New York Times op-ed says racism behind GOP attacks on Obama Doesn't everyone know that. After all, there are; Those have got to be racism at its worst. After all, the NY Times says so, right? http://www.examiner.com/conservativ...op-ed-says-racism-behind-gop-attacks-on-obama
It seems as if anyone says anything negative about Obama's policies, many times they're labeled a racist. That's a very poor defense of his policies if you ask me...
Did the events happen, or at least similar to, as described - yes, probably. The problem is you must have some kind of inference to make a conclusion. You know! Like when you accuse the authorities of racism because they are investigating you for perjury and other criminal charges.
Oh ye of little sense. Denying racism in America is just plain stupid. Talking about my wonderful memory I also remember segregation, I remember Jim Crow. I remember how, in the little Arkansas town where I lived, all the black people had to live in a little ghetto called nigger town. I also remember that this nation was founded by white men who believed themselves superior creatures. I remember that our medical, scientific, justice and every other function was set up by racists because that was the given belief of the time. If you don't remember these things, or try to ignore them, you can never understand how far we've come, what incredible progress we've made. And you can't understand how deeply rooted these foul notions are in so many people. If you don't believe racism is around just get into a conversation with working class white guys, with no minorities around, and bring up Obama, or Mexicans, or Muslims or any non-white non-Christian group and listen to what you hear. Do blacks and other minorities use the race card improperly when they're in trouble. Of course they do. It's a survival technique developed under white oppression. The reason so many think Chinese are a quiet people is that this is a survival technique they developed to deal with white people as well. Stay quiet, under the radar. If you ever, and I doubt you will, sit in a Chinese or Asian household when they are among their own and maybe one sort of trusted whitey like me who has married into the culture, and the conversation gets going, you can't hear yourself think. Your general ignorance continues to amaze me. Like most right wingers you seem only to understand bright colors and bellowed, simple minded slogans.
Just where have I denied that there is racism in America? What I am denying is that Boehner's objection to Obama's request to speak to a joint session of Congress at the same time Congress was scheduled to be watching the Republican debate had absolutely nothing to do with racism. In fact, Obama's request might well be considered racism. I would also deny that Joe Wilson's exclamation was racist based. It was rude and inappropriate for which he has apologized, but not racist. However, Obama's lie may well be considered racist. Both Romney's and Gingrich's were quite accurate. How is that racist? On the other hand, Obama wanting to "redistribute the wealth" I believe should be racist, IMO. BTW, your unabashed arrogance does not amaze me. Rather it is what I have come to expect from people of your beliefs.
When someone talks about history and the facts and it doesn't suit your little clutch of brainless beliefs, you call it arrogance. I am also not surprised.
For all my accusations and that is your only comment. I guess that must mean you agree that Obama is a racist.
In all those words you only made one real point, that you hate Obama. How many answers do you want? By the way inference is a basic of human communication. With inferring the meaning of a man's word from his attitude and the way they're delivered, you are only hearing articulated grunts.
Here we go! http://www.yourblackworld.com/2012/01/09/racist-image-of-michelle-obama-based-on-marie-antoinette/ I am sure you like/agreement with the parody is directly dependent on your affiliation, but, i am sorry, it is just plain not racist. Who else would qualify for wearing her $540 sneakers to a feed the poor at a food bank. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/29/michelle-obama-wears-silv_n_193138.html
The article on www.yourblackworld.com said the image was racist. But, they didn't say why they thought the image was racist. Also, if I had some $540 shoes I'd probably take them to the bank, too. Oh, you said it was a FOOD bank she went to? Not good, Marie Antoin... I mean... Michelle Obama.
As someone pointed out in the comments on that article, the image is a political one, not a racial one. Marie Antoinette was out of touch with the working class, so much so that she could not understand the poverty that existed nearly on her very doorstep. Michelle Obama is also out of touch with the working class. While she can't be accused of a lack of understanding, she does seem to have a disconnect--while she appears to try to fit in with her image of the working class, with her frumpy, ill-fitting clothes, many of them have expensive labels (like her shoes). The whole anecdote about MA saying "let them eat cake" pretty much parallels Michelle's disconnect--the anecdote demonstrates MA's lack of understanding of what her people faced by assuming they could buy cake if bred was not available.
You know I never worried about shoes. I never priced either of the Bush's, but I imagine Nancy Reagan and Mrs. Nixon wore pretty pricy ones. All this fuss about shoes, once again, shows only the bankruptcy of your argument. Please just carry on. The left couldn't do better than you to prove their points.
Considering that there is no actual evidence she ever said that any way LOL The words were 1st used by Jean-Jacques Rousseau in his autobiography "Confessions" published when Marie Antoinette was nine "Enfin je me rappelai le pis-aller d’une grande princesse à qui l’on disait que les paysans n’avaient pas de pain, et qui répondit : Qu’ils mangent de la brioche"
This has nothing to do with her shoes per se, but her entire wardrobe, vacations and other excesses. It has nothing to do with just who said "let them eat brioche", or cake or anything else. Regardless of how deserving, Marie Antoinette has attained the status as the epitome of excess. Further, I believe the attempts by those on the left to deflect the topic of racism as charged in my previous post and as the original topic easily demonstrates how absurd a charge of racism in this case really is.
No, I know that she probably never said it--I just used the anecdote that's been attributed to her over and over, which was used to demonstrate her very real disconnect with her people. For all we know, she did say it, by way of quoting Rousseau. Whether she said it or not is pretty much beside the point.
The part that makes me laugh is that as a country, we definitely have our share of racism. Anyone who can deny that should go sit down and be quite or return to the planet they live on because they certainly didn't grow up on this one in this country. But then you have an entire political party that denies that it exists in their party. Really? If it is pervasive in this country as any number of news stories have documented, where would they likely be found? Simple, the place that they feel most accepted, the Right-wing. This isn’t rocket science folks, people gravitate to the place they find like thinkers. The greatest concentration of racism in this country is of course the South. That hasn’t changed in 200 years. Racism can exist anywhere but they concentrate in the South. If you can deny that, you simply don’t know this country. Now where is the GOP reliably supported. Again the South. This isn’t an indictment of the South but it simply recognizes where racist views are most tolerated. In the South. Sorry if that offend you but it has been the reality for longer than any of us have been around.
The first tactic of a racist is the claim "it's not about racism." "I'm not prejudiced but," is the bigot's battle cry. Neither fools anyone.