Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
in fifty years Thinking Americans, political scientists and historians looking back will agree that the criticisms of Barack Obama were justified and that the false claims of it being motivated by racism were in fact the accusations of racists themselves. As if Obama won't suffer enough from failure and scandal, he'll be forever linked to being supported by racists.
I was just getting ready to post something along these lines.
I believe the answer to your question is yes. And I believe that Americans will look back at this as a shameful period in our history, much like we view slavery and the era of Jim Crow today. It probably was inevitable that the election of the first black man as president would bring so much racial hatred to the forefront, exacerbated by him not only winning in a landslide, but then definitively winning reelection, especially when their stated goal was to make him a one-term president.
But we have a president who has handled being the first to cross the barrier with grace and intelligence, and like Jackie Robinson, he will be remembered as a class act in spite of it.
President Obama hit the road apologizing......his biggest mistake to think he could shuffle our allies and now we have more hating us than liking us. What was his secret deal with Russia before this last election?
This is a serious question. In 50 years, when thinking Americans, political scientists and historians look back on the two terms of President Barack Obama, will they conclude that racism was the primary motivating factor in the continued obstructionism of a Republican House and Senate?
I understand that the GOP wants this President (and by extension, much of America) to fail, I get that. I also understand that the GOP represents the richest 1% of America, as well as corporations and their shareholders, both of which contain the wealthiest white Americans.
I am not asking about those who vote Republican, whether or not they are racist is immaterial, I am talking about the Republican membership of the 111th, 112th, 113th and 114th United States Congress.
Considering they have put forth little reason to be overwhelmingly obstructionist during the Presidency of the United States first African-American President, someone who has bent over backwards to appease Republicans, will history view the overwhelmingly white, older, male membership of the GOP as racist? Will President Obama breaking the color barrier, and the irrational level of opposition faced in doing so, be attributed to a Jim Crow level of disdain for this nations first black President?
Or will this opposition to President Obama be rationalized as something else in 2066?
If harry reid is ever determined to be a racist then yes, racism did bring legislation to a stand still.
Only if michelle obama is in charge of rewriting our history will anyone in the futue ever thnik racism was a factor. Obama's legacy of poor decisions in every venue of presidential control, the world on fire and stated reversals without media challenge will reveal to any clear thinking reader that overwhelming evidence exists to make the thought that racism had anything to do with opposition to obama an absolute naieve, partisan, myopic, delusional suggestion bordering on the edge of pathology.
I know you were addressing another poster, but rest assured (R's) would take Carson over Obama by 99%. While neither of them were/are qualified to be president, race is not the issue. Instead it is substance over the race or gender of the candidate.
The (R's) will also be willing to elect a woman, but she of course must be conservative. If Jane Kirkpatrick or an American version of Margret Thatcher were still alive, they would be an obvious choices.
So despite the liberal hyperbole deriding (R's) as being racist and/or misogynists, they would be happy to have any race or gender so long as they were qualified and conservative.
BTW - Whether you liked Sarah Palin or hated her, she would have been one heart beat from the presidency, and oh,,,,,,,,,,,, it was the (R's) who nominated her. Imagine that.
`
Yet, who was it throwing stones at Carson and Palin......a lot of it made up and disgusting. Look how the left treats Allen West.
Wonder why people think Republicans hate Blacks, did these people not get the memo their color was not allowed???
There is no comparisons to Jackie Robinson about dignity or class Obama isn't in the same league he's JV!
Jackie never apologized bowed or made excuses to anyone for his actions so quit insulting #42 cause #44 makes Four! a poor analogy ... lol...
While most people blame the obstructionism on the Republicans. What people don't seem to realize is that Obama made a lot of promises during his campaign. Promises which were very far to the left on the political spectrum. And Obama believed he had such overwhelming American support, that he didn't feel the need to compromise with the Republicans. He would effectively come out and say that what he was doing was "mandated by the American people who overwhelmingly elected me and the other democrats". And then turned around and branded any attempt by the Republicans to prevent the passing of his legislation as "obstructionism", while then pointing his finger at the Republicans calling them racist.
The actual truth is this, if Obama and the Democrats hadn't pushed so hard, the Republicans wouldn't have pushed back so hard.
Thats a false narrative. President Obama had a super majority when he was elected and he did everything in his first term in a bi-partisan way. He did not wish to be the like President and Vice President before him, who famously had a "You're either with us, or against us" mindset in their so-called GWOT that also applied to their politics.
People who support President Obama often remarked they wished he were more like Bush in one way, and that was in ignoring attempts at bringing the other party into the fold and just getting legislation thru with or without them. It's how politics has to be done these days, as the days of compromise and working amongst the parties (anyone remember Howard Baker and Tip O'Neil from the 80's, to name only a few) are seemingly over, thanks to Republicans. The cray-cray has taken over that party.
That's exactly the approach that this President should have taken when he had a super majority. But Democrats still try and act like adults, working with the petulant children (Republicans, of course) and Republicans have so divided this government, so polarized Congress, has had FOX and Rush so enraging the low information voters, and have worked so hard to eliminate compromise in government that one cannot help but think that their ultimate goal is in breaking down the Federal government altogether. And I believe that it is.
They want private corporations (their base, so to speak) running this country.
Thinking people know they cannot govern, thinking people know they shut down the government when they didn't get their way, and thinking people know that since the days of Reagan they have always demonized the Federal government. Just do the math and see where we are today, then draw the obvious conclusions.
I am sure lots will be written about Obama's terms as President - perhaps the most analyzed president in a long time.
I think it is interesting that so many here blame Republicans for Obama's lack of success advancing his initiatives (and those of some here on the left).
Lets not forget Obama had everything he needed when he was elected - Dem control of Congress, a sizable election win, and lots of buzz over his charisma and style. He squandered his first two years on Obamacare - and didn't focus on what he should have - the economy. At minimum it was poorly calculated politically since voters kicked Dems out of the house. But more meaningfully he didn't reduce unemployment and do anything else that actually mattered.
He loaded his cabinet with ethnicity instead of quality. He put academics in his circle of economic advisors instead of people who do commerce for a living. His charisma was exposed as creation of the teleprompter. He is not persuasive - his gift of words disappeared when the words couldn't be scripted a year in advance as it was for his campaign.
GOP obstruction was both political and policy driven. It wasn't racism. The same President, but a different color (white), or gender, would have seen the same opposition.
Uh oh....all the racist Hillary supporters are crawling back out of the woodwork trying to distract us from their actions. lol.
Oh wait, you guys don't remember 2008 and the racist Hillary supporters meme?
OMG, it's priceless. Get used to it, anyone supporting Hillary in 2016 is still racist and I will be posting the news articles, quotes etc. all along.
Frankly I don't remember, but I was really not paying attention. I do recall Bill was upset that they were supposedly being called racists, but I assumed that was part of what was to be expected with PC liberals involved.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
