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.
I don't think everyone who criticizes President Obama is a racist. I've never called most of them one either.
However, there is undoubtedly some racisim against him. Some things that have never been done or said against another President (You lie!!) are being said and done to this one.
People called President Bush a Nazi, because he was for spying on Americans without a warrent. He took away some personal freedoms, and invaded countries that didn't attack us.
They called him a idiot, because of a lot of the things he said. "Fool me once, shame on you... Fool me twice, won't get fooled again"
While President Obama isn't immune to this, I get the feeling if I was in the room with him and President Bush, I think I could tell who is the smarter guy.
The reason racisim is charged against some of Obamas critics, is because of the people that have come out to rallies against him. Look at the posters people used at the 9/12 rally. There were lots of racial signs against him.
Quote:
The Senate's top Democrat, Harry M. Reid of Nevada, called President Bush a "loser" yesterday just about the time Air Force One was touching down on foreign soil. Reid immediately called the White House to express regret.
The Republicans are worried that we can't pay for insuring an additional 10 million children. They sure don't care about finding $200 billion to fight the illegal war in Iraq. Where you going to get that money. You gonna tell us lies like you're telling us today? Is that how you're going to fund the war. You don't have enough money to fund the war or children. But you're going to spend it to blow up innocent people if we can get enough kids to grow old enough for you to send to Iraq to get their heads blown off for the President's amusement...
Gateway Pundit: Hypocrisy Alert: Dem Rep. Pete Stark Called Bush Liar On House Floor... Twice (Video) (http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2009/09/hypocrisy-flashback-dem-rep-pete-stark.html - broken link)
Quote:
MR. RUSSERT: When the president talked about Yucca Mountain and moving the nation's nuclear waste there, you were very, very, very strong in your words. You said, "President Bush is a liar. He betrayed Nevada and he betrayed the country."
Is that rhetoric appropriate?
SEN. REID: I don't know if that rhetoric is appropriate. That's how I feel, and that's how I felt. I think to take that issue, Tim, to take the most poisonous substance known to man, plutonium, and haul 70,000 tons of it across the highways and railways of this country, past schools and churches and people's businesses is wrong. It's something that is being forced upon this country by the utilities, and it's wrong. And we have to stop it. And people may not like what I said, but I said it, and I don't back off one bit.
I think the difference between Bush-haters and Obama-haters is that...
Bush had no idea what he was doing/saying...his plans were stupid. He was lying through his teeth, ie "Weapons of Mass Destruction", Invading Iraq, Katrina, etc. He was not doing things in the best interest of the Country/People. He looked out for the upper tier and that's all.
Folks are criticizing Obama saying he's a liar (talking about healthcare reform) and the truth is right there in their faces. That's why people/media/Jimmy Carter are searching for the truth in their "dislike". It can't be b/c he's lying about what's in the bill...he's not. So what other reason is there for people to CONTINUE to "hate"/dislike this man?'
Where were these same angry people when Bush put us in this recession? When Bush (and previous Presidents) allowed the housing market to balloon then collapse? They were "okay" with sitting at home and griping all the while losing money left/right, values in their homes, taxes being raised, jobs being lost, etc. They were okay with it while a white man was in office.
Now...all of a sudden...these folks come out with guns to healthcare reform discussions. They want their "America" back as if this is a different America from when Bush/other Presidents were in office, when the only difference is Obama is Black.
Call a spade a spade! I think "we" should not try to make excuses for them. I mean...let them explain for themselves if they aren't racist or if their attacks aren't based on Obama's skin color/fear of them losing their "place" in America. If they bring valid points to the table as to why they don't like Obama or the Healthcare reform (actually pointing out lies in the bill vs. what Obama's saying) then hold a respectful discussion with them about it.
I don't agree with Obama on everything so I understand that point, but I do believe it's a lot deeper than that for some of these people
Quote:
H.R. 3200 does not contain any restrictions on noncitzens—whether legally or illegally present, or in the United States temporarily or permanently—participating in the Exchange.27 However, as discussed above, H.R. 3200 would only mandate that resident aliens would be required to have health insurance.
ok, i may catch some hell for this, but here goes.
How come from 2000-2008 it was ok for us to call Bush every name under the sun and oppose everything he did and expect to get away with it...yet when people disagree with any of Obama's actions they are automatically called racist? (althought some of them are) but it doesnt give us the right to label every conservative a racist.
I am not a conservative, i just think it's getting crazy that every Obama basher hates blacks and when we all did the same thing to Bush nobody said anything
In the year or 2 following the 9-11 Attacks, anything Bush said or did seemed to be Gold. Everyone was behind him sending Troops to Afghanistan and Iraq. They believed the WMD farce and supported the Color-code terror alerts.
Natalie Maines of the Dixie Chics had the guts to speak out against him and she and her Band were heavily boycotted!!!!!
Don't tell me that nobody said anything when Bush was criticized - all the self-described Conservatives seemed to rally on his side.
Conservatives had no problem with spending 700-billion dollars of tax money on Bush's Iraq war but are up in arms over the cost of Obama's proposed Health-care plans to help their fellow Americans.
I'm not really a Liberal or a Conservative, I'm totally against Welfare give-aways, but I'm not against helping people truly in need. If this Health-care passes it would give people an option - not force them to take the Government plan.
In the year or 2 following the 9-11 Attacks, anything Bush said or did seemed to be Gold. Everyone was behind him sending Troops to Afghanistan and Iraq. They believed the WMD farce and supported the Color-code terror alerts.
Natalie Maines of the Dixie Chics had the guts to speak out against him and she and her Band were heavily boycotted!!!!!
Don't tell me that nobody said anything when Bush was criticized - all the self-described Conservatives seemed to rally on his side.
Conservatives had no problem with spending 700-billion dollars of tax money on Bush's Iraq war but are up in arms over the cost of Obama's proposed Health-care plans to help their fellow Americans.
I'm not really a Liberal or a Conservative, I'm totally against Welfare give-aways, but I'm not against helping people truly in need. If this Health-care passes it would give people an option - not force them to take the Government plan.
...yet when people disagree with any of Obama's actions they are automatically called racist? (althought some of them are) but it doesnt give us the right to label every conservative a racist.
We just went through an entire thread on this subject.
Please point to a single example where someone on CD was called a racist for disagreeing with Obama.
If, as you claim, it is automatic, you should require a few seconds to find dozens of examples. I'm just asking for one.
"Conservatives had no problem with spending 700-billion dollars of tax money on Bush's Iraq war".
Are you saying no democrats voted for the war and spending? Hint, the President doesn't spend any money congress doesn't vote for.
Hey, I'm not on the Democrats side in any of this - I'm a confirmed Independent. I know how Spendthrift Liberals can be!
But why would any self-described Conservative be in favor of spending billions of taxpayer dollars on a War that we had no reason to be involed in?????
Don't you see the hypocrite angle in this? Conservatives were Ok with all the money divered to the Iraq boondoggle but are fuming-mad over a government option for Health-care.
I mean, come on! Iraq never attacked us, they weren't involved in the Trade Center-Pentagon Attacks. Why were people so much on Bush's side during the Showdown with Saddam debacle?????
Gateway Pundit: Hypocrisy Alert: Dem Rep. Pete Stark Called Bush Liar On House Floor... Twice (Video) (http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2009/09/hypocrisy-flashback-dem-rep-pete-stark.html - broken link)
Hey, I'm not on the Democrats side in any of this - I'm a confirmed Independent. I know how Spendthrift Liberals can be!
But why would any self-described Conservative be in favor of spending billions of taxpayer dollars on a War that we had no reason to be involed in?????
Don't you see the hypocrite angle in this? Conservatives were Ok with all the money divered to the Iraq boondoggle but are fuming-mad over a government option for Health-care.
I mean, come on! Iraq never attacked us, they weren't involved in the Trade Center-Pentagon Attacks. Why were people so much on Bush's side during the Showdown with Saddam debacle?????
Quote:
"Doomsday Clock" Moves Two Minutes Closer To Midnight
17 January 2007
"The second nuclear era, unlike the dawn of the first nuclear age in 1945, is characterized by a world of porous national borders, rapid communications that facilitate the spread of technical knowledge, and expanded commerce in potentially dangerous dual-use technologies and materials. The Pakistan-based network that provided nuclear technologies to Libya, North Korea, and Iran, is an example of the new challenges confronting the international community."
"Sixteen years after the end of the Cold War, following substantial reductions in nuclear weapons by the United States and Russia, the two major powers have now stalled in their progress toward deeper reductions in their arsenals."
"More than 1,400 metric tons of highly enriched uranium and approximately 500 tons of plutonium are distributed worldwide at some 140 sites, in unguarded civilian power plants and university research reactors, as well as in military facilities."
"Global warming poses a dire threat to human civilization that is second only to nuclear weapons. Through flooding and desertification, climate change threatens the habitats and agricultural resources that societies depend upon for survival. As such, climate change is also likely to contribute to mass migrations and even to wars over arable land, water, and other natural resources."
"The prospect of civilian nuclear power development in countries around the world raises further concerns about the availability of nuclear materials. Growth in nuclear power is anticipated to be especially high in Asia, where Japan is planning to bring on line five new plants by 2010, and China intends to build 30 nuclear reactors by 2020."
"Several factors are driving the turn to nuclear power--aging nuclear reactors, rising energy demands, a desire to diversify energy portfolios and reduce reliance on fossil fuels, and the need to reduce carbon emissions that cause climate change. Yet expansion of nuclear power increases the risks of nuclear proliferation."
IT IS 7 MINUTES TO MIDNIGHT 2002: Concerns regarding a nuclear terrorist attack underscore the enormous amount of unsecured--and sometimes unaccounted for--weapon-grade nuclear materials located throughout the world. Meanwhile, the United States expresses a desire to design new nuclear weapons, with an emphasis on those able to destroy hardened and deeply buried targets. It also rejects a series of arms control treaties and announces it will withdraw from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty.
IT IS 9 MINUTES TO MIDNIGHT 1998: India and Pakistan stage nuclear weapons tests only three weeks apart. "The tests are a symptom of the failure of the international community to fully commit itself to control the spread of nuclear weapons--and to work toward substantial reductions in the numbers of these weapons," a dismayed Bulletin reports. Russia and the United States continue to serve as poor examples to the rest of the world. Together, they still maintain 7,000 warheads ready to fire at each other within 15 minutes.
The brightest minds of our time... I guess a ideologue though can easily dismiss all this..
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.
2002: Concerns regarding a nuclear terrorist attack underscore the enormous amount of unsecured--and sometimes unaccounted for--weapon-grade nuclear materials located throughout the world. Meanwhile, the United States expresses a desire to design new nuclear weapons, with an emphasis on those able to destroy hardened and deeply buried targets. It also rejects a series of arms control treaties and announces it will withdraw from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty.
1998: India and Pakistan stage nuclear weapons tests only three weeks apart. "The tests are a symptom of the failure of the international community to fully commit itself to control the spread of nuclear weapons--and to work toward substantial reductions in the numbers of these weapons," a dismayed Bulletin reports. Russia and the United States continue to serve as poor examples to the rest of the world. Together, they still maintain 7,000 warheads ready to fire at each other within 15 minutes.
