Well, I suppose I’m one of those people…because I’m not seeing quite what you seem to be seeing. And last I checked I hadn’t gouged my eyes out, and my back doesn’t feel bent over.
So maybe I’m just wrong. But don’t get sad on my behalf just yet, because it’s just possible that you’re the one who’s wrong! And I wouldn’t want that sadness to go to waste. 
Okay, since you responded to me, please answer my question. What would it take for you to admit that racism is a significant motivating factor behind the Tea Party and birther movement? What would you have to witness? What would have to occur? I’m trying to figure out where the line is.
Not exactly. They hated him because he was a lying sack of shit straight out of the gate. I remember Rush Limbaugh bashing Clinton daily for lying during his first presidential campaign against Bush. And then you had his attempt to install his detested wife as co-president. And then you had a dozen or more “bimbos” talking about their affairs with him (which he lied about) or complaining about how he sexually assaulted them (which he also lied about). Clinton was smug, arrogant and too clever by half. And unironically, lying is what got him impeached. Live by the sword, die by the sword.
But to get back to your claim, Clinton was certainly less of a hick than Carter, and Carter, despite his excruciating ineptness, never came in for anywhere near the hatred that Clinton inspired.
In no way is true - at least not so far as Obama’s race is concerned. Birthers are looking for loopholes to unseat a president who’s policies they disagree with, just like hanging tabs were a loophole many Democrats were hoping would unseat a president whose policies they disagreed with. I have no doubt whatsoever that a white Democrat with the same history as Obama (or as similar as it could be for a white person) would come in for the same type of scrutiny. To the degree that bias does exist within birther ranks, I’d say it is much, much more an anti-Muslim bias than an anti-black bias. Still, this does not qualify as racism because religious believers are not a race.
You mean like Clinton, or Carter, or Kennedy?
What exactly did I say and why exactly am I full of shit? I said nothing about any “vast majority.”
That’s a common enough opinion. However, I’ve never seen any support for the idea. I see Fox and GOP pols jumping onto a populist bandwagon and trying to steer it (and at times succeeding), but I’ve seen no indications that that was the origin. Feel free to fight my ignorance.
Well, certainly a sizable chunk of it are GOP partisans who will find any reason at all to bash a Democrat. Such is ever the case with any political movement in our two-party system. Some of this in conscious and cynical, but most I attribute to cognitive dissonance. In similar fashion, we saw very little in the way of protest when the US waged war in the Balkans, immense protest when the US did it in Iraq and Afghanistan, and then mostly quiet since a Democrat took office, even as said Democrat escalated the Afghanistan conflict. Partisans can and will rationalize damn near anything; and any political movement is going to be, sooner or later and to some extent or another, co-opted by one of the big parties.
Having said that, both groups of partisans also had valid reasons to be upset. In the case of the conservatives, it’s the simple fact that Obama took Bush’s high spending to a whole 'nother level. You can argue that stimulus was needed, and perhaps it was; but the fact is that that he did in fact drastically increase spending, and thus duly attracted the ire of anyone who was inclined to be fiscally conservative (including people like myself, who are not social conservatives or republicans)
Finally, I think part of the impetus for the Tea Party was in fact the bailouts under Bush in his last months. Those were very unpopular at the time, but of course Bush was already on his way out, and all political energy was focused on the election. When Obama took over and made it clear he was going to continue the bailout route with GM, etc, a lot of bottled-up ire was released. Not totally fair to him, perhaps (although I’d expect he’d have done the same thing as Bush), but nobody said being POTUS was fair.
That certainly isn’t an exhaustive accounting, but it’s my basic take on it. Not as sophisticated and nuanced as the “they’re a bunch of racists” view that some have, but I do what I can.
I’ve become an anti-Obama person after supporting him for quite a while. I initially supported Hillary Clinton and then switched to Obama after it was clear the super delegates were his. I didn’t think that he had the necessary experience in Washington to understand how long the knives were and the willingness to fight hard. I knew Clinton had those qualities. And I was right about Obama. He suggests that something needs change and then gets out in front of what looks like it will prevail. He does not fight hard for a position. I suppose that he doesn’t want to be perceived as an uppity black guy, but it is really weak. Our extended wars endanger us. He promised to end the war in Iraq and now won’t. He seems afraid to take sides against Quadiffi. The guy who blew up an airplane. I understand not starting a war over that, but to shove an off balance murderer off the edge seems to me to be quite reasonable.
He won’t take to the bully pulpit on the economy when Republicans do nothing but criticize the efforts of Congressional Democrats to prevent another Great Depression. That’s just weak.
Are there people who criticize Obama because he is black? Absolutely. Will we be able to tell them apart from those who aren’t racist and criticize him? No. Racism is hidden in this country with the exceptions of the really out there whackos. And that is a good thing.
You do realize there’s a vast difference there? There can be honest differences of opinion about how a ballot should be interpreted but hanging chads undeniably exist. But Obama’s Kenyan birth is completely fictional.
It’s like somebody saying that Bush should have been impeached because of the mistakes over Iraq’s WMD programs - it’s a real issue and there are arguments on both sides. But if somebody said that Bush should be impeached because he was a vampire, then that’s just nuts and you could ignore anything that person said.
Well, we just can’t say that for certain. There most certainly are anti-Obama people who are racist - I was hearing racist (and I do mean racist, for real, as in “lol we have Stepin Fetchit for president”) jokes the day after the election in 2008. I’d be crazy not to think that at least some of this group overlaps with the Birthers. It’s not exactly out of left field that someone anxious with a possibly Kenyan president would be anxious at least partly because of what color the people in Kenya are.
To be fair, election fraud is probably a lot harder to disprove than birth certificate fraud. With a nationwide election you’re dealing with thousands of precincts,
Not that I think the 2000 election issues should have mattered all that much once Gore conceded. On the same note, the Birthers really should have knocked it off the first time the State of Hawaii said, “nope. Not faked. Sorry, guys!”
Maybe, maybe not. We’ll see what happens if Romney becomes a serious contender in 2012 - remember that his father is from Mexico. (EDIT: and yes, I know he’s a Republican, but if what you says rings true - that all people will search for any little loophole - there would undoubtedly be someone out there who pulls the “Romney is Mexican!” card)
I don’t think it really matters whether you consider anti-Muslim to be textbook “racism” or not (in this context, I would say that it sort of is - when these people say they have a problem with Muslims they are probably not thinking about white Muslims in the Balkans, if you know what I mean). It’s an irrational fear of someone that is different, someone who they perceive as an outsider, and it’s not any better than the usual racism. I’ve seen a lot of people compare this to the fear over Kennedy’s Catholicism, but at least in that case Kennedy actually WAS a Catholic. Obama isn’t even Muslim, so the Birthers have essentially tacked one conspiracy theory on top of another.
I’ve explained my views in a number of posts in this thread - if they don’t answer your questions let me know. I guess I’d need to see a) more anti-Obama venom than I’d have expected based on the trend in political discourse; b) more overt racism. Maybe some other things. Where I do see those things I’m perfectly willing to admit that racism is at play.
I don’t see how you could possibly see any more of those things than atre already present among the teabaggers. Mobs of them screaming “nigger” at a black Congressman isn’t sufficiently racist for you?
I’ll still check to see how many Republicans claim Obama is going to force us all to gay marry.
Somewhat similar to the Democrats when running against Republicans during Bush’s first term. They were supposedly the party against the Iraq War but the majority of the Democrats in the Senate voted for it, and a substantial about in the House did as well. Then their candidate criticized the Iraq invasion even though he voted for it.
Not unlike some Democrats. They were against the war, but they still voted for Democrats who helped pass the Iraq War Resolution.
I think, firstly, it had to do with him being a Democrat, then his connections to Jeremiah Wright and Bill Ayers, suspicions about his faith combined with his name, then his comment about guns and bibles, etc.
Probably because of the the stuff I mentioned. I remember way back he gave some speech, when he was just a senator, and my whole family was in awe and saying how he should run for president some day, blah blah blah. So I guess it goes both ways.
I agree that people may change their wording to hide their racist sentiment, but “not one of us” is not uncommon in politics. They use that for white democrats all the time. “Elitist” for example.
If there was another Tea Party movement, comprised of black Americans, who wanted lowered taxes, who were against “Obamacare” and the Obama administration in general, Fox News and Republicans/conservatives would probably be positive about the coverage and using it as an example of how the Tea Party movement is not about racism.
Now if there were a movement with black Americans who were against a Republican administration, and advocated liberal policies, and used violent rhetoric, then FOX, Republicans, etc, would be saying how they were anti-American, etc, and my guess would be that liberals would be defending them.
That’s the problem. It’s “my side is bad, but not as bad as yours.”
One of his “leftist views” would probably be his view on healthcare.
I’m pretty sure Obama isn’t a right winger. But then again, I remember Michael Savage yelling about Bush not being a conservative, because of the former President’s comments and/or stances on spending, immigration, etc.
I disagree with some of Obama’s policies but I feel more confident that the country is in better hands than when Bush was president.
But some of the stuff you’re saying sounds really strange. “Better looking?” “More successful professionally?”
And in regards to a much earlier post about an interview excerpt. Was that real? If it was, I think it’s a pretty bad example to use. I remember people gushing about Obama when he was still in the primaries, about what a powerful speaker he was and…and…that’s it. They couldn’t tell me anything about him except that promises he was making. They didn’t know his record in the senate, but assumed that he had voted against the Iraq War Resolution.
Truth hurts, doesn’t it?
The country was better off under Bush? That is just…wow.
Tell me what you mean he’s more successful professionally? Aren’t most Republicans supposed to be professionally successful as well? Isn’t Mitt Romney pretty wealthy? And aren’t Republicans supposed to represent the middle and upper class, not the lower and working classes? So why would they have an inferiority complex about intellect?
Better looking? I never thought of Obama as really good looking. Maybe JFK, but not Obama.
No, I meant that even though I disagree with some of Obama’s policies, I feel more confident that we have an intelligent, and well educated president in office. When Bush was president I was constantly worried.
We’re talking about teabggers, not Republicans, and most teabggers are fat, bitter failures. have you seen them? Holy shit.
Without question.
I misunderstood you. My apologies. It’s late and I’ve had a couple.
I don’t have a side in this. The Democrats aren’t my side; they are just slightly less insane and malignant rightwingers than the Republicans are.
:rolleyes: A warmed over Republican plan that is basically just a handout to the insurance companies is not remotely “left wing”.
Well, you are wrong. He is right wing, as are the Democrats in general. Only a very narrow, very right wing political spectrum is acceptable in America.
Was that his original intent, or is this what he ended up signing just to get something out there?
Was the public option part of the Republican plan?
Well considering we’re speaking, or atleast I am, in regards to American politics I think calling him left wing or liberal is apt. But then, maybe the republicans are socialists because they helped pass the bank bailout.