Saying that since minorities are more likely to be poor, helping poor people is racist seems to be a bit of a stretch.
That cite is truly awful and does not support your case. It’s a chain of loopy assumptions that works only if you assume the conclusion.
Don’t be daft. That is some incredible stretch they’ve got going on there.
What Obama said and meant should be perfectly clear. He believes reparations do very little to address actual issues of inequality. It’s simply money thrown at people, and not much else. A better path toward equality would be to address actual issues, among them being poor people’s (poor people being disproportionately minority) lack of access to quality health care. So now extending health care to poor people is some sort of sneaky racist scheme to pay reparations to black people?
I’ll look there. Thanks.
Uh, that’s exactly what he’s being characterized as saying, that reparations don’t go far enough. Obama’s solution is socialism, or the better newspeak “social justice” and “economic justice.”
That article is trying to make it seem as though this whole health care business was specifically designed as an underhanded scheme to take money back from whitey and give it to black people in the form of socialism/universal health care. Really we have two things going on here. 1) Obama doesn’t believe in reparations, and 2) Obama would like to extend health care to more poor people, many of whom are black.
My dad liked to watch him when he first came on. It seemed that back then he was more of a Limbaugh-lite - staunch conservative to be sure, but not crazy conservative.
I don’t think that word means what you think it means.
Do they go on to say what kind of health care he gets, living in the UK?
He’s been crazy for at least two years, which is when I discovered him on CNN Headline news. There was a daily barrage of hatred that boggled my mind. It was a step beyond the Fox & Friends “Holy shit, this is funny” and more of an unbearable “This sick bastard is vile.”
Yabbut, a path toward equality can’t benefit anyone who was subject to unequal treatement in the past, because, that’d be [F0NT=SCARY]Reparations![/FONT]. A path toward equality can only legitimately assist people who are not descended from people who have been disadvantaged by inequality.
Huh. What’s the matter with my coding?
Nothing in your link supports Beck’s contention. It’s just a moronic editorial accusing Obama of trying to institute reparations through health care, but it doesn’t support that with anything other than citing Obama as saying he wants to eliminate “inequities” in access.
Typical, race-obsessed, right wing dogshit.
The paper’s reading of his statement was inaccurate and flagrantly dishonest: he said reparations don’t solve the problem, not that they don’t go far enough. Obama has repeatedly said he is opposed to reparations for slavery, and health care reform is not a form of reparations since it does not just apply to black people or descendants of slaves.
That isn’t what he says at all. He says reparations serve no purpose. He’s more interested in addressing current inequities. There is no connection between his (very moderate) social justice philosophies and any kind of redress for slavery. Do you know what “reparations” means? I don’t think you do.
He also continually tells young black people not to use history as an excuse not to succeed.
Damn good health care apparently, seeing as he has lived far beyond his projected lifespan.
According to The Spectator he was in an NHS hospital earlier this year:
emarkp’s attempt at a reparations cite was so clearly biased and wingnut that it rightly destroyed all his credibility. Unfortunately, he is half right on this one.
O’Reilly’s audience is certainly one of the oldest on tv. All the cites, though, seem to go back to a 2006 New York Times article on Olbermann.
Olbermann’s best claims of matching O’Reilly in the advertiser’s preferred demographic of 25-54 year olds came last year during the campaign. All indications are that Olbermann’s audience fell drastically, almost in half, since then, while O’Reilly got a much smaller, around 15%, drop. O’Reilly now averages three times the viewership of Olbermann.
I found this chart from April. You can see the long-term trends both both total audience and the demo audience. O’Reilly does in fact lead in the demo audience, although the difference is remarkably small given the total audience.
I’ve never heard Beck say anything even remotely resembling hate on his radio show or his TV show. Cite?
I’m sure he simply disagreed with a liberal. That’s considered “hate speech” on the Left these days.
Where do you think the deathers are coming from?
“Every night I get down on my knees and pray that Dennis Kucinich will burst into flames.” (March 16 2003)
“I’m thinking about killing Michael Moore, and I’m wondering if I could kill him myself, or if I would need to hire somebody to do it. No, I think I could. I think he could be looking me in the eye, you know, and I could just be choking the life out – is this wrong? I stopped wearing my What Would Jesus – band – Do, and I’ve lost all sense of right and wrong now. I used to be able to say, “Yeah, I’d kill Michael Moore,” and then I’d see the little band: What Would Jesus Do? And then I’d realize, “Oh, you wouldn’t kill Michael Moore. Or at least you wouldn’t choke him to death.” And you know, well, I’m not sure.”
(May 17 2005)
“You know it took me about a year to start hating the 9-11 victims’ families? Took me about a year.” (September 9 2005)
If I cared to put the effort into it I could find more, but they’d probably be dismissed as satire.
I can’t find the part where Obama says he favors reparations. Humor me, and quote it here.