If 90% of whites vote against Obama, are whites racist?

If 90% of whites vote against Obama, are whites or those whites racist?

Not if they vote against him because they don't like his politics. If they vote against him simply because he is black, yes.

Of course, we already know which way that's going to get played. We got the sneak preview in the Dem Primary.

I wonder how many intimidation votes Obama gets for laying that bullshit, racist guilt trip on chickenshits more afraid of what may said of them than they are putting the wrong PERSON in the White House.
 
Not if they vote against him because they don't like his politics. If they vote against him simply because he is black, yes.

Of course, we already know which way that's going to get played. We got the sneak preview in the Dem Primary.

I wonder how many intimidation votes Obama gets for laying that bullshit, racist guilt trip on chickenshits more afraid of what may said of them than they are putting the wrong PERSON in the White House.

Tons of em----like a bunch of catholics dashing to the confession booth to be absolved.
 
If 90% of whites vote against Obama, are whites or those whites racist?

Only if they vote on the basis of race. If they vote because they don't agree with him on issues then the Dem. will still call them all racists...so I guess either way, they'll be racist in someone's eyes...but mostly the ignorant. :D
 
I wonder how many intimidation votes Obama gets for laying that bullshit, racist guilt trip on chickenshits more afraid of what may said of them than they are putting the wrong PERSON in the White House.

I don't recall Obama ever saying that votes cast against him are cast in racism.

Intimidation votes? Are you serious? Since caucuses usually involve rather ardent supporters, I would guess few. Since in the primaries, votes are cast anonymously, I would also guess there were rather few.
 
Not if we vote against him to retain power for ourselves.

Totally different motivation than just plain spite.
 
Not if we vote against him to retain power for ourselves.

Totally different motivation than just plain spite.

What if everyone boycotted the election? Would that get a message across? Probably not, if I had a guess. The 10 people that would vote would be the "deciders" (Bushism)
 
I don't recall Obama ever saying that votes cast against him are cast in racism.

Intimidation votes? Are you serious? Since caucuses usually involve rather ardent supporters, I would guess few. Since in the primaries, votes are cast anonymously, I would also guess there were rather few.

Actually he has said that. He said, paraphrased: "...people will not vote for me because of my skin/race(I forget which one he said), but those people would not be voting democrat anyway"

He's a bit of a bigot, it seems. The leftist media lets him slide on all his crap, though, as always.
 
Actually he has said that. He said, paraphrased: "...people will not vote for me because of my skin/race(I forget which one he said), but those people would not be voting democrat anyway"

He's a bit of a bigot, it seems. The leftist media lets him slide on all his crap, though, as always.

First, you should probably provide a link.

Second, that is not the same as saying that votes cast against him are necessarily cast in racism. That is simply acknowledging the simple fact that some people will not vote for him because he is black, which is pretty clearly the case.

Yes, the all powerful media is hiding the truth from the American people, but you, of infinite wisdom and insight, can see all.
 
First, you should probably provide a link.

Pretty difficult to find one given, like I said, the media gives him a pass on everything. But, quite frankly, I don't give a shit if you believe me or not. That is what he said.

Second, that is not the same as saying that votes cast against him are necessarily cast in racism. That is simply acknowledging the simple fact that some people will not vote for him because he is black, which is pretty clearly the case.

How now brown cow? Would you mind sharing your definition of racism/racist? You seem to believe it something far removed from the current american vernacular.

QUOTE=ReillyT;704761]
Yes, the all powerful media is hiding the truth from the American people, but you, of infinite wisdom and insight, can see all. [/QUOTE]

Media specializes in hiding and/or distorting the truth. Where you been the last 500 years of western history?
 
Pretty difficult to find one given, like I said, the media gives him a pass on everything. But, quite frankly, I don't give a shit if you believe me or not. That is what he said.

It wasn't an "I don't believe you" kind of thing although I do have my doubts. It is actually a rule of the board. Doesn't particularly bother me one way or another.

How now brown cow? Would you mind sharing your definition of racism/racist? You seem to believe it something far removed from the current american vernacular.

"All people who don't for me are racist." This may or may not be true, and if not true, is at least a false generalization, if not racist.

"Some people who don't vote for me choose not to vote for me because I am black." This also may or may not be true (although in this case it is true). However, it is not a generalization at all, as it clearly distinguishes between similarly situated groups of people. If it is not based on a generalization, it also isn't racist, as racism is based on generalizations about groups of people based on race. All that beside the point of course, because it is clearly true.

Can't see the difference?

Media specializes in hiding and/or distorting the truth. Where you been the last 500 years of western history?

Luckily, we have you here to see past their vicious lies and enlighten us to the truth.

By the way, that was sarcasm (don't know how bright you are yet, so I wanted to make sure you got the memo).
 
Last edited:
"All people who don't for me are racist." This may or may not be true, and if not true, is at least a false generalization, if not racist.

"Some people who don't vote for me choose not to vote for me because I am black." This also may or may not be true (although in this case it is true). However, it is not a generalization at all, as it clearly distinguishes between similarly situated groups of people. If it is not based on a generalization, it also isn't racist, as racism is based on generalizations about groups of people based on race. All that beside the point of course, because it is clearly true.

Can't see the difference?

What I see is you failed to define your personal variation of "racism/racist".




Luckily, we have you here to see past their vicious lies and enlighten us to the truth.

By the way, that was sarcasm (don't know how bright you are yet, so I wanted to make sure you got the memo).


Thanks for the hint. I think it was Twain who said something akin to "Believe nothing you read/hear, and only half of what you see."

....

Oh, he wasn't being sarcastic.
 
What I see is you failed to define your personal variation of "racism/racist".

I would have to think about it for a while before I could give you my definite opinion. Fortunately, it isn't relevant in this case.

Thanks for the hint. I think it was Twain who said something akin to "Believe nothing you read/hear, and only half of what you see."

....

Oh, he wasn't being sarcastic.

Actually, I am pretty sure he was, although sardonic would probably be the more appropriate term. He certainly wasn't being literal. He was just admonishing to not take everything you hear at face value.

Now I see your problem. You are unable to understand anything except in its most basic and literal sense. It must be easier for you that you don't believe anything you read or hear. You would surely be confused otherwise. That must explain your lack of analytical skills, and quite probably if this is the case, education.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the hint. I think it was Twain who said something akin to "Believe nothing you read/hear, and only half of what you see."

....

Oh, he wasn't being sarcastic.

Actually, the quote is "Believe nothing you hear, and only half of what you see."
Aphorism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

He was a writer after all.

You can feel free to read again. If you have problems, I can probably look up some remedial programs if you let me know what city you live in.
 
Actually, the quote is "Believe nothing you hear, and only half of what you see."
Aphorism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

He was a writer after all.

You can feel free to read again. If you have problems, I can probably look up some remedial programs if you let me know what city you live in.

Heh. You should try. Twain didn't even say that. He was quoting someone else, some woman if I recall right. One wonders how you would have any idea of the context of the quote then, hmm? Though of what consequence? You don't even understand the basic definitions of words in your own time, how could any reasonable person expect you to parse the logic of a genius in a different time. It's a good thing I don't.
 
Heh. You should try. Twain didn't even say that. He was quoting someone else, some woman if I recall right.

Could be, but since you are against linking anything you say, I guess we will never know.

One wonders how you would have any idea of the context of the quote then, hmm? Though of what consequence? You don't even understand the basic definitions of words in your own time, how could any reasonable person expect you to parse the logic of a genius in a different time. It's a good thing I don't.

That rather quickly devolved into general statements lacking any real meaning. I guess this is where we end then. xoxo
 

Forum List

Back
Top