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.
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?
The kool-aid is free and flowing among the brainwashed liberals today.
Standing for one's beliefs (in the mind of a liberal) is not a different point of view, but "obstructionism".
Liberals are too dense and brainwashed to understand that uniform acceptance and agreement with a given political position characterizes a totalitarian state. Whether this "agreement" is achieved through propaganda or intimidation and coercion, it matters not, as long as everyone tows the line and agrees with the dogma of central authority.
Do you have a crystal ball? And if so, do you know how to use it?
You're another one who assumes that all republicans are racist. Apparently, you forget that democrats have their share of racists, too.
You love making baseless assumptions, don't you?
I answered the OP. My position on Republicans is based on the past six years. It will be generations before Republicans have a chance to change people's perceptions of them and I don't think they have any desire to do so. As the demographics continue to change, the GOP will just lash out in anger more.
Thats because 95% of the candidates are white men, (ok I pulled the figure out of my butt to make a point), and when a minority runs on a Republican ticket, Democrats go out in huge numbers to defeat them...
Bunch of racists in the Democratic Party
Judging by your inability to understand why 65% of elected offices are white males, Id be embarassed to be Seacove
Pulling it out of your butt is fine if that's where your thinking comes from (your words).
A Democrat cannot vote for a Republican minority if they are never nominated. And Republicans will never nominate a black or a woman, at least not for a generation or two (or three).
I understand exactly why 65% of elected offices are white males when only 31% of the US population is white males. And so do you.
What is wrong with wanting to vote for the right person? I guess, according to you, people should vote for the black candidate just because s/he is black or the woman candidate just because she is a woman. Never mind that the candidate is totally incompetent.
So, you think that if a black person or a woman is on the ballot, people should never question his/her qualifications because doing so makes that person---gasp!---a racist or a sexist.
If you want to see a racist or a sexist, look in the mirror.
Excellent post! Find me a competent candidate that I can agree with on the issue on and I don't give a hoot what race, gender or party they are. I have disagreed plenty with many white candidates and wouldn't vote for them. I'd rather stay home than vote for someone who doesn't share my ideals.
There are plenty of self-hating whites around as evidenced in this forum. Always feeling guilty about something that neither they or most whites never even played a role in. They view every white conservative as racists.
Excellent post! Find me a competent candidate that I can agree with on the issue on and I don't give a hoot what race, gender or party they are. I have disagreed plenty with many white candidates and wouldn't vote for them. I'd rather stay home than vote for someone who doesn't share my ideals.
Said by Republicans everywhere who will also never nominate a Republican. Just like I said originally. And considering you're the one that said "white racism" you are the perfect example of why that will never happen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oldglory
There are plenty of self-hating whites around as evidenced in this forum. Always feeling guilty about something that neither they or most whites never even played a role in.
A Democrat cannot vote for a Republican minority if they are never nominated. And Republicans will never nominate a black or a woman, at least not for a generation or two (or three).
I understand exactly why 65% of elected offices are white males when only 31% of the US population is white males. And so do you.
Is your criteria to vote for a candidate based on being "black or a woman"? What about a Hispanic, Asian, or white candidate? And you are wrong about Republican candidates being 'of color', in case you missed the last election cycle.
I despise identity politics.....and those who espouse the practice.
I answered the OP. My position on Republicans is based on the past six years. It will be generations before Republicans have a chance to change people's perceptions of them and I don't think they have any desire to do so. As the demographics continue to change, the GOP will just lash out in anger more.
Please cite examples of us lashing out in anger against Obama..
I need to validate you arent some kook before I respond appropriately
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seacove
Pulling it out of your butt is fine if that's where your thinking comes from (your words).
A Democrat cannot vote for a Republican minority if they are never nominated. And Republicans will never nominate a black or a woman, at least not for a generation or two (or three).
There have been lots of black Republicans, please stop embarassing yourself..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seacove
I answered the OP. My position on Republicans is based on the past six years. It will be generations before Republicans have a chance to change people's perceptions of them and I don't think they have any desire to do so. As the demographics continue to change, the GOP will just lash out in anger more.
Except for the
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seacove
I understand exactly why 65% of elected offices are white males when only 31% of the US population is white males. And so do you.
Doesnt seem like it, seems like you want to believe its something that its not. How old are you? By time someone hits about 18 or so, they should recognize most candidates are white males, thus thats why white males hold the majority of positions.
The kool-aid is free and flowing among the brainwashed liberals today.
Standing for one's beliefs (in the mind of a liberal) is not a different point of view, but "obstructionism".
Liberals are too dense and brainwashed to understand that uniform acceptance and agreement with a given political position characterizes a totalitarian state. Whether this "agreement" is achieved through propaganda or intimidation and coercion, it matters not, as long as everyone tows the line and agrees with the dogma of central authority.
Wake up, for Christ's sake.
You described many liberals to a tee. If you don't agree with them then you are an obstructionist. I doubt they will ever wake up. I know, I have a few in my family and it's like talking to a brick wall.
Is your criteria to vote for a candidate based on being "black or a woman"? What about a Hispanic, Asian, or white candidate? And you are wrong about Republican candidates being "of color", in case you missed the last election cycle.
I despise identity politics.....
I answered the OP. You may not like the answer, you may not like what most everyone sees about the Republican Party, but I answered the OP's question.
It's funny to hear someone complain about identity politics when members of their own party are whining about white racism. Other than Obama, all presidents have been white men even though they are only 31% of the US population.
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.
