Finally settled on Obama

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Stormtrooper X**

So I have to be literal to be racist? Hmm. Ok, so if I say... Black people sho love fried chicken and watermelon. That's not racist is it? I didn't say anything about hating them, I just stated a stereotype. However, if I do infact say this I WILL be branded a racist. So, on the flip side, if a black person says "White people don't know what it's like to be poor, to be overlooked, to be called racial slurs." that's ok? Because he doesn't add "and that's why I hate those crackers" at the end means he's not racist? Both are stereotypes and both are very incorrect. Yet because of the color of the skin of the person saying them you will not get an equal reaction.

**Grignard**

And that is exactly the definition of passive agressive! It is in the very link that was posted.

**Mannahnin**

How is he out to get you? Where in that text is there any threat?

If you read the darn text, he’s angry at racism, and at black people who fail to recognize the fact that Obama is the candidate who best represents them.

**Mannahnin**

Grignard wrote:
Mannahnin wrote:Churches, churchgoers, and preachers have every right to be politically involved, and even to speak about political issues.

What they (along with every other group defined as a nonprofit under section 501C(3) of the Internal Revenue Code) are forbidden to do by Federal tax law is to endorse or oppose candidates for public office or use their resources in partisan campaigns. It's against the law.

This law gets bent or broken every election, but that doesn't make it right. A lot of churches are really good and scrupulous about this, but a lot of others break it willfully, because they prefer to take advantage of the law when it comes to their money and contributions, and break the law when it comes to endorsing and working for candidates.

http://projectfairplay.org/brochure/

I'm interpreting this as meaning donating tax free monies to candidates. Furthermore your source is hardly unbiased.

You've gotta be joking. New thread time.

**Stormtrooper X**

Sorry, but this looks like the classic "If whites hate blacks they are racist, but if blacks hate whites it's just desserts for the all the horrible wrongs they did to them". No, it doesn't work this way. If you hate someone because of the color of their skin it's racism no matter which side you fall on. I live in Albuquerque New Mexico. I deal with Hispanics that have "Brown Pride" tattooed on their head and bitch about how they can't get a job because the white man hates them. Somehow, we're the ones that are wrong. However, if I were to walk around with "White Pride tattooed on my head I wouldn't get to apply for a job because I'd get beat down in a parking lot for being a white supremacist. Being a minority doesn't make it ok to be racist.

**Grignard**

Look I dont care. I'm not a particularly relgious man, but I was under the impression that people could support the political candidates they want. So it is illegal for a preacher to tell his congregation that he believes a certain candidate reflects the values of the faith???

This is why I dont deal with this. I have no idea why I even mentioned anything. I don't read the news, I dont vote. Talking about this just makes me physically ill. You can't change anything, and even trying to just causes dissention and makes people unhappy.

**Mannahnin**

Stormtrooper X wrote:Sorry, but this looks like the classic "If whites hate blacks they are racist, but if blacks hate whites it's just desserts for the all the horrible wrongs they did to them". No, it doesn't work this way. If you hate someone because of the color of their skin it's racism no matter which side you fall on. I live in Albuquerque New Mexico. I deal with Hispanics that have "Brown Pride" tattooed on their head and bitch about how they can't get a job because the white man hates them. Somehow, we're the ones that are wrong. However, if I were to walk around with "White Pride tattooed on my head I wouldn't get to apply for a job because I'd get beat down in a parking lot for being a white supremacist. Being a minority doesn't make it ok to be racist.

And to me it sounds like you’re accusing a person of expressing hatred when he expresses anger at societal inequality. They’re two different things.

People express pride in their ethnic heritage all the time. Irish pride. Italian pride. Polish pride. Whatever. It’s not racist to be proud of your heritage and to get in touch with your roots.

What I will note is that all of the ethnic groups I just mentioned above are groups which were looked down on, discriminated against, and marginalized when they first immigrated to America. 150 years ago you could find signs in shop windows in New York saying “Help Wanted- No Irish”. It’s a common reaction for people who are oppressed and mistreated to embrace their difference and to call upon it as a source of strength.

Black Pride comes from the same exact source, only American blacks had it much worse than my Irish immigrant ancestors. My Irish ancestors weren’t property. They weren’t considered nonhuman. They weren’t bred or slaughtered like animals. There are horrible crimes in the past of our nation, and they inform the lives and identities of any black person here who cares at all about their ancestry or heritage. Do we need to get past it? Of course. Does this mean we can forget it or pretend it didn’t happen? Or that the effects still linger and impact people’s lives today? No, sadly not.

White Pride is a term used by actual racist and terrorist groups, like the KKK. By association the term has gained evil implications. Just like the swastika once meant other things and had positive associations in some cultures, today it’s impossible to use it without invoking the memory of the Nazis.

Claiming that there’s no difference between the phrases Black Pride or White Pride is just sticking your head in the sand and ignoring the cultural associations and history associated with the phrases.

**Mannahnin**

This is why I dont deal with this. I have no idea why I even mentioned anything. I don't read the news, I dont vote. Talking about this just makes me physically ill. You can't change anything, and even trying to just causes dissention and makes people unhappy.

To heck with that. Every good thing we have in life is the result of people working hard to change things and make them better.

That's the power given to us by the divine, and the responsibility owed to our children and the world.

Without it we'd still be in caves eating berries and carrion.

**Frazzled**

Mannahnin wrote:This one?

Hillary Ain’t Never Been Called A N*****

Who cares about what I’m going through? Who cares about what poor people have to put up with? Who cares about what a poor black man has to face every day in a country and a culture controlled by rich white people?

Somebody missed that — you got nervous, because we got some white members here. I’m still in Bible country. I am still in [unintelligible].

Jesus was a poor, black man who lived in a country and who lived in a culture that was controlled by rich white people. The Romans were rich, the Romans were Italian — which means they were European, which means they were white — and the Romans ran everything in Jesus’ country.

It just came to me with— with— with— within the past few weeks, y’all, why so many folks are hatin’ on Barack Obama. He doesn’t fit the mold. He ain’t white. He ain’t rich. And he ain’t privileged.

Hillary fits the mold. Europeans fit the mold. Giuliani fits the mold. Rich white men fit the mold.

Hillary never had a cab whiz past her and not pick her up because her skin was the wrong color. Hillary never had to worry about being pulled over in her car as a black man driving in the wrong…

I am sick of Negroes who just do not get it!

Hillary was not a black boy raised in a single-parent home. Barack was! Barack knows what it means to be a black man livin’ in a country and a culture that is controlled by rich white people! Hillary can never know that!

Hillary ain’t never been called a n*****! Hillary has never had her people defined as non-persons! Hillary ain’t had to work twice as hard just to get accepted by the rich white folks who [unintelligible] everything, or to get a passing grade when you know you are smarter than that C student sittin’ in the White House!

Ohhh, I am so glad that I got a god who knows what it is to be a poor black man, and in a country and a culture that is controlled and run by rich white people!

He taught me, Jesus did, how to love my enemies. Jesus taught me how to love the hell outta my enemies! And not be reduced to their level of hatred, bigotry, and smallmindedness.

Hillary ain’t never had her own people say she wasn’t white enough!

Jesus had his own people sidin’ with the enemy!

That’s why I love Jesus, y’all. He never let their hatred dampen his hope. …[.quote]

You missed the one we he called upon everyone to sing "God Damn America," equated American troops with assassins, said we (the US) were the ones who put Mandela in Jail and said were deserved it (9/11) because we nuked Hiroshima and Nagasaki in unwarranted wars. The guy is not only a racist but an A-1 wack job. When you attend the Church of the Nutjob for 20, that calls your judgement into question.

**Grignard**

Mannahnin wrote:
This is why I dont deal with this. I have no idea why I even mentioned anything. I don't read the news, I dont vote. Talking about this just makes me physically ill. You can't change anything, and even trying to just causes dissention and makes people unhappy.

To heck with that. Every good thing we have in life is the result of people working hard to change things and make them better.

That's the power given to us by the divine, and the responsibility owed to our children and the world.

Without it we'd still be in caves eating berries and carrion.

I don't care. I don't have children, and the world is something I just quit caring about.

**Grignard**

And tell me when I can stop feeling guilty for something that happened over a century ago and that I played no part in.

**Grignard**

Stormtrooper X wrote:So I have to be literal to be racist? Hmm. Ok, so if I say... Black people sho love fried chicken and watermelon. That's not racist is it? I didn't say anything about hating them, I just stated a stereotype. However, if I do infact say this I WILL be branded a racist. So, on the flip side, if a black person says "White people don't know what it's like to be poor, to be overlooked, to be called racial slurs." that's ok? Because he doesn't add "and that's why I hate those crackers" at the end means he's not racist? Both are stereotypes and both are very incorrect. Yet because of the color of the skin of the person saying them you will not get an equal reaction.

And Man, I don't mean to offend you by this, but why dont you come down to where I live and you can see plenty of white people ( And black ones!) who know exactly what it is like to be poor, and to be called racial or ethnic slurs. The average yearly income for a single person is just over 16000 per year in the county just adjacent to mine. The number of families under the poverty line is approaching a third. Incidentally they are predominantly white, though there are quite a few African americans there living in the same conditions.

**Grignard**

I'm sorry. The figure I quoted was per capita, which is a little different.

**Mannahnin**

jfrazell wrote:You missed the one we he called upon everyone to sing "God Damn America," equated American troops with assassins, said we (the US) were the ones who put Mandela in Jail and said were deserved it (9/11) because we nuked Hiroshima and Nagasaki in unwarranted wars. The guy is not only a racist but an A-1 wack job. When you attend the Church of the Nutjob for 20, that calls your judgement into question.

He's definitely said some crazy things.

But then, Pat Robertson also said we should kill Chavez, and that 9/11 happened because America had offended god. And that's before we get into any of the stuff in his book "The New World Order."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pat_Robertson

It seems that a number of charismatic and popular religious leaders get eccentric and strange as they get older.

I expect his regular sermons were less of this and more "love they neighbor" and "help those who can't help themselves".

**Grignard**

Two wrongs don't make a right. Bringing up old Pat doesn't really change anything.

**Mannahnin**

Certainly not. But a lot of conservative politicians have been associated with or endorsed by him. Let’s not pretend that Obama’s preacher is the first instance of something like this.

Grignard wrote:I don't care. I don't have children, and the world is something I just quit caring about

Sorry to hear that. I know it’s hard. It’s hard for all of us. Most of the time I’m lazy and self-centered. I don’t get out and work for campaigns and volunteer as much as I feel that I should. I donate here are there to charities and to political organizations which fight for principles I believe in. Every once in a while I get motivated to actually do something to improve the world. For (a little less than) three years I worked getting homeless people into shelters, and taking child abuse reports at night. Nowadays I work for a private company in part so I can afford to live a more comfortable life, to travel, and to start a family. But it’s still a company where we help people, because that’s important to me.

Grignard wrote:And tell me when I can stop feeling guilty for something that happened over a century ago and that I played no part in.

No one told you to feel guilty for it. But you shouldn’t act like it doesn’t still impact the world today, or that black people don’t still face racism.

Grignard wrote:And Man, I don't mean to offend you by this, but why dont you come down to where I live and you can see plenty of white people ( And black ones!) who know exactly what it is like to be poor, and to be called racial or ethnic slurs. The average yearly income for a single person is just over 16000 per year in the county just adjacent to mine. The number of families under the poverty line is approaching a third. Incidentally they are predominantly white, though there are quite a few African americans there living in the same conditions.

I completely agree that poverty is a bigger issue than race. Poverty is certainly the main cause of suffering, of lack of opportunity, of hopelessness in people’s lives all over the world.

**Grignard**

Well, good to hear that we agree on that. Maybe that is why I'm so upset these days. It seems like all these different political parties could come to some kind of common ground.

I'm just as bad though, I'm not very good at debating. I'm not an idiot, but once I try to argue something I'm not a very clear thinker, I'll give you that. Probably something I need to work on.

**Mannahnin**

I appreciate you making the effort to express the things you believe in. Even if I heartily disagree with them.

To quote that classic paraphrase of Voltaire (actually written by Hall)- “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”

My brother’s favorite candidate in this race was John Edwards. When he was still in the race I was definitely undecided. He was the one candidate who really cared about that issue. It’s terribly ironic that so many impoverished voters oppose politicians who might actually make things better for them.

**Frazzled**

Mannahnin wrote:
jfrazell wrote:You missed the one we he called upon everyone to sing "God Damn America," equated American troops with assassins, said we (the US) were the ones who put Mandela in Jail and said were deserved it (9/11) because we nuked Hiroshima and Nagasaki in unwarranted wars. The guy is not only a racist but an A-1 wack job. When you attend the Church of the Nutjob for 20, that calls your judgement into question.

He's definitely said some crazy things.

But then, Pat Robertson also said we should kill Chavez, and that 9/11 happened because America had offended god. And that's before we get into any of the stuff in his book "The New World Order."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pat_Robertson

It seems that a number of charismatic and popular religious leaders get eccentric and strange as they get older.

I expect his regular sermons were less of this and more "love they neighbor" and "help those who can't help themselves".

Correct however:
1) Pat Robertson has been castigated as a nutjob. This one should be as well.
2) You don't stay in a church headed by a minister like that. You just don't unless there is something wrong with you as well.

**Grignard**

For what it is worth, I think Pat Robertson was foolish to talk about Chavez like that, and I know he's not that stupid. I think Chavez is a blowhard, who somehow thinks he is a sort of reincarnated commie Simon Bolivar. He wouldn't be any threat to us at all if we weren't stuck buying oil from the OPEC countries. I don't shop at Citgo stations, not that that will make any difference.

**Mannahnin**

jfrazell wrote:Correct however:
1) Pat Robertson has been castigated as a nutjob. This one should be as well.
2) You don't stay in a church headed by a minister like that. You just don't unless there is something wrong with you as well.

1. I don't think too many people were castigating Robertson back in 1992 when The New World Order came out. I do remember a president prominently using that phrase in a speech around then.

2. Depends on how often he makes with the crazy, how long it's been going on, and how many other ministers are there who aren't saying crazy and offensive things. If it's something he's descended into as he aged and got closer to retirement (he left last month, right?), and other more reasonable folks have gradually been taking over during the same time, it is something a reasonable person might tolerate. I'm sure a lot of 700 Club watchers were pretty shocked and offended when Pat said god deliberately let 9/11 happen to punish us.

**Lorek**

Grignard wrote:I don't shop at Citgo stations, not that that will make any difference.

It does make a difference. It shows that you're willing to put your money where your mouth is and not be a hypocrite, and that's a rare and good thing these days. Lead by example!

(I too refuse to shop at Citgo.)

**Stormtrooper X**

Grignard wrote:
Stormtrooper X wrote:So I have to be literal to be racist? Hmm. Ok, so if I say... Black people sho love fried chicken and watermelon. That's not racist is it? I didn't say anything about hating them, I just stated a stereotype. However, if I do infact say this I WILL be branded a racist. So, on the flip side, if a black person says "White people don't know what it's like to be poor, to be overlooked, to be called racial slurs." that's ok? Because he doesn't add "and that's why I hate those crackers" at the end means he's not racist? Both are stereotypes and both are very incorrect. Yet because of the color of the skin of the person saying them you will not get an equal reaction.

And Man, I don't mean to offend you by this, but why dont you come down to where I live and you can see plenty of white people ( And black ones!) who know exactly what it is like to be poor, and to be called racial or ethnic slurs. The average yearly income for a single person is just over 16000 per year in the county just adjacent to mine. The number of families under the poverty line is approaching a third. Incidentally they are predominantly white, though there are quite a few African americans there living in the same conditions.

I know what it's like to be a poor white person. I can take you to entire towns of poor white people where none of them make significant amounts of money. And I do know what its like to be called racial slurs. I went to a school that was 50% Native American, 45% Hispanic/Mexican (and don't you dare get the two confused or they'll cut you) and 5% other. Guess which part my white ass fit in. You get to watch your back all day because some chump doesn't like the fact that you're white and some ass hat like this preacher says white people are the cause of all his problems.

**Grignard**

Iorek wrote:
Grignard wrote:I don't shop at Citgo stations, not that that will make any difference.

It does make a difference. It shows that you're willing to put your money where your mouth is and not be a hypocrite, and that's a rare and good thing these days. Lead by example!

(I too refuse to shop at Citgo.)

The only thing is I really don't know how the petroleum industry works. Probably most of the others buy Venezuelan crude. Someone told me that British Petroleum doesn't, but I don't know if that is true. I have a hard time believing they rely totally on North Sea drilling. It is just that from what I understand, Citgo is a nationalized company of the Venezuelan government.

**Ahtman**

I don't hold this wack job against Obama. He's the same as Pat Robertson or the Westboro Baptist Church. You bet your ass it's racist and ignorant. I like his costume though.

How come of the people of the book only the Jews seem to have it together? Just kidding, they got their nuts to.

**Stormtrooper X**

Yes, CITGO is a Venezuelan company, but wasn't always. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citgo

We don't have too many 7-11s down here. Lot's of Chevron and Shell stations.

@Ahtman - The difference between this joker and Pat Robertson is Obama went to this guys church for 20 years. He refers to him as his mentor and one of his closest friends. He worked on the campaign until just recently. The presidents that Pat Robertson endorsed didn't actively go to his church.

**Stormtrooper X**

Gignard, if you're interested you can check out this - http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/country/country_energy_data.cfm?fips=UK

The UK actually doesn't import oil. The North Sea reserves allow them to export extra oil.

**Mannahnin**

Stormtrooper X wrote:I know what it's like to be a poor white person. I can take you to entire towns of poor white people where none of them make significant amounts of money. And I do know what its like to be called racial slurs. I went to a school that was 50% Native American, 45% Hispanic/Mexican (and don't you dare get the two confused or they'll cut you) and 5% other. Guess which part my white ass fit in. You get to watch your back all day because some chump doesn't like the fact that you're white and some ass hat like this preacher says white people are the cause of all his problems.

Yup. Poverty is the real killer. But I'm still not seeing where he said that white people are the cause of "all his problems". There is a reasonable basis to say that black poverty and inequality does have its roots in slavery. Poor white (or hispanic, or whatever) folks don't generally have rich people in their family tree either. Their families and ancestors have been poor as well, and they've had reduced opportunities as a result. The descendents of slaves just started even further down the ladder, socially and economically.

The unfortunate reality is that black people, even if wealthy or well educated (though those things certainly mitigate the problem to a great extent), are physically identifiable and associated with that legacy, and easily picked out for discrimination by prejudiced people. The continuing presense of racism and its impact slows their advancement as a subgroup within our society. The exact EXTENT to which it hurts them is probably debatable and undoubtedly exaggerated by some people. But neither you nor I, nor Hillary Clinton have walked a mile in their shoes or are able to see exactly how much daily impact it has. We can't really know. Which is, I think, the guy's central point.

As a white guy, unless I'm missing teeth, have open sores, and/or am unable to manage decent diction, all I need is some clean clothes and a decent haircut to look just as appealing and sympathetic to a cab driver or a cop as a rich kid.

ahtman wrote:How come of the people of the book only the Jews seem to have it together? Just kidding, they got their nuts to.

I think all you monotheists are loons.

**Stormtrooper X**

Good night Mannahnin, I thought I sat on the left side of the bench.

Look, minorities have just as much of a chance to succeed in this wonderful country as either you or I do. In fact, they have a better shot at it. They can go to college for free, get priority when it comes to jobs and in some cases don't have to pay taxes. Now some will say that this only makes sense because all of the horrible things us Europeans did to them. Uh, news flash, I didn't make your ancestors pick cotton or give them small pox infested blankets... and guess what, it wasn't you out there picking cotton either. What I'm getting at here is when is it enough? When do the descendants of people have to stop paying for what their ancestors did?

And as far as blaming white people for his problems, he refers to us as his enemies. I don't know about you, but when I refer to someone as my "enemy" it's not because I embrace them with love and understanding, it's because I despise them and wish to see them dead.

**Mannahnin**

Exactly which minorities are we talking about?

While poverty is more important, race is not trivial or insignificant.

I cannot see any evidence to suggest that a person from a minority ethnic group has “a better shot” at success than I do. That sounds like a Rush Limbaugh “persecuted majority” fantasy. Can you cite any statistical evidence showing that people from any particular minority group have MORE educational or economic success than your average white American?

How exactly can they go to college for free? Any how many of them can do so? Statistics or at least examples, please. There are certainly scholarship programs out there, but scholarships exist for all sorts of groups (and for high-achieving students in general) not just for racial minorities. Here’s one for people with Cystic Fibrosis:

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/85940.php

Scholarships rarely allow people to go to school “for free”. Most of the time they partially defray the costs.

“Don’t have to pay taxes”? Can you cite me some examples? Taxes are generally based on income, which again is a poverty issue, not a racial issue. If a higher percentage of minorities are too poor to owe taxes, that’s not an advantage. Just the opposite.

Priority for jobs is another matter, and is its own whole discussion. I disagree that it’s enough by itself to equate to more success or a better chance than you or I.