No, they don’t. The vast, vast majority of Republican in this country do not carry racist signs. For that matter the majority of Republicans at political rallies don’t carry racist signs either.
Obama’s birth wasn’t questioned simply because he’s black (any Dem/Rep with a similar history would have come under the same scrutiny - such is the nature of politics. THe allegation that racism was behind it is also an example of what I was talking about regarding false/phony accusations of racism).
And yes, generally I think it’s better to be honest about one’s views than it is to pretend to feel one way and then behave another. The second is deceptive, dishonest and cowardly. (And in this case just as racist as the first.)
The “similar history” you’re referring to is a history of having a dark skin color. If it were anything other than that, there’d be just as much hubbub over the guy who really genuinely wasn’t born in the US, and was not a citizen at the time of his birth.
They’d probably say their friends are “black”, but apart from that, so what? If some of their best friends are blacks then to say so in response to false accusations of racism is both justified and a simple statement of fact. You have no objection to facts, do you?
What other condidate has Obama’s childhood history? A white candidate with a background history identical to Obama’s would have come under the same scrutiny. As I said, it’s politics. When you think you see an opening that might undo your opponent, you seek to exploit that to your advantage. I wish things weren’t as they are in this way as well as in many others, but such is the state of politics these days and both sides do it.
You really don’t understand what the quote means or where it comes from, do you? That’s odd for someone who claims to know and revere US culture of the 1950’s.
Every one has born in the US or to a US-citizen parent. Every single one.
So, again, why the stupid lying “questions” about the first colored one?
I understand perfectly well what it’s alleged to mean in liberal circles. I simply reject the premise underlying that interpretation.
The first “colored” one? I thought “colored” was as out of it and symbolic of rightie thinking as “Negroes”. Must be yet another of those expressions that can only be used by lefties.
But I digress. Now, to get back to your question, first we should clear up what I would call a misapprehension. Questioning the circumstances of Obama’s birth and/or having doubts about the proof thereof was neither stupid nor lies. In this day and age of political dirty tricks and easy digital alterations, it would be stupid not to question the legitimacy of the circumstances surrounding Obama’s birth, given that there was such obstinate refusal to release the original document and the apparent mysteries surrounding its existence…mysteries exaggerated even by Hawaiian state officals, some of whom claimed to have seen it while others couldn’t seem to find it.
As for lies, something is a lie only if a contradictory truth is known to begin with, and I’d wager that 99.9% of the people known as birthers did not know as a matter of fact the true circumstances of Obama’s birth. Especially - like I said just above - given today’s climate of political dirty tricks and ease of digital imaging.
As to why Obama’s background was questioned where no one else’s was, his childhood experiences were such as to give rise to questions that he may be of Muslim sympathies and/or beliefs, and in the wake of 9/11 this was a matter of considerable concern to much of the populace, and it was a concern unique to Obama as a candidate.
So the problems Obama faced over having to prove the legitimacy of his birth qualifications to be president were a combination of concerns over possible Muslim sympathies or attitudes and raw politics, where when you see a possible opening with which to do in your opponent, you exploit that opening to the best of your ability. Neither of these has anything to do with Obama’s race. I would imagine that if someone like Herman Cain should prove to have the ability and political depth to run for and acheive the Republican presidential nomination, he would have the enthusiastic support of most of Republican voters. A few wouldn’t vote for him because of his race of course, but I strongly suspect a similar percentage of Democrats supported Hillary Clinton and/or abstained from voting for Obama because of his race too. There are racists on both sides of the political scale and to assume that your side has a lock on all the good guys is erroneous at best.
I’m fairly certain that this is not how you supported Trump’s questioning of Obama’s birth, but, since both supporting arguments are made out of thin air, I guess it doesn’t matter.
I don’t know that I supported Trump’s questioning of Obama’s birth so much as I merely explained the reason for it. If you’ll recall, the context of the thread was that stupidity was the only explanation why ayone could have genuine questions about Obama’s birth. I merely pointed to the numerous reasons why this is not so. It seems to be very difficult on this board to explain unpopular actions without it being automatically assumed that I’m in support of them.
And as to whether the arguments (or more accurately, the concerns) were made out of thin air, I say that depends largely upon who’s ox is being gored. The fact of the matter is that an important Constitutional issue lay at the root of the question of Obama’s birth and in the end things played out as they should. The Constitutional issue was raised, debated, investigated, and found to be without merit. So far as I know we’re not supposed to rely merely upon assumptions where Constitutional issues are concerned.
See? Now you’re doing it. I never said that Muslim concerns would have influenced my vote. Yet simply because I point to how they could influence others’ votes, I’m the bad guy.
Besides, I hadn’t really noticed that your policy toward me had changed much to begin with.
So, the only US president in history to have shown the voters his birth certificate is suspect because… He didn’t do it quick enough, I guess? Within a week of the rumors starting was too slow? And why did the rumors start in the first place? You’re trying to claim that people questioned the circumstances of his birth because he didn’t instantly show his birth certificate the moment that people questioned the circumstances of his birth. Isn’t that a bit circular?
You’re really not doing a very good job of refuting the proposition that birtherism is just plain racism.
Considering that it had exactly zero factual support, and that it was (and is) maintained as a “question” even when comprehensively factually refuted, then yes, yes it was. Just like the “concerns” about his faith. It’s about time you dealt with that.
There’s no need for me to deal with it because it was never a concern of mine. All I’ve done and all I continue to do is explain why people might legitimately have questions about it, or why others might pursue the issue primarily for political purposes. I don’t know how many times it’s going to be necessary for me to say that, nor in how many threads, but I guess I can keep repeating myself for however long as it takes.
Since you’re the one pushing this theory, could you explain how “OMG, that candidate might be a Muslim (or have ‘Muslim sympathies’)” leads to “Prove you were born in the USA.”
For bonus points, you could explain why you apparently think a good rebuttal to “The Birthers only raised the question because they’re bigoted against blacks” is to posit, “Nah, they’re just bigoted against Muslims.”
My first impression of Cain was a positive one. He does have some solid business experience and he occasionally gets off an excellent soundbite.
The problem is that once you start digging you discover that Cain doesn’t really have good political skills - for all the mockery politicians, you need to be able to talk the talk and walk the way in Washington, and from what I’ve seen Cain would be out of his depth in that environment very quickly. I can’t see him being a very good president at all, even before his spectacular gaffe about the DoI/Constitution.
I don’t know as to how spectacular it was in truth. If Biden had said it, no one would pay any attention. I do agree though that Cain seems to lack the polish that makes for a good candidate. He not only un-PC, he’s too agressively un-PC and all that will do is give ammo to his adversaries. Plus I’m unsure as to whether he has sufficient connections among capable people to staff an effective and knowledgeable cabinet and fulfill the other appointments and offices necessary in running an administration.
What I’d like to see is someone with the political chops of a Romney or McCain but with the ideals, goals and viewpoint of a Palin or a Herman Cain.
