there’s a good chance they never said it.
on May 5th, 2011 at 7:30 pm
“If a quote appears only in racist literature and racists are thus defined by their political opponents based solely on what these opponents consider racist, then it only stands to reason nothing contrary to the beliefs of my political opponents can be true, because all who oppose them are racists.
This is the circular secret of the power of the concept of political correctness.”
O.K., so if someone (a person or group) who is against the actions or views of another [person/group] says something about that [person/group] (or says said person/group said something) it is true. If no other source even mentions this, all the other sources are all lying…
“Catch-a twenty-two, Catch-a twenty-two!”
“That’s some catch, that Catch-22.”
Also, dictionaries are responsible for definitions, people are racist if they meet the excepted dictionary definition (you can find this definition in either Merriam-Websters, Encarta, or Oxford), the definition reflects modern word usage.
on May 5th, 2011 at 8:08 pm
Ok I get it now.
We’re just changed the name of the parties from ‘Republican’ to ‘Racist’ and ‘Democrat’ to ‘Domestic Enemy’.
A rose by any other name?
No matter the name of the party, the policies stay the same and thus lays the problem. Get over it!
on May 5th, 2011 at 11:55 pm
Dick,
Okay, you’re making me laugh again! But wow, sometimes, seriously, I do wonder if you had been kicking it/chillin’ with Bud, Miller, or Jack aka JD. just a little too much. LOL! BTW, I hope you’re not using me ‘as research project.’ LOL! ROTFLMAO! LOL!
on May 6th, 2011 at 3:17 pm
No, Skinny, no research project. I just enjoy reading your posts. While you get a little insulting from time to time (as do I), your views rarely depend on ridicule of your opponent. Thus, I take your viewpoints as sincere since they stand alone with or without rebuttal.
I used to admire the SPLC and their work to eradicate the klan. But their “hatewatch” is completely one sided. When they started labeling any group with traditional or conservative values as racist, that’s when they lost me.
Their leadership is complete hypocracy but their fans aren’t all that way.
By the way, I haven’t got a clue who Bud, Miller or Jack, JD are.
on May 6th, 2011 at 10:28 pm
Hello. Did u people listen to Herman Cain last night? When asked what group of people did not like him on talk radio today, he responded “black liberals”. Do these people still want him to reside on the plantation.? This guy is truly black, 100%, and he is a breath of fresh air. I think Barry is a walking contradiction, but this man, Mr. Cain does not skate around the block.
on May 7th, 2011 at 12:25 am
Dick Lancaster,
Okay, I think I see where you’re going with this. BTW, I used to be a republican, most of my family members are republicans. I’m thinking that is where I got most of my bad manners, and last but not least, I’m ‘hood. I know it’s hard to believe that blacks are republicans, especially in black neighborhoods, but, most people who served in the military are republican voters.
And it was just a little teaser joke when I said Bud, Miller, or Jack. My family members use this joke when they say someone is not behaving, just like you. You are being a bad boy needing a little spanking. But here goes, Bud is Budweiser, Miller is Miller Lite, and Jack is Jack Daniels. Again, I was just teasing. ***I hope this made you laugh. Laughter is good once in a while.
on May 7th, 2011 at 1:47 pm
It’s not hard to belive there are black Republicans but it IS hard to BE a black Republican.
The last time I had a beer was when Colt 45 was popular in the “hood”. So booze references are forign to me.
As far as my spanking goes, I’d better leave that one alone. I’m married to a white red head and have no problem stereotyping that group. My survival depends on it!
on May 10th, 2011 at 7:44 pm
Dick Lancaster,
I think that we are not on the same page when I mentioned the spanking. So I agree, let’s leave that one alone.
Colt 45! Wow! Don’t know about that one in the ‘hood. In my hood, it was 40 oz. Old English. But again, it was a joke about Bud, Miller and Jack.