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.
She says, "I don't have to worry about putting gas in may car or paying my rent any more, if I help him he's gonna help me". Yea, she's saying that he's going to make life free for her. You don't understand my other post? I thought it was pretty plain. This type of person is the type that racist groups tout as being the norm among blacks. The waiting for the free lunch bunch. The "Obamas gonna make life a bed of roses for us" types. This woman, single handedly, (and unwittingly) threw more kerosene on the race fire than Jesse and Al have done in the last ten years.
This video has constantly surfaced on thid forum by nutjobs trying to say:
A, This woman is saying Obama is going to pay all their bills and they no longer have to work. B, Obama is a Socialist who will give all the "white" money away to the "blacks".
I listened to the entire conversation not this highly edited drivel.
The Mortgage Industry was tanking, predatory lending was the norm for minorities including poor whites. Gas was approaching $5.00 a gallon, people were losing their jobs because they could not afford to gas up their vehicles.
Obama said that he would fight predatory lending, help with the sky rocketing cost of gas and help Americans make ends meet.
This lady was saying she no longer had to worry about losing her home or thinking the cost of gas would stay the same or increase in price because she now had an advocate to fight for her in the Oval Office.
She was not proposing she would get a free ride, the only people who would believe such non-sense are the people who are looking for issues no matter hew moronic; to argue about.
IS the radical right wing becoming more than just annoying, to the point of being DANGEROUS? And if so, what precautions should everyone else take not to be victimized or intimidated by such people?
They're getting whinier and more self-pitying.
They've always been more prone to violence when not getting their way.
How is the 'radical right' being defines here? white nationalists and Christian fundamentalists have been specifically mentioned, lets break that down some. By 'white nationalists, I'm taking that to mean the neo nazi types, skinheads, AB, WAR, et al? This bunch has seen a 'surge in growth'? I don't see it. Yes, since the election, thaey have something specific to spout off about, and coverage of their blather has certainly seen a surge in growth, but their ranks have not exactly swelled to bursting. They still attract the same type of people, young whites that have been abandoned by their parents, are social outcasts and are deperatly looking for someplace to 'fit in' and gain some kind of acceptance. One day they are the skinny, pale kid that gets their underwear pulled over their head in gym, the next they are hanging out with a bunch of shave headed, semi uniformed, hyper violent types, and nobody messes with them anymore. All they have to do is embrace hate. This has not surged in number anymore since the election than it has in the last ten years. Groups like the Klan have certainly not grown leaps and bounds either. Membership in the Klan is more of a family thing, by that I mean membership recruiting is limited to a small circle, within certain families and circles of friends. The Klan does not have the appeal and the reach of the nationalist types that actively seek out disenfranchised youth. Christian fundamentalists? They have not grown by leaps and bounds either. Christians, as a whole, have been just short of being driven underground. It has become a stigma to be labeled a Christian. Radical Islam gets more understanding than even the mildest of Christian faiths. When a Christian group organizes some type of rally, that may be motivated by politics, the media descends, the far left comes out in droves to organize a counter protest squalling like scalded cats about 'seperation of church and state' and slapping labels on ALL Christians as being racists, homophobes who want to cram their God and belefs down everyones throats. Only the boldest and most ideologicaly rabid people are seeking out membership in either white nationalism or Christan fumdamentalism. These type of people are not popping out of the woodwork like termites either. But , just as these 'far right' types are preparing for their version of Armegeddon, so is the 'far left'. If either side is to be lent any credibiity, the 'revolution' or whatever, is knocking on our door, and we all have to pick a side or be swept aside, and the more attention gets paid them, the bigger these 'movements' look. The reality is, they are no bigger (or more organized) than they have ever been.
I dont know. I saw VERY few 'happy and proud' conservatives. What I saw was many angry people who felt some aspect or another about Obama (could be his background, his parentage, and the big one...his half race) constituted a 'loss of real america'. Somehow they felt that his election = America was no longer the America they lived in.
Why? Who knows. But 'proud'? Absolutely not.
True, the race argument comes up. But at the same time, looking from an objective view point of a guy with few black friends and plenty of white ones, and whenever the topic of 'race' does come up, it usually goes along the lines of "Im no racist...but I dont want to live near those blacks/mexicans" or "Im not a racist, I just think they are all criminals..." or "Im not racist, but I wouldnt hire one of those 'ghetto/barrio' people" etc.
And whenever confronted by it (usually when their conversation is overheard by a person fitting into the group being mentioned), the first thing the white person does is says "hey I didnt do anything bad to your ancestors, stop blaming me, how dare you bring up the race card, Im not racist!" Even though probably 75% of the time, it was a case of racism.
No one thinks of themselves as being racist. Not even white nationalist, black nationalist, hispanic nationalist, whatever. But we'd be lying to ourselves if for one second we said our actions in different social situations arent motivated by race.
Best example? THIS forum section, along with the immigration section. (See links to the standard thread title).
So, in making that statement you admit that you consider discussion of Obama synonymous with a discussion about race.
You dont say "Lets talk about baseball" and then bring up the latest hockey score unless you consider them related topics.
Me on Obama =
1. Its still early to judge.
2. Hes no different than MOST other politicians in office, dem or repub.
3. The same interests have their hands in his pockets as did they with Dubya, and Clinton and Bush I and Reagan, and Carter etc etc. Nothing changes there.
4. The one thing I WILL give to him is that 99% of the arguments being made against him are utter, and almost comical. Screams of communism, socialism, subsidization etc...all with absolutely NO source.
Yahoos crying that hes taking their guns away, yet no legislation has come forth. Yahoos crying about public health care, yet anyone whos read the bills sees that there is no public option whatsoever. Yahoos crying about soviet armies and killing granny and other nonesense.
Honestly, the polls are showing less than 20% of Americans consider themselves republicans, yet 50% support what Obama is doing (which IMO is nothing). Conservatives are making themselves look crazier and crazier and thats a BIG turn off to middle america.
10 rep points + for this excellent post!
I totally agree. So well thought-out, well written, very concise simple language that ANYBODY reading on this message board could easily understand.
How is the 'radical right' being defines here? white nationalists and Christian fundamentalists have been specifically mentioned, lets break that down some. By 'white nationalists, I'm taking that to mean the neo nazi types, skinheads, AB, WAR, et al? This bunch has seen a 'surge in growth'? I don't see it. Yes, since the election, thaey have something specific to spout off about, and coverage of their blather has certainly seen a surge in growth, but their ranks have not exactly swelled to bursting. They still attract the same type of people, young whites that have been abandoned by their parents, are social outcasts and are deperatly looking for someplace to 'fit in' and gain some kind of acceptance. One day they are the skinny, pale kid that gets their underwear pulled over their head in gym, the next they are hanging out with a bunch of shave headed, semi uniformed, hyper violent types, and nobody messes with them anymore. All they have to do is embrace hate. This has not surged in number anymore since the election than it has in the last ten years. Groups like the Klan have certainly not grown leaps and bounds either. Membership in the Klan is more of a family thing, by that I mean membership recruiting is limited to a small circle, within certain families and circles of friends. The Klan does not have the appeal and the reach of the nationalist types that actively seek out disenfranchised youth. Christian fundamentalists? They have not grown by leaps and bounds either. Christians, as a whole, have been just short of being driven underground. It has become a stigma to be labeled a Christian. Radical Islam gets more understanding than even the mildest of Christian faiths. When a Christian group organizes some type of rally, that may be motivated by politics, the media descends, the far left comes out in droves to organize a counter protest squalling like scalded cats about 'seperation of church and state' and slapping labels on ALL Christians as being racists, homophobes who want to cram their God and belefs down everyones throats. Only the boldest and most ideologicaly rabid people are seeking out membership in either white nationalism or Christan fumdamentalism. These type of people are not popping out of the woodwork like termites either. But , just as these 'far right' types are preparing for their version of Armegeddon, so is the 'far left'. If either side is to be lent any credibiity, the 'revolution' or whatever, is knocking on our door, and we all have to pick a side or be swept aside, and the more attention gets paid them, the bigger these 'movements' look. The reality is, they are no bigger (or more organized) than they have ever been.
IMO, it seems that your perception of white nationalists is a bit old fashioned. Perhaps you would benefit from doing a little more research about the movement?
"...by far the best weapon of the white nationalist movement has been the unwillingness of liberals, conservatives, progressives and their respective institutions to reject the advances of white nationalism...the shift from white supremacy to white nationalism was successful. White nationalism is now mainstream, not because of its success as a movement, but due to our willingness to remain silent. "
You know, it would be really helpful to those reading your posts if you would simply quote the person to whom you're responding so that we can all understand your references.
Would that be too difficult for you to do?
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.
.
