But not why this, or anything other than his race itself, should not. :dubious:
When can we expect you to cut the shit?
And I have mentioned specifics as to why some working class people consider liberal positions to be rather elitist (from their perspective), yet this is hand waved away as mere code words for Obama being uppity…despite the fact that many liberal positions are considered elitist regardless of the color of ones skin. And DtC went further:
Because DtC doesn’t think that Obama is an elitist, by fiat he is saying that anyone saying he is MUST be a racist. The situation with Rev. Wright is the same…he is automatically painting any one who disagrees with him as an obvious racist…by his own fiat because HE doesn’t see it that way.
Why? Well, because he (and you I suppose) say so. Doesn’t matter if people ACTUALLY perceive Obama as elitist just because of his positions. He’s black. If someone attempts to label him as an elitist they MUST be using code words because he’s to uppity (btw, that particular label makes me cringe nearly as much as calling someone a nigger…must be a generational thing but it really disturbs me).
-XT
He’s not a “man of the people”. Won’t gladly wade into the crowd like George W. or Bill Clinton.
xtisme, note, too, that many of the same people who object to Obama being characterized as “uppity” (a word that didn’t appear here until Dio used it) quite gleefully make the same sort of charge about the *woman * opposing him - and with no more evidence.
But let’s not stoop and respond to their claims of Clinton’s own “elitism” by charging them with misogynism. Better to let their contemptible claim just sit there. It isn’t even an insult, since insults generally have some base in fact or in the insulter’s credibility; it’s just contemptible.
I’ve pretty much agreed with your wife (and mine) about Hillary, but Bill I pretty much respected. Until all this.
And then yesterday really put me over the top. He was stumping in a small NC town when a lady fainted. As people rushed to help her, he seemed annoyed that the problem was distracting attention from him. “Y’all just give her some water and leave her alone,” he said. “People faint at these things all the time.” I mean, my God what an utter asshole. A woman is lying on the fucking hot pavement, semi-conscious, in need of medical attention, and all Bill could do is bellow at people to pay attention to him. Any person in attendence there who votes for the Clintons deserves a tyrant for a president.
I think you are wrong about that…I think he IS a man OF the people…and I think he will glad hand in public the same way as GW or Clinton. I don’t think he is aloof…that’s not what elitist necessarily means in my own book anyway.
-XT
Why does it grate you and xtisme that people have an opinion that differs from yours? I mean, I could understand your petulance if someone was bad talking you or your mama, but whining because people think racism is at work with respect to this one little issue makes you look inordinately wedded to the idea that racism could not possibly be at work here. Which is pretty naive.
Would it be any better to ascribe stupidity and abject ignorance to the “Obama is elitist” position, rather than racism? If it makes you feel better, I think its a little from column A and a little from column B.
And that, even ignoring your ludicrously hateful spin of an act of compassion and calming, has what to do with elitism? Just a misdirection, to avoid discussing your unretracted (and equally ludicrously hateful) racism charge, as it appears?
I think it means “He’s the smart candidate.” Do you (Americans) want to delegate responsibility for decision-making to someone better equipped (statistically, than yourselves in the brains department) or do you want representative government? Vote for me, Hillary; I’m as dumb as you when I find it expedient.
Why does it grate on you that people disagree with your assertion by fiat that elitism wrt Obama is a code word for racist slang (just can’t stomach writing racist words even from an intellectual perspective in a thread)? I mean, I can understand your petulance to a certain degree (I mean…someone is disagreeing with your right and just assertion after all!), but really it’s not all that complex. Plain and simple I don’t agree with you and I think there is sufficient evidence pointing to non-racial uses of the term elitist…and several things that tie Obama and his positions into the liberal branch of what is considered by some to be elitist stances.
That you don’t agree with me is, frankly, of militant unconcern to me. I’m far from stressed out about it, as I was far from stressed about your strident tone in the other thread related to this one.
How about a bit from column C where we don’t build a strawman? Could we perhaps do that? No? Ah well…c’est la vie I guess.
-XT
That this one is hateful, ignorant, and irresponsible. Was that not sufficiently clear?
Nope, guess not. Well, it’s not for want of trying.
So there *are * some issues in which hate and ignorance should be allowed to blossom? What are they? Where can we find an index? :rolleyes:
The charge requires support. Where is it? You got anything, either? Anything at all? No?
If there were any actual, factual, or even plausible, support available for that position, sure. But charging racism is, as I already said, a nuclear weapon.
Don’t worry about how I feel; worry about being honest and responsible. Do that and I’ll feel fine.
By “calming”, I think you meant “trivializing”. I am trying to understand the mindset that would interpret WJC’s reaction as “compassion” and I am failing. I am not usually deficient in my imagination.
This is more an urban/rural divide than a liberal/conservative one (although it ends up breaking down that way a geographical consequence). Big cities like Chicago have huge problems with gun crimes. It’s not about taking guns away from rednecks “for their own good.” The populist desire for gun restrictions in urban areas is driven by self-preservation. You can disagree with with their goals, but assigning elitist motivations to them is completely inaccurate.
Are you saying that working class white people actually do these things more than other demographics? If so, cite? Or are you saying “liberal elitists” believe that orking class whites drive drunk and beat their wives more than other demographics? If so, cite that they believe this? Also, do you think that opposing drunk driving and wife beating is itself an elitist attitude? Are you saying that only liberal elitists think that drunk driving and wife beating should be illegal? What exactly are you saying?
Cite that liberals want to stop homeschooling or religious schools?
Cite that liberals think this?
Do you have a problem with seatbelts and speed limits? Do you honestly believe that those are “liberal elitist” laws? What does “wiping their noses and bums” refer to? That sounds like empty filler to me. I don’t think you’ve really manage to identify any elistist attitudes here.
Can you give an example of a specifically elitist belief held or expressed by Barack Obama?
With the latter, you get both - someone who is smarter than most of us where it counts, *and * can assemble the support to actually get the right things done.
There are too many people who have the notion that a *disdain * for playing the game (of campaign politics as well as governing politics) is actuallya predictor of *success * in it. The same folks profess to be genuinely outraged when a pol is playing the game.
The part where he noticed what was happening and asked for some water for her. The "calming "part was the off-the-cuff remark about it being a common occurrence, one intended to prevent panic. Did you read either of those parts, or only Lib’s rantings about what it was?
To the contrary, calling Bill’s reaction contemptible requires a great deal of it. A noncompassionate reaction would have been to just keep rambling on.
I’m not grated by by it, just in disagreement. I’m not seeing disagreement from you two. I’m seeing offense.
That you perceive stridency in my posts says it all. I’m expressing an opinion. I’m not insulting you personally. It’s like you can’t tell the difference.
We have already established that success in playing the game of campaign politics does not correlate with successful governance. We are currently trying to test whether a) there is any meat to the “no politics as usual” message, and b) whether this will drive a better governance outcome. Not very complicated.
YWTF: Racism is a personal insult. As personal as it gets.
And it should not shock you that the target is more upset about it than the insulter, okay? Got it now?
Unless someone is accusing you of racism personally, they aren’t being personal.
So I take it that you believe Obama is elitist since you feel that you’re being accused of racism in this thread? Is this right?
Not perfectly, in general, no. But we do have the established results of the administration of which Clinton was a very senior policy-level member, no? We have the IL state senate by comparison.
Oddly enough, I thought this thread was about elitism. My bad.